|
|
|
|
IntelliChoice Value Rating
The chart above shows the purchase price versus ownership cost for each car from a specific vehicle class. The cars with better than average ownership cost/purchase price correlations are the best values, and these best value cars are represented by the dots below the curve. (i.e. the cars that have a lower ownership cost compared to its purchase price.) Those cars, which are worse than average or poor values, appear above the curve.
One way to view the graph is to draw a vertical line through any purchase price. You may see several dots that fall on this line - each of which is a car with a similar purchase price. However, notice the difference in ownership costs of each car represented by the vertical position of the dot. Two cars with the same purchase price can have thousands of dollars difference in ownership costs. This is what separates "good value" cars from "poor value" cars.
What is a good car value?
A "good car value" is one whose cost to own and operate is less than expected. The lower the cost to own and operate a car compared to what is expected, the better the value of that car.
But how do we know a car's "expected cost"?
For each car in the class, IntelliChoice plots the car's purchase price against the total five-year cost to own and operate it as determined by IntelliChoice research. Each dot on the above chart represents a specific car. Generally, we find that as the purchase price of the car increases, the cost to own and operate that car increases. This is why the dots on the graph tend to rise upward and to the right. This phenomenon also makes intuitive sense - as the purchase price rises, financing costs tend to rise, as do insurance, depreciation, taxes, and most other car ownership costs.
This is an important concept. It's normal for car ownership costs to rise as purchase price rises. Therefore, we can't just establish one "average" ownership cost number for each class, since cars in the class have different purchase prices. (This is why the "Relative" shown on each chart is different for cars in the same car class.)
Using statistical techniques, IntelliChoice "connects the dots" to form a curve that defines, for this car class, the relationship between the car's purchase price and car's ownership costs. This curve is our "expected cost" curve. The curve defines, for any car in the class, the five-year ownership cost that we would expect to see at each possible purchase price. If every car in the class were an average value, then all the dots would fall exactly on the curve. However, it's rare that any dot is exactly on the curve. Some dots are a little higher or lower, and some are a lot higher or lower. The dots that are a little lower are better than average car values, while the dots that are a lot lower are excellent car values (A dot that is a lot lower than the curve has ownership costs much lower than expected for a car of its purchase price). Conversely, a dot a little higher than the curve is a poorer than average car value, while a dot that is much higher than the curve is a poor car value.
Value is a relative term, not an absolute term. It is performing better than the logical expectation.
So is a Mercedes-Benz E320 expensive to own and operate? Certainly in an absolute sense. Most other cars cost less. But, when its cost to own and operate is plotted against cars with comparable invoice prices, the E320 costs less. So the E320 is not expensive to own and operate - it is a good car value. The Mercedes does not have low ownership costs, but it has low ownership costs for its invoice price.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Review From Truck Trend Magazine
Road Test: 2008 Land Rover LR2It's going to shake up the segment / By Dan Carney / Photography by the Manufacturer /
Article provided by: Truck Trend Magazine
There was a time when Land Rovers were rugged, supremely capable off-roaders built from sturdy chunks of steel and sheets of aluminum, with overwrought drivetrains and suspensions. This recipe earned the company a formidable reputation--but the vehicles became increasingly out of step in a world where SUVs are expected to serve as comfortable and efficient family transportation. How can Land Rover provide that civility without compromising off-road capability? Enter Terrain Response, a computer-controlled system that apportions power to the wheels based on a scheme selected from four different settings. With that technology on board, the LR2 ably fills the shoes of its jungle-busting forebears, despite the fact that this upmarket replacement for the primitive and unloved Freelander is built using parts and designs from corporate-sibling Volvo's S80 sedan. Because of this source of drivetrain hardware and suspension designs, the new entry-level Land Rover possesses the graceful ride and handling expected by today's sport/utility buyers. There's no engine smoother than an inherently balanced inline-six like the LR2's Volvo 3.2-liter, 230-horsepower unit. The LR2 also uses a beefed-up version of the Volvo's MacPherson-strut front suspension, combined with Land Rover's own new strut rear suspension. But the question in any off-road traditionalist's mind is, how could this glorified Volvo possibly uphold Land Rover's proud tradition of rock-busting prowess? To answer this question, Land Rover launched the LR2 in Morocco, a country renowned for exotic settings and a classic film ("Casablanca"), not the quality of its highway system. Fortunately, Land Rover didn't expect us to stick to those byways, instead shepherding us off to rock-strewn paths frequented by donkey carts and over windswept sand dunes along the country's Atlantic coast. On the dunes, the LR2 ran a close second to the camels, which was impressive considering the absence of LR3-style air suspension to provide added ground clearance. We also hadn't bled the air pressure from the smooth-riding highway-oriented Continental tires for better traction, making the performance in sand even more amazing. Give it a bit of stick, as our English handlers suggested, maintain momentum, and keep the front wheels pointed as straight as possible, and the LR2 climbs dunes that would leave many 4x4s buried. Judging from the plumes of sand lofted by all four wheels, the Sand setting of the Terrain Response permits considerable wheelspin and ensures that all wheels contribute equally. ... >>next page
|
|
|
| |