By on August 21, 2015

Ford Mustang Receiving Gas Circa April 2015

Break out the champagne and 7-liter engines. Have one on us, alright?

The Wall Street Journal and Reuters are reporting that despite a mild increase in crude, oil is hovering around $40 a barrel and it’s expected to further dip in coming months to a six-year low on a global glut of oil.

The national average for a gallon of gas could drop to as low as $2, Green Car Reports says, which would be the cheapest its been since January, and could approach historical lows from 2008.

Brent crude (light, sweet oil that serves as a trading standard) dropped on worries that a slumping Chinese economy would further slide and European uncertainty about Greek’s flailing economy.

American crude reserves will likely increase in the short-term as refineries prepare for off-season maintenance, which would reduce demand for crude and drive prices down further.

In crude’s corner, worries about hurricane season — and that’s about it — kept the bottom from falling out.

Although stone-cold cheap gas seems like a good deal for drivers, it may not be the best for the economy and energy-sector jobs. This year, the Wall Street Journal excellently reported how super-cheap gas wasn’t exactly great in the 1980s either.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

97 Comments on “Who’s Ready to Party Like It’s 2008?...”


  • avatar
    Dan

    This is going to make the 4 cylinder crapboxes that the manufacturers have gone all out on an awfully tough sell in the future.

    Good.

    • 0 avatar
      mchan1

      The lower gas prices won’t be felt by consumers for awhile as it takes time to ripple down from the oil companies to the consumers.

      Also, winter is coming so the oil refineries will be switching over from the summer blend to the winter blend soon so pricing will also be affected this.

      Consumers should enjoy it now as gas prices won’t stay this low for long. Many media reports already show that consumers are enjoying it now as SUV/truck sales have increased probably due to the low gas prices. Those people will be in a world of hurt when gas prices eventually go up later, in a couple of months to maybe a year or two from now.

      Gas prices in my New England area for regular:
      Lowest ~$2.25/gallon in some places but many are ~$2.50/gallon in most other areas while premium gas is ~$2.75/gallon.

      Enjoy it now!

      • 0 avatar
        brn

        “it takes time to ripple down ”

        That only appears to be the case when oil prices drop. When oil prices rise, the consumers get hit right away.

        Also, I seem to be the exception when it comes to lower gas prices. I live in the [real] MidWest and gas prices have been on a steady climb for six months. The media keeps telling me prices are going down, but it continues to climb. Kinda feeling screwed. :(

        • 0 avatar
          ect

          Crude is plentiful, but refinery capacity has been tight. So, an increase in the supply of crude oil doesn’t lead to an increase in the supply of gasoline at the pump.

    • 0 avatar
      RideHeight

      “This is going to make the 4 cylinder crapboxes that the manufacturers have gone all out on an awfully tough sell in the future.”

      Not if they’re CUVs. The form factor sells the vehicle, the engine is merely a detail about as important as interior color. “Yeah, I guess charcoal gray is OK.”

      I’m not deriding that attitude, I’m epitomizing it.

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        I don’t know about that.

        Checking online inventory for some of the dealerships around here, one of the Toyota dealers has 4 4Runners, 5 Highlanders, and 149 Ravs, 131 Camrys, 126 Corollas, and 86 Priuses on the lot.

        The next Toyota chain has 4 lots with a total of 27 Highlanders, 18 4Runners, 185 Ravs, 211 Priuses, 330 Camrys, 334 Corollas.

        The Hyundai lot has 18 Santa Fes, 92 cute utes, and 160 Sonatas, 153 Elantas.

        The Ford chain has 500 Fusions and Focuses, 150 Escapes, just 80 Explorers.

        Guess which ones have $6,000 on the hood and which ones are all 2016s selling at $1,000 over invoice.

        • 0 avatar
          RideHeight

          I have no idea what point you’re making but that was a lot of work!

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            Point being that the few models that aren’t small and economical are in awfully short supply.

          • 0 avatar
            RideHeight

            Well, I’d guess dealers order in proportion to what they expect to sell.

          • 0 avatar
            Xeranar

            Yeah, RH, I pretty much was going to say the same thing: It’s a mixture of dealer ordering and allotment. Annual production would suggest that those numbers are well…pretty normal. They make about a million camrys & corollas a year combined. The total production of all of Toyota’s SUV/CUV lines is about half that total production. So yep, those numbers are pretty inline with what’s being made.

