The average wage for a “full-time manual worker” in 1971 was £29 per week, equivalent to about £15,000 today (interestingly, a little below today’s adult minimum wage).

That's the key I think. At least until last 10yrs wages rose faster than prices. The 'real terms' cash cost of a gallon of fuel is one thing the number of hours of work required to buy it is another.

Our comparator year of 1971 was before the fuel crisis in 73/4 ended cheap crude. What was price of a gallon in say 1975 and how does it compare to today.

I'd guess that if you buy wisely and spread depreciation by making full use of modern cars' longevity then motoring is as cheap as it's ever been.

Of course it is. Or can be. When I was young, pensioners, most unmarried young men and women, and most housewives couldn't afford a car. Or if they did, they went without lots of other things. In 1975 fewer than 50% of households had a car. What has changed is the inequality of expenditure, reflecting the inequality of wealth after seventy years of post-war peace and prosperity. E.g. a nearby house has three Mercedes in the drive, one of which, an S class coupe, will depreciate more in two years than my personal cars have cost over nearly forty years. Another has a V reg Astra - nuff said!

drive through any housing estate today and every drive and road is cluttered with second and often third cars. I have an ordinary job as a bus driver and our car park at work is full of expensive metal including new Golf R’s and high spec BMW’s

As I have said in many threads before something does not add up when people which are low earners are driving very expensive motors. People seem to think it is some kind of status symbol to drive a high spec BMW for £xx per month and then hand it back after three years and keep nothing! Not sure how we ended up in a society in which that in some way increases a persons status.

To me an increase in financial status is being mortgage free of a real freehold asset and having a solid plan to retire.

Bought my first car as a 17 year old in 1974 earning about £20 a week (less deductions). It cost me £100 for what would be considered an un-roadworthy 10 year old wreck these days. Petrol was about 35 pence a gallon but I remember it going up to 50 pence a gallon late in the year, that was quite a shock, imagine petrol going for £1.20 a litre today to £1.71 a litre by the new year.

The National Minimum wage for a 17 year old today is £4.20 an hour, £168 for a 40 hour week (less deductions of course). Petrol is £5.45 a gallon.

So my car cost 5 weeks wages and 5 gallons of petrol cost me 9% of a weeks wage.

5 weeks wages would get todays 17 year old a £840 and from what I have seen for sale locally that would be a far better car (but older) than the one I bought back in 74. 5 gallons of petrol would cost them 16% of their wages thus they are worse off in that respect.

Overall I think that todays 17 year old is getting far more for their money than I did, probably why more 17 year olds drive these days.

Also had a think about dad. He bought his first new car in 1972, a 2 litre Mk 3 Cortina, cost about £1200 (probably because it was the "L" spec and had absolutely no kit whatsoever. He was earning about £30 a week (before deductions), £1560 a year. Simple sums suggest that he would have worked 40 weeks to buy the car. I seem to remember he normally would buy £1 of petrol a time which was 3 gallons.

He's retired now but based on his pension he would currently be earning about £25,000 a year. 40 weeks wage would get you a £19500 car which looking for a car a similar size and power would probably be a Ford Focus and £19500 would get you a very nice one which is way better kitted out than a 1972 Cortina, if you want something similar sized but really basic probably the only suggestion I would make would be a Dacia Logan MCV which with the better engine (to get similar power) and trim is £10,095.

40 weeks wage would get him a similar main stream car but if he wanted to go bargain basement he could spend 21 weeks wage on a Dacia. Going bargain basement in 1972 was also possible of course, that would have been a Skoda or Lada, but whereas the Dacia is acceptable the 1972 Skoda and Lada were rubbish.

As with me petrol is going to cost a greater percentage of his wage now.

As far as servicing goes no idea what 1972 rates were but they did need doing every 6,000 miles, some had an oil change every 3,000 miles. Cannot see the overall being much different to be honest.

Insurance in 1974 as a 17 year old cost me £40 a year, 2 weeks wage. Today prices are terrifying from what apprentices at work pay so I think it definitely was better for us. Dad was paying £20 a year back in the early 70's (1/2 what I was paying 3rd party for a rusty wreck) which was about 66% of a weeks wage. I pay just under £200 a year currently which would be 40% of dads projected earnings.

Good

17 year olds get more car for their money than I did.

Insurance for mature drivers is cheaper.

Similar sized car cost a similar percentage but is better equipped.

Cheaper but still good cars are available.

Bad

Petrol is more expensive.

Insurance for young drivers is far more expensive.

But lets not forget that today there are a large number of pre-reg and nearly new cars available at huge savings plus there are brokers out there that will save you large sums. Using those sources would either save you money or mean you could get more for your money.

I personally think its far better these days.

In 1971 most households "did" with one car. Nowadays, apart from in congested metropolitan areas where actual car ownership is low, every driver in the household who has a licence owns their own car, hence the 4 vehicles for 4 people outside the house syndrome.

So any available space in front of a house is paved over for parking, usually without allowing for lost drainage potential. Faster runoff, flooding, and we all know the results.