Train Fares

Prayer-in-C

You can't just compare simple fuel costs when doing train versus car calculations.

You have to pro-rata calculate:

Insurance
Tax
Wear and Tear
Parking
Congestion Charge / Emissions Zone Charging
Fuel
MOT cost
then calculate what your unproductive time driving is worth.

For many commuters, even though the rail fares may appear high, the annual season tickets usually come out FAR more cost effective (and probably less stressful stuck in traffic), which is why people continue to buy them.

Some people also have serious concerns about the environment, and the train carrying hundreds, or thousands of people, is obviously better for the environment than a car with just 1 or 2 people in it.

Commuters also rarely buy daily tickets, so specific fares are pretty irrelevant for comparison. The majority will buy an annual season ticket, (maybe on a 0% credit card, or interest free work loan, direct debit etc),

A Brighton to London day return is £51.80, but an entire week is £111.30, so effectively you only pay for 2 journeys.

A 12 month Brighton to London season ticket is £4452, which means that the cost is reduced to just £85/week. Other examples are available!

Plus, if the commuter is late or delayed, they are going to be compensated for that, (soon as quick as 15 min delay), which you won't get on the road.

Stoke

Prayer-in-C wrote: »

You can't just compare simple fuel costs when doing train versus car calculations.

You have to pro-rata calculate:

Insurance
Tax
Wear and Tear
Parking
Congestion Charge / Emissions Zone Charging
Fuel
MOT cost
then calculate what your unproductive time driving is worth.

For many commuters, even though the rail fares may appear high, the annual season tickets usually come out FAR more cost effective (and probably less stressful stuck in traffic), which is why people continue to buy them.

Some people also have serious concerns about the environment, and the train carrying hundreds, or thousands of people, is obviously better for the environment than a car with just 1 or 2 people in it.

Commuters also rarely buy daily tickets, so specific fares are pretty irrelevant for comparison. The majority will buy an annual season ticket, (maybe on a 0% credit card, or interest free work loan, direct debit etc),

A Brighton to London day return is £51.80, but an entire week is £111.30, so effectively you only pay for 2 journeys.

A 12 month Brighton to London season ticket is £4452, which means that the cost is reduced to just £85/week. Other examples are available!

Plus, if the commuter is late or delayed, they are going to be compensated for that, (soon as quick as 15 min delay), which you won't get on the road.

OK, but throw in the fact most commuters don't get to sit down, find the trains stink of !!!! and then all of a sudden, that added value goes a bit down the drain don't you think?

Biggles

It is hard to believe that successive governments give a toss about the environment when they price us onto the roads like this.

Stoke

Biggles wrote: »

It is hard to believe that successive governments give a toss about the environment when they price us onto the roads like this.

Well, they've just pretty much banned e-bikes..... which were another energy efficient way of getting around. Strange how they want everyone to buy cars to save the environment but train fares are through the roof and e-bikes are now pretty much illegal.

wealdroam

Stoke wrote: »

Well, they've just pretty much banned e-bikes.....
...and e-bikes are now pretty much illegal.

Just a little off topic, but why on earth do you think that?

Nick_C

Prayer-in-C wrote: »

You can't just compare simple fuel costs when doing train versus car calculations.

You have to pro-rata calculate:

Insurance
Tax
Wear and Tear
Parking
Congestion Charge / Emissions Zone Charging
Fuel
MOT cost
then calculate what your unproductive time driving is worth.

...

No you don't. It depends what financial decision you are making.

If you are deciding whether to buy a car or use public transport, then yes factor everything in.

If you already own a car and are deciding whether to make a journey by car or by train, you are only looking at the marginal costs.

I am travelling from Biggleswade to Peterborough on Friday, returning on Monday. My first thought was to take the train. Then I found out it will cost £20.10. This is travelling off peak in the middle of the day. There are no return fares so buying two single tickets means no opportunity to use my railcard to get a discount.

The return journey is 86 miles. If I take the car it will cost me £7.93 in fuel. Consumables cost 2.6p a mile, so another £2.26, total £10.19.

Tax, insurance, MOT all have to be paid anyway.

So obviously I will be driving, adding to pollution and congestion.

My total cost of ownership is 32 pence per mile, but this is not the appropriate figure to use to calculate the effectiveness of using the car for an ad hoc journey.

My partner and I went to Newcastle in September. It would have been over £200 by train. Going by car cost £43 in fuel and about £12 in consumables.

Stoke

wealdroam wrote: »

Just a little off topic, but why on earth do you think that?

Because before January 2016, you could buy an e-Bike which could throttle you up to 15mph with no peddling required whatsoever. Not exactly fast, but quicker than walking speed. Add some peddling and you could probably get up to near 30mph.

After January of this year, all e-Bikes have been restricted. They can't throttle you at all, and the most they can add to your speed is something ridiculous like 6mph. I've not read up the rules quite as carefully as some, but gone are the days of buying an e-Bike as an effective efficient cheap way of getting to work.

Voyager2002

Nick_C wrote: »

No you don't. It depends what financial decision you are making.

If you are deciding whether to buy a car or use public transport, then yes factor everything in.

If you already own a car and are deciding whether to make a journey by car or by train, you are only looking at the marginal costs.

Yes, but the marginal cost of a car journey has to include some allowance for the wear and tear (and hence maintenance costs) that it causes, costs that would not arise if the car were sitting in the garage while you travelled by train.

Of course the big factor is that time on a train is available for work, while time driving is wasted.

Biggles

Stoke wrote: »

Well, they've just pretty much banned e-bikes..... which were another energy efficient way of getting around.

Hadn't heard about that. But they have resolutely banned Segways, as they think they're in the way on the road and too dangerous on the pavement. Or maybe too slow on the road and too fast for the pavement. We're just about the only country in the world where they can only be ridden on private property.

Nick_C

Voyager2002 wrote: »

Yes, but the marginal cost of a car journey has to include some allowance for the wear and tear (and hence maintenance costs) that it causes ...

Agreed, which is why I included them in my examples!