          • 0 avatar
            dolorean

            “Point being that the few models that aren’t small and economical are in awfully short supply”

            Cause that’s the way Dan wants it to stay
            And he always wants it to be that way for Toyota
            La-la-la-la Toyota
            Cars are not trucks and trucks are the best
            It’s a mixed up muddled up shook up world except for Dan and Toyota

            Well Dan’s not the world’s most masculine buck
            But he knows when he buys, he buys the over priced truck
            From Toyota. To-yo-yo-Toyota

    • 0 avatar
      Thatkat09

      Nothing wrong with a good 4 cylinder. Something wrong with short sightedness though. It’s good manufacturers are actually prepared for the next inevitable gas price spike(unlike 2007). Also I’ve driven most of the current crop of midsize and compact 4 cylinders, I’m not sure where your getting the idea there crapboxes. Its not 1995 anymore dude, or 2005 for that matter.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        It’s pretty short sighted that manufacturers don’t have a better selection to cope with low fuel prices. That’s where the big profit producers are, to completely focus on fuel efficient cars is putting all their eggs in one basket.

        • 0 avatar
          Drzhivago138

          To completely focus on less-efficient larger vehicles (I wouldn’t call anything a “gas guzzler” anymore, but still) with higher up-front costs and higher COO in an effort to maximize short-term profits does the same thing, and it’s part of what got us here in the first place.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            I didn’t say completely focus on them, but when all focus is on developing cars with the lowest profit margins, there’s trouble afoot.

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        “I’m not sure where your getting the idea there crapboxes.”

        Because unlike most of the blogging crowd, I wasn’t born earlier this week and am therefore burdened with pre-millennial expectations of what an $30,000 plus vehicle is supposed to feel and sound like.

        • 0 avatar
          Thatkat09

          Well yeah, factoring in inflation a $30,000 car today would be the equivalent of an $18,000 car in 1994. If your expecting a $30,000 car now to compare to a $30,000 car 20 years ago(about $47,000 today) then that’s your own fault, not young bloggers or manufacturers.

          Edit: A midtrim Camry in 1994 with a 4 cylinder was $19,558. So over $30,000 in today’s dollars.

          • 0 avatar
            RideHeight

            This isn’t about anything more cerebral or complex than big rumbly things causing more instinctive fear/admiration than little buzzy things.

            I don’t care if I drive a little buzzy car but obviously plenty of other males do. What I *won’t* drive is a little crampy car! Gotta be tall.

  • avatar
    Shankems

    I hope people really like their PRII for something other than the fuel economy!

    • 0 avatar
      Syke

      This situation has me licking my chops in glee. My next car purchase is for a daily use bad weather commuter (I use a Yamaha Zuma 125 when the roads are dry – 80mpg). And some form of hybrid or plug-in is very high on my list. Seeing that such cars are not considered desirable at present, that should put prices in a much more acceptable range for me.

      And 40+ mpg at $2.15/gallon beats 25 mpg almost as good as it does at $3.50/gallon. You can never go wrong on high mileage and low operating costs on the daily travel that has little to no chance of being fun.

      Plus, when the price of gas inevitably rises, you can just sit back and laugh at all those $50k F-150’s.

      • 0 avatar
        Thinkin...

        Exactly. It’s not like efficiency and reliability are going to suddenly become liabilities…

        And lower gas prices aren’t magically going to turn commutes into track days, regardless of what someone is driving.

  • avatar
    cartunez

    Well hopefully I am prepped for whichever direction oil goes. I have a 2014 Hybrid Account and 2015 Thundra 4×4 plus I just bought some COP stock. Lets hope for the best and above all enjoy the cheap fuel :)

  • avatar
    craiger

    What could be causing oil to drop in price like it hasn’t since the 1980s?

    • 0 avatar
      Toad

      Because oil companies keep finding more of it, nobody is slowing production (as OPEC used to do in the past), and the developing world is not developing as fast as was predicted.

      When supply outstrips demand prices drop.

    • 0 avatar
      maxxcool7421

      Because OPEC is at war with frakers, and smaller oil producers. they can ”offord” to run with no profits for AGES, while frakers and smaller oil producing entities drop like flies.

      part two is when the use third party entities then buy up those bankrupt resources and $%^& everyone in the coming decade and jack it all back up with the fraking and land rights all bought up.

      • 0 avatar
        CoreyDL

        This. OPEC (read: Saudi Arabia) is causing this intentionally to drive competition out of business through the slow waiting game. Then when they do, magically the supply contracts, they get their market share back, and prices go zoom zoom.

