Commuting break even analysis = 7003 miles!

[Kim]

My commuter bike is liberating and brings me joy.  Buying it was transformational and life-changing for me.  I reckon I'm quids in 

This.  It also means I've been able to do away with the car, which - while occasionally bloody useful - was a source of stress far greater than anything that the combined forces of Enterprise Rent-a-Car and the great British rail network have so far managed to throw at me.

I doubt it's saved much money, what with all the associated tools and toys and orange cardboard habit, and that I was already a semi-competent fettler wise in the ways of bangernomics.  But I'm better at breathing these days.  That's pretty much priceless.

[teethgrinder]

I do not claim that my method of calculating the payback is definitive to everyone but instead is appropriate to my situation - as I said I will always have a car whether I commute or not since I need one in others areas of my life so I think in my case considering only the variable cost of car ownership is valid, but perhaps my 10% unrealistic - it was just a ballpark figure. I recognise that for other people who are comparing commuting by bike to public transport, or for those who can, as a result of cycle-commuting, have fewer cars in their families then the economics are much more in favour of cycling.

To turn it around the other way, how much more would it cost me to drive instead of cycle. For me to do it the same way as you did, I'd say that Ineed my bike for other areas of my life, other than commuting. So the cost of my bike is zero.
But for me to drive to work, I'd need driving lessons, to buy a new car and pay for it to be road legal. I'm allready at least £7000 down if I buy a cheap new car, probably more like £10,000.
If I need a car, I call a taxi!

[John Henry]

OP Did state clearly he was comparing marginal costs - because (like most people) he will always run a car as well as the bike.

So costs of car exist with or without cycle commuting. Hence calculation is valid.

No. OP stated he was comparing marginal costs of car against marginal+fixed costs of running bike. I can see the logic in that if the only reason you're buying a bike is to save money on your commute, but you're not comparing like with like.

But if you're only buying a bike for commuting, and nothing else, then the purchase cost is a variable cost for that user. Everyone will have different criteria for assessing costs, based on their own circumstances, so perhaps we should avoid critiquing the OP's assessment on the basis of our own values, eh?

I thought my post was fairly balanced and one of the less 'robust' ones. But since you have singled it out for censure, I feel I should apologise for any lack of excellence - I was trying to make a mathematical point, not to criticise. I am suitably ashamed. Very sorry.

[PhilO]

But if you're only buying a bike for commuting, and nothing else, then the purchase cost is a variable cost for that user. Everyone will have different criteria for assessing costs, based on their own circumstances, so perhaps we should avoid critiquing the OP's assessment on the basis of our own values, eh?

I thought my post was fairly balanced and one of the less 'robust' ones. But since you have singled it out for censure, I feel I should apologise for any lack of excellence - I was trying to make a mathematical point, not to criticise. I am suitably ashamed. Very sorry.

Ok, my turn to apologise, if my response came across as overly critical. My comment about critiquing the OP's assessment was aimed at the wider thread, not your post per se. Your post just happened to provide suitable argument to hang that observation on. I agree that yours was amongst the less forthright comments. 

[vorsprung]

The main reason for these calculations is n+1 for a commuting bike

When the SO says "how much? for a commuting bike??" these figures are your shield, your protector, your pimp

[TimO]

It sounds like you have the convenience of being able to easily park your car at work.  I'd have no chance of getting a parking space at work, and would probably have to pay in excess of £20 a day to park in a car park (I work in South Kensington).

With approximately 240 working days a year, and assuming an unreasonably low parking cost (say £15 a day), that's £3600 a year.  You can pretty much ignore all the other costs in comparison.

If I travelled by public transport, I could mostly get away with a Zone 1-3 Travelcard (Tramlink to Croydon using Oyster works if your Travelcard covers any of Zones 3 to 6, even though the Croydon stations are in Zone 5), which is a mere £1368 annually.

For any of those costs, I could buy a new bike every year, throw it away at the end of the year, and still save money (assuming I didn't buy a carbon fibre racing bike, anyway, and kept the price reasonable).