    • 0 avatar
      PandaBear

      Because we got Iran back on conditional production to put pricing pressure on Russia. This will collapse the Russian economy and break the Iran Russia coalition.

      • 0 avatar
        APaGttH

        Iran is nothing, just a bit player. It makes for nice headlines but really, the lifting of sanctions don’t mean a lot.

        Iran’s oil is extremely heavy and sour – in plain English, their crude oil sucks and it is very hard to process. Buyers simply don’t want it and that the price they have to sell it at, and then the transit and production costs to process, refiners don’t want it either.

        Now Russia on the other hand…

        • 0 avatar
          Xeranar

          While this is true getting Iran’s oil flowing again is a boon to the US naval fleet who will gladly gobble up Iran’s cheap sour crude because the massive diesels simply don’t care for their size. It’s not of IMMENSE strategic value but it is a great bargaining chip against the next rounds of discussions with SA for oil for the military and bases. We’re not going to be great friends with Iran but having a viable alternative seller in the region is actually a great value.

    • 0 avatar
      jjster6

      Why is the cause of price drops always tied to the workings of the free market, but price increases are a global conspiracy of the oil companies?

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      In a really tight nutshell – simple supply and demand.

      I wrote a couple of stories on this issue for TTAC.

      There is more oil being produced in the world that being consumed.

      There was a bit of a blink earlier this year from large multi-nationals and it appears that it would stabilize the price of oil in a $45 to $60 trading range. The blink was just that a blink.

      No one is slowing down production and there is just more supply that buyers. Storage is filling up so there is no where to put it.

      US gasoline consumption is going to decline in a couple of more weeks with the end of the summer driving season and a push for more efficient vehicles.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    The cheaper oil gets for any extended period of time, the more of it we’ll be buying from the Wahhabis. I’d rather have it at a level where we can sustainably replace Wahhabi oil with domestic oil.

  • avatar
    BunkerMan

    Canada has seen a drop in prices, but nowhere near as much as the US, because of our sinking dollar. In December, gas in my area got as low as $0.80 per litre. Now it’s $1.10 per litre. It’s still better than last year when it hit $1.39 per litre, though.

  • avatar
    eggsalad

    In Las Vegas, our gasoline comes from California refineries. Owing to the latest “maintenance shutdown” or “refinery fire”, the price of gas here has not gone down. Still around $3.29.

    Diesel, however, is below $3.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    Green car reports is probably rolling with hate comments from people that are absolutely livid everyone (except them) isn’t being forced into tiny cars and mopeds. That site is a festering blister of hatred.

  • avatar
    Joe K

    Lets see how many people are going to be stupid and buy gas guzzlers. This is like free money right now. Every time I fill up I bank what I used to put in fuel purchase. I hope this affects heating oil this winter.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      What gas guzzlers? The only thing that doesn’t get good fuel economy anymore is 3/4 ton + pickups, otherwise everything made get fairy reasonable fuel economy. That argument was barely even acceptable in 2005 let alone 2015.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        Last time I drove an F250 with the 6.7L diesel I got better fuel economy than I did with my MKV GTI.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          I meant gassers, I almost specified but got lazy. Though I’ve heard Rams 6.4l giving some people 14-15 MPG unloaded which would be mighty impressive if true.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            With the GM 6.0 and the Ford 6.2, 14-15 is pretty common. I’m sure the Ram 6.4L is right in there too.

            They are honestly all good trucks. The RAM is the one I’ve had the least seat time in though.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            I have seat time in the 2010 Chevy 6.0, I never did unloaded tests but I would be surprised if it ever got over 12.

            Which, still, isn’t really that bad.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Well, at least you know the 6.0 is borderline unkillable. When all the throwaway commuter cars are turned scrap steel, the 6.0L will be powering on.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            That they are, although (with that said) I would suggest an oil pump replacement before 250k as that seems to be one of the few issues that do come up on our GMT800 based 6.0s.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        Here are a few cars sold in reasonable volume that qualify as guzzlers under any reasonable definition:

        Benz G550 12/13/15
        Lexus LX570 12/14/17
        Toyota Sequoia 13/14/17
        Toyota Land Cruiser 13/15/18
        Range Rover (all V8 models) 14/16/19
        X5M/X6M 14/16/19
        Escalade ESV 14/16/20
        Jeep GC 5.7 4WD 14/16/20

        • 0 avatar
          CoreyDL

          You know, talking about the Sequoia the other day, I’m thinking it’s a good used buy if you can find a gen1 without super-200 miles on it.

          They didn’t rust, and the styling has held up pretty well, especially in higher trim Limited guise. (Saw Jeff Greene’s Limited green Sequoia on S2 of Curbed as well, and that helped.)

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            As far as I’m concerned, those old ones cost too much used. They had a hateful interior and the engine wasn’t any better than the domestics.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Was the interior that bad on Limiteds? It’s GOT to be better than an equivalent year Explorer.

            The door panels on the show looked equivalent to LC. They are costly used, I agree. But much less than an LC and equivalent in size (larger).

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Let’s be honest, mid-00s SUVs did not have nice interiors. My suggestion would be a GMT900 or 3rd gen Expedition. Both are newer and would have less miles for the same price.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            Nice trucks for their day but they’re getting up there in age now such that you’re looking at boots, seals, belts, hoses, shocks, ball joints, etc. no matter how well they were screwed together to begin with. On top of that, the guy is probably selling it to avoid doing the timing belt.

            Paying the Toyota premium with that kind of reconditioning ahead doesn’t add up to me, you’re putting in work regardless so do it to a cheap domestic instead. The old 4Runners and Tacos have no real competitors but a Sequoia really isn’t anything special.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            If I had a Sequoia I’d always be wishing I had bought a Land Cruiser instead, despite the enormous difference in new or used price.

          • 0 avatar
            PrincipalDan

            Sequoia is a bone for the Toyota loyalists. I only say that because the alternative is an Expedition EL or a Suburban and let’s face it. The Suburban and Expedition are likely the GM/Ford vehicles with the highest build quality.

            Other than really loving your Toyota Dealer I can’t think of a compelling reason to choose the Sequoia over a Suburban.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            I agree, I can’t see a reason to buy the Sequioa over the land cruiser other than the price obviously. New, I would either go land cruiser or suburban.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            Fair points! However, I was talking EARLY 00’s here. Gen 1, cheapo to buy and run. Hard to find equivalent Expeditions or GM versions which are not totally clapped out (Expedition option), or rusted to hell and back (GM option).

            Did not think about the timing belt thing though. I guess the Vortec uses a chain?

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            GM V8 cams are chain driven, yes.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          Compared to say a big block Continental, none of those are that bad. Plus none of those are really attainable new to anyone that (shouldn’t) be able to afford the cost of ownership.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            “Compared to being flayed alive, having both legs cut off really isn’t that bad.”

            Trucks like that are really where the hybrid powertrain engineering effort should be going (and, no, GM’s half-ass effort doesn’t count). It would save a *ton* of fuel if every Sequoia got 22/21/20, which is probably about what it would get if Toyota adapted the powertrain from the LS600hL.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Fuel savings are going to go to the lowest hanging fruit, which is where it hurts consumers the most. The 4Runner is smaller in every way of a Tahoe, yet gets the same (worse?) fuel economy than the Tahoe, but the 4Runner, unlike the Tahoe still has approach angles and respectable ground clearence.

            The Hybrid solution just doesn’t work for these big trucks, the general group of buyers wants long(as in decades) term reliability as well as self-servicibility, they see the 196X pickup and want the modern iteration. The Subaru buyer doesn’t give a damn and just wants a car, disposable or not.

            So long as the 4Runner and Wrangler offer the only Midsize offroad capable vehicles on the market, they will retain those customers. MPG be damned.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            “The Hybrid solution just doesn’t work for these big trucks, the general group of buyers wants long(as in decades) term reliability as well as self-servicibility.”

            Then the buyers should love Toyota- or Ford-type hybrid tech.

            The type of hybrid powertrains Toyota and Ford are using are some of the most reliable powertrains on the market right now. The electric motors (which are basically indestructible) allow the engine to be understressed even when the driver asks for heavy acceleration. The PTU is dead-nuts simple, way simpler than a traditional transmission. It’s one planetary gearset. Even the traditional worry about traction batteries has proven mostly unfounded, and replacing the traction battery is a simple (if expensive) job if it does wear down. Every Toyota and Ford hybrid yet made has above-average powertrain reliability, which is better than you can say about a lot of the trucks on the market.

            Taxi service in cities is just as abusive as anything most truck owners can dish out, and Priuses are happily lasting 500,000+ miles as taxis or livery cars. They are slowly but steadily taking over the taxi market.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Let me change my criteria to tell you what you know but (rightfully) are trying to work around.