All that aside, my daily commute is 23.2 miles, so for the 240 days I quoted above, my annual mileage is 5568 miles, so I do 7000 miles in just over one year, 3 months and 2 days.  It wouldn't take me long to pay off a new bike based on your costs (and this assumes I don't use it all for any other purposes, like shopping, picking up parcels etc).

If the Congestion Charge still covered this area (which it did for almost four years), then that would be another £8 a day (add on £1920 to the cost).


The other flip side, is that if I come in on the Tram/Tube I read more, so there's an additional cost of books on my Kindle.

[mrcharly]

My current annual commute mileage is about 7000 per year. It used to be more.

Never spent more than £550 on a bike. Best bike was bought second hand for £300.

I reckon on spending about £200 per year on spares and parts. Maybe a bit more; I don't keep a logbook.


If I used the train instead of riding, that would cost £3650. The bus £1560.

So even if I started from scratch,

£300 + 200 + 624 (for days I use the bus) = £1124.  So in a year I've saved £436 over the next cheapest alternative.

[Polar Bear]

You can spend almost as much or as little either driving or cycling as you wish.   Your comparison is flawed in that you're comparing a new bike with a secondhand car.   Go buy a new car and figure out what that will cost you.

What you cannot get by driving is better health just by doing it.   Measure that and realise what you've gained has a far far greater value than just monetary.

Also, buy a decent quality bike and relatively little maintenance will see that bike last for a couple of decades.   

[CrazyEnglishTriathlete]

This is a useful debate as it reminded me of an overdue calculation of what I think it costs me to keep my bike on the road (I've excluded the wear and tear on clothing).  Based on my annual mileage of 7500...

Front Tyre            10000   25   0.25
Rear Tyre               4000   25   0.63
Inner tubes               500   5   1.00
Chain & rear casette     4000   100   2.50
Chainrings                   15000   75   0.50
Brake casettes             4000   10   0.25
Annual service             4000   35   0.88
Saddle                   25000   75   0.30
Bartape                10000   5   0.05
Lubricants and washing   7500   10   0.13
Random replacement     7500   100   1.33
         
                                         7.82p per mile

(Random replacement - other bits that wear out).

A similar calculation for the car works out at about 25p per mile.  But it puts a lie to the fact that cycling is free. 

[Morrisette]

Cycling isn't free, but.....

I can't drive, so that is not in the equation.

Annual bus ticket here is in the region of £900 (I think; I've never considered using the bus all the time as I value my sanity)

Train season ticket last time I had one was £1100, and as that was three years ago I'd add another 200 quid to that, probably, so £1300. If I get the train every day I still need a bike as the office is 4 miles from the station - it would be the crap bike so £200.

I have two commuting bikes - one that gets left at the station in winter (cost under £200 all in, in 2006), and my good bike the I use for doing the whole journey (about £400 including a good light etc). I do still use the train when it's cold and icy - last year I had three months off the bike which came to £330 (I think). I'll add another £150 for various other days when I get the train or the bus. So even if I had bought both the bikes brand new this year, I would still have saved money:

Good bike: £300
Commuting light: £70
Lock: £30
Crap bike: £150
Maintainance, tubes etc: £100
Three month winter season ticket: £330
Summer laziness tickets: £150
TOTAL: £1130

VERSUS

Train season ticket: £1300
Crap bike: £200
Maintainance, tubes etc: £50
TOTAL: £1550

I think this tells you more about the rip-off prices charged on my local train line than anything about the price of cycling, to be honest.

[CrazyEnglishTriathlete]

I think this tells you more about the rip-off prices charged on my local train line than anything about the price of cycling, to be honest.

+1 - rail prices in my area are typically 25p - 35p per mile which is about the same cost as running a single-occupancy car over the same route.  If it really costs that much then why don't they tarmac over the rails and run busses....  it is all very well suggesting you can get cheaper fares by travelling at different times unfortunately most employers aren't interesting in you working a 12 - 8 day....