            Can I put that drive train into my (theoretical) 1968 Camaro? With basic skills and minimal risk of creating a hazard?
            Well, yes, but with a lot more effort/money/time than a LSX, and not much advantage. All that mess is great to the first 2 maybe 3 owners, then it’s outdated and service for any non mechanical problems becomes difficult to impossible. I can buy the machine to press out carbon fiber body panels for cheaper than I can correctly redesign a battery for a car that no longer has part availability, come 20 years.
            I know I truly seem like the most Luddite engineer in existence to some people here, but for goodness sake I hate dealing with outdated technology and having to teach myself or find someone to teach me when I come to things before my time. I’m excited to learn what’s new and coming in technology, but I also realize that its ingenuity will be upstaged in short course.

            Spending my money on Gimmicky technology over vehicle quality is ridiculous to me, I’m obviously in the minority, but I cannot understand why I care about an infotainment system when the rest of the car is cheaped out as if I’ll be too distracted to notice.

            It’s my money and I’ll buy the impressive amount of steel in a new Ram 3/4, long before I buy the already outdated in technology Pilot that was just introduced here recently.

            As for the electric motors, why do I need to concern myself with increased complexity when GM has two V8s that both return excellent fuel economy, unless the difference in cost per year is $3,000-4,000, it’s irrelevant to me.

    • 0 avatar
      mchan1

      Read the media reports on auto sales.

      SUV/truck sales have improved for awhile because gas prices dropped. Many are probably replacing older vehicles for newer ones, though.

      Still, the price of oil hasn’t dropped low enough yet as the barrel of oil was just published to probably drop more.
      It won’t affect the gas prices now as it takes time for the lower oil prices to affect consumers. But winter is nearing so the oil refineries will be switching over to the winter gas soon.
      Also, it’s too early to tell if the winter season will affect home oil prices.
      Too much speculation for now but, yes, the SUV/truck buyers may be in a world of hurt when the oil prices go up which I don’t think will happen for awhile.

      Enjoy the low gas prices now ;)

    • 0 avatar
      sgeffe

      What I cannot figure out is: WTF ever happened to even cursory RUSTPROOFING on pickups and BOF SUVs? The last two winters in Toledo have been the worst in recent memory, but there were a few years of mild winters in the late aughts, without so much salt spread! Yet even pickups which are only five or six years old (and with what I assume would be engines that are in the prime of their life) are already rusting to oblivion — Fords, the worst, and a tie between GM and Dodge/RAM.

      Planned obsolescence, I take it?

    • 0 avatar
      WhiskeyRiver

      Thanks Joe K for calling me stupid. I never realized I was stupid before you posted.

  • avatar
    onyxtape

    Still in the low $3’s in WA state, so I’m not seeing the floor drop out on prices as dramatically as I was expecting. Especially considering the strong dollar.

    And it doesn’t help that one of the energy stocks I have in my portfolio took a 90% dive in the last 6 months. Ouch.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    There is nothing to support the price of oil – RBOB short contract is hovering around $1.55 for Sep 15 delivery – and that is still summer formulation. Once they switch to the winter blend the price is going to go down even more.

    I stick to my $28ish a barrel prediction – I was just off on my timing by 3 to 6 months. Interesting reasons why it held relatively stable through the summer driving season.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      APaGttH,
      I would think the oil futures are looking carefully at the Iranian deal.

      Remember, how long can it sit at $40 per barrel, let alone $28.

      The price of oil is affecting a number of countries that rely on oil for export.

      Something must give soonish.

      Like 2008 I think this party will end with a bang.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    Aww me olde GS430 is back there lurking.

  • avatar
    Sgt Beavis

    Kroger in Denton, TX had gas at $2.09 a gal today. I got a 20 cent discount on top of that.

  • avatar
    VoGo

    Gas at $2, unemployment at 5%, Dow at 17,000.

    Just like Romney promised.

  • avatar
    Master Baiter

    Can we get the “peak oil” lunatics to STFU forever?

  • avatar
    WhiskeyRiver

    At under $40 a barrel… Why the HELL is gas $2.40 a gallon where I live? Seriously…

  • avatar
    Hummer

    Looky what I just found, Californians aren’t paying enough for fuel apparently.
    http://www.contracostatimes.com/breaking-news/ci_28668277/senate-panel-votes-raise-californias-gas-tax-12

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      Responsible governments have found that investing in infrastructure can be beneficial to future economic growth and citizen well being. The dip in oil prices provides cover for such investments.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        California is still paying over $3, not to mention all the money they’re raking in from the fuel tax they implemented several months back. If they have too much infrastructure to maintain with the second highest taxes on fuel, then they have other problems that need to be taken care of.

        It’s ridiculous to believe that raising fuel taxes by 12 cent will solve an infrastructure problem when the last tax did no such thing. They haven’t a need to worry about economic growth when companies are packing up and going to states with positive economic growth that doesn’t require heavy taxation.

        My state has 36.25 cent tax on Gas, and we’re regularly repaving roads that are perfectly acceptable, how California cannot keep their roads at least acceptable with almost twice the fuel tax, and multitudes of additional people, should trigger an investigation.

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          I don’t know; CA seems like a pretty popular state…

        • 0 avatar
          smartascii

          If the gas tax hike goes into effect, it that’ll make a $0.5435 per gallon total gasoline tax that goes to CA. The state consumes about 14.5 billion gallons of gas a year, which leaves them with about $7.9 billion for roadway construction and repair, if you only spend gas tax dollars on that. Last year, CA spent $23.89 billion on non-public-transit transportation infrastructure, not counting Federal dollars.

          So, if CA is going to pay for its transportation infrastructure with a gas tax, it has to be $1.65 per gallon to fund all the spending. It’s almost certain that some of the money is badly spent, and chances are a more efficient system could keep CA’s roads up to par for less money, but the short of it is, that’s how CA can’t keep their roads acceptable at the current fuel tax level.

          • 0 avatar
            thelaine

            California will never use the gas tax as anything more than a slush fund. One justification is as good as another, as far as they are concerned. Call it the “Kitten Torture Prevention Tax,” if you want. They do it all the time. The carbon tax scheme is the same thing. It is going to prevent kittens from being killed by global warming. You can’t make California government efficient. They exist to serve the unions and others. Look at the “Bullet” train. It is a financial…train wreck but is chugs along because of graft.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            Gas taxes are just tip of the iceberg of state car taxes, declaring that the gas tax alone doesn’t cover the cost of roads is either ignorance or intentional myopia.

            The CA DMV website has a TTL calculator. I plugged in my grandparents’ address and see that buying a $30,000 new car would mean $3,147 in taxes just to get off the lot. IOW, the tax on 6,000 gallons of gasoline.

            The $300+ a year after VLF (property) tax just to keep it registered. Insurance taxes. The smog inspection tax. The red light cameras everywhere. The traditional ticket industry on top of that. The 9% sales tax on parts and upkeep. Etc. Etc. Etc.

            25 bucks a month at the pump is noise.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            We pay the most in gas taxes, probably the most in registration and property tax on cars, and yet we have the worst roads in spite of no weather worth mentioning. It’s indefensible.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            “No weather worth mentioning”? Where do you live?

            A 120 degree difference (yes, I’m using Fahrenheit because it looks more impressive and also because those are the units of FREEDOM) in the Upper Midwest is more than a little stressful on any road surface, before you add in the increased traffic every year because increased demand for meat in Asia has mandated that someone had to put up another hog confinement.

            Okay, that one got off on a little tangent. Hopefully my point was not lost.

          • 0 avatar
            JD23

            “A 120 degree difference (yes, I’m using Fahrenheit because it looks more impressive and also because those are the units of FREEDOM) in the Upper Midwest..”

            He was referring to California, not to wherever you were thinking. Your point is lost.

  • avatar
    reclusive_in_nature

    If fuel costs remain this low for too long consumers will start purchasing vehicles they actually want instead of need.
    This can’t stand!
    Tax, tax, TAX them until the pleebs do what we think is best for them.

  • avatar
    ihatetrees

    As I’ve said before, medium term (3+ years) low oil prices are going to upset the CAFE apple cart here in the US. There’s no way the ‘domestics’ will pass up the huge profits on trucks/SUVs to comply with the Future Fantasy MPG numbers. Short of a GOP landslide in 2016, the adjustment politics will be fugly.

  • avatar
    phippsj

    As for me and my 14 mpg Toyota Land Cruiser DD, we are very happy.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • dantes_inferno: FCA motto: Dodge testing. RAM into production.
  • Schurkey: A few years back, I treated myself to a Challenger 5.7 Hemi rental car for several days when vacationing on...
  • SCE to AUX: I was shocked to see an SSR in the wild the other day. The Hummer EV will do better, but I wouldn’t...
  • SCE to AUX: Yeah, I’ll bet the engineers didn’t think of that. Have you seen the armor plate under the...
  • CaddyDaddy: Ya, but when Dalton got to Missouri and the Roadhouse, the Riv was the one to go with for the Dirty Work.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber