Group 6

Sports Utility Vehicles versus Cars:

A Comparative analysis of the costs of different types of
vehicles, considering fuel economy, maintenance and
features.

VS.

Names of Candidates: Kemoy Powell, Nastassia Boothe, Peter-John Murray, Tyler Rust
Center Name: Hydel High School
Center Number:100324
Teacher’s Name: Mr. G. Wright
Territory: Jamaica
Year of Examination: 2022

1|Page
Table of Contents
Cover Page

Table of Contents

Project Title............................................................................................................................................3
Introduction...........................................................................................................................................4
Method of Data Collection.....................................................................................................................5
Presentation of Data............................................................................................................................13
Analysis of Data...................................................................................................................................25
Discussion of Findings.........................................................................................................................26
Conclusion...........................................................................................................................................27

2|Page
 Project Title

The title of this project is Sports Utility Vehicles versus Cars: A Comparative

analysis of the costs of different types of vehicles, considering fuel economy,

maintenance and features.

3|Page
 Introduction
This Mathematics School Based Assessment was created to compare Sports Utility Vehicles and

Cars. This was chosen because the student researchers observed that in Jamaica there is a greater

preference for cars in comparison to Sports Utility Vehicles.

Through doing this SBA we hope to learn more about how Mathematics plays a role in the day-

to-day life of the average person who owns a vehicle (Applied Mathematics) as well as to

sharpen Problem Solving skills when it comes to resolving money-related issues that arise from

owning a vehicle.

This Portfolio specifically looks at a comparative analysis of the costs of different types of

vehicles, considering fuel economy, maintenance and features. This will be done by researching

and examining information from a case study revolving around what exactly affects the prices of

vehicles. This was done using two well-known vehicle brands namely; Honda and Toyota.

A questionnaire was also used to aid the data collection process, it was distributed to a total of

thirty-one (31) people. All of the data garnered from the questionnaire will be displayed in colour

coded charts, graphs, and tables. Each of these tables will be labeled clearly and the information

derived from these will be broken down in the Data Analysis.

4|Page
 Method of Data Collection

Case Study

The first set of data was gathered by carrying out a case study, comparing the statistics from two

large Car and Sports Utility Vehicles brands, namely Honda and Toyota. The project was divided

into five (5) areas to be researched. These sections are Cost of different types of vehicles, Cost of

different features of vehicles, Fuel Economy and Cost of Maintenance for both Sports Utility

Vehicles and Cars. This was done to ensure that all members of the group would be able to carry

out sufficient research to provide information to back up the data findings. We decided to narrow

our searches to Toyota and Honda. They (Toyota and Honda) are leading vehicle manufacturers

known for packaging performance, comfort and quality at a reasonable price.

Cost of Different Types of SUV

Toyota and Honda both offer a range of prices for a long list and variety of SUV’s. When

researched it was discovered that prices of SUV’s were generally higher due to the parts they are

made up of, maintenance, the technology built into the vehicle, the materials used to build them

and the how new the materials used to build them are as this improves the longevity of the

vehicle. The least expensive Toyota SUV is the Toyota Corolla STD which comes in at $37,862

USD. Based on an average of 5 Toyota SUVs namely the Corolla Hybrid, Rush Mid, RAV-

4HIGH, Prado 2.8TXL and the Land Cruiser 4.5LVXR with prices starting at $42,327 USD,

$33,991 USD, $54,605 USD, $107,590 USD and $151,237 USD; respectively, giving an average

of $77,950 USD.

5|Page
Similarly, Honda’s least expensive SUV is the Corolla Sedan starting at just over $USD. Based

on an average of 5 Honda cars; namely, the Honda CR-V, Honda CR-V Hybrid, Honda Pilot,

Honda Passport and Honda HR-V with prices starting at $25,750 USD, $30,960 USD, $32,250

USD, $32,590 USD and $21,420 USD; respectively, giving an average of $28,594 USD.

Cost of Different Types of Cars

Toyota and Honda both offer a range of prices for a long list and variety of cars. As mentioned

for the SUV’s, generally, the price of the vehicle is affected by the parts that it is composed of.

Similarly, the price is also affected by longevity of the vehicle. Toyota’s least expensive Car is

the Yaris Sedan which comes in at a bit under $17,000 USD. Based on an average of 5 Toyota

cars namely the Toyota Camry, Toyota Corolla, Toyota Prius, Toyota 86 and Toyota Avalon,

with prices starting at $24,425 USD, $22,525 USD, $24,525 USD, $26,985 USD and $36,275

USD; respectively, giving an average of $26, 947 USD per car.

Similarly, Honda’s least expensive car is the Corolla Sedan starting at just over $21,000USD.

Based on an average of 5 Honda cars namely the Honda Accord, Honda Civic, Honda Clarity,

Honda Insight and Honda with prices starting at $24,970 USD, $28,300 USD, $33,400 USD,

$23,120 USD and $17,120 USD; respectively, giving an average of $25,382 USD.

6|Page
Fuel Economy: Sports Utility Vehicles and Cars

What is Fuel Economy?

Fuel Economy Refers to the number of miles a car can travel using a specific amount of fuel. It is

measured in miles per gallon/miles per gallon gasoline equivalent (MPGe) or measured in

L/100km or Litres per every 100 kilometres.

What is good fuel economy?

Good fuel economy generally refers to anything listed as less than 5 litres per 100 kilometres.

Fuel Economy in Cars versus Sports Utility Vehicles

In general, larger vehicles are known to use more gas than smaller vehicles. Weight plays a big

role in this as the heavier the vehicle the more gas is uses. Since SUVs are heavier, it will travel

significantly fewer kilometres per litre when compared to the lighter vehicle, the car. When it

comes down to it, if the equal amounts of gas are inserted in both a Car and Sports Utility

Vehicle, the SUV would burn much more gas at a faster rate.

Comparison

According to multiple sources, the best fuel economy cars are the Toyota Prius and Honda Civic

respectively. In terms of Sports Utility Vehicles, the Ford Escape comes in first followed by the

Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V.

7|Page
Features of Vehicles
A feature is a distinctive attribute of something. In the case of vehicles this refers to anything that

sets the vehicle apart from others.

Cost of Features of SUV

Sports Utility Vehicles just like all automobiles have their individual characteristics. These

features include but are not limited to a High-Capacity Engine, All-wheel drive, High ground

clearance, Longer Wheelbase, A somewhat box-like body and a High Seating Position. These are

the main features of a vehicle that would be classified as a SUV.

A High-Capacity Engine for a Honda would cost $3500USD while for a Toyota it would be

slightly lower coming in at around $3000USD. All-wheel drive on a Honda costs up to $580USD

while for a Honda it would cost about $490USD. High-ground clearance for both Toyota and

Honda would cost $600USD and for a Toyota $700USD. A box-like body which shows you the

shape of the vehicle is cost $1300USD for both Toyota and Honda. A high seating position for

Honda is $980USD and for a Toyota it is $900USD.

Cost of Features of Cars

8|Page
Cars also have individual characteristics. These features include but are not limited to Traction

Control, anti-lock brake system, smart stop technology, vehicle stability control, and brake assist.

Traction Control for a Honda would cost about $35USD while for a Toyota it would be more

coming in at around $98USD. Anti-lock brake systems in Hondas start at around $80USD while

in Toyota it starts at about $79USD, roughly the same price. Vehicle Stability for both Toyota

and Honda would cost around $850USD for both. Brake assist would cost about $365USD in a

Honda and about $672USD in Toyota.

Cost of Maintenance: Sports Utility Vehicles and Cars

What is Cost of Maintenance?

This refers to any cost associated with keeping a road, building, vehicle, or machine in good

condition. In this case we’ll be specifically referencing vehicles, SUVs and Cars.

When researched it was found out that car maintenance would cost $1000 USD to maintain on

average every year. Based on further research a source cited that “In 2017, AAA found that, on

average, new vehicles cost $1,186 USD each year to maintain and repair.” This is because of the

upkeep of the following:

 Oil change

 Windshield wiper replacement

 New battery

 Brake pad replacement

 Tire rotation or replacement

9|Page
 NB// this does not include fuel costs or the replacement of parts for the vehicle.

Cost of Maintenance in Cars versus Sports Utility Vehicles

When compared to cars, SUV’s generally cost more to maintain, this is strictly due to their size

and weight along with the extra labour costs. Typically, the brakes and brake pads have to deal

with a larger amount of locomotion; this means that the brakes are constantly being affected by

stronger forces which make them prone to damage and further increasing the need for

replacements.

Questionnaire

The second set of data was obtained by distributing a questionnaire to thirty-one people. A total

of fourteen (14) questions were asked to accurately gauge the reasons why participants in the

survey responded the way that they did. Participants were asked;

I. Gender

II. How old are you?

III. How many vehicles do you own?

IV. Do you plan on purchasing another vehicle? If yes give a reason for your answer

V. What kind of vehicle(s) do you own? (Car or SUV)

VI. What brand vehicle(s) do you own?

VII. How much did your current vehicle(s) cost?

VIII. Do you think the cost of your vehicle was worth it? Why or why not?

IX. Which vehicle do you have a preference towards? Give a reason for your answer

10 | P a g e
 X. Based on experience with vehicle shopping, googling or prior knowledge, between a Car

and an SUV which vehicle costs more?

XI. Which features on the vehicle(s) do you find most expensive?

XII. How good is the fuel economy on your vehicle(s) currently?

XIII. How much does your vehicle(s) cost to maintain?

XIV. Do you plan to switch to the other type (SUV or Car)? If yes why?

XV. How long have you had your vehicle?

These questions were asked to accurately determine the outside factors which affect the cost of

the vehicles as well as the additional reasons as to why consumers choose these types of

vehicles.

Other questions had arisen from the results of our questionnaire; all of which are answered in the

Data Analysis

I. Did gender play a significant role in the type of vehicle that the consumers had chosen?

II. Did age affect the type of vehicle that the consumers had chosen?

III. Was the cost of the vehicles as well as the maintenance and features of the vehicles

affecting the amount of vehicles that a person owns?

IV. Did the kind of vehicle the person own depend upon the cost or was it dependent on

outside factors such as terrain?

V. Was the brand vehicle affecting the cost as well as the efficiency of the vehicle?

VI. Was the fuel economy of the vehicle dependent on the length of time the vehicle was

owned for?

VII. Are the costs of the vehicle worth it when taking into consideration these factors?

11 | P a g e
12 | P a g e
 Presentation of Data

Pie Chart Showing Gender of Participants in Ques-

tionnaire

10

21

male female

21 100 21×100 2,100

× = = =67.7 %∨68 % of participants were male .
31 1 31×1 31

Similarly, we can deduce the percentage of females who participated;

10 100 10× 100 1000

× = = =32.2% of participants were female.
31 1 31× 1 31

13 | P a g e
 Pie Chart Showing Age of Participnts in the
Questionnnaire
1

11

14

15-19 20-30 31-40 41+

1 100 1 ×100 100

× = = =3.2 % of participants were 15−19 .
31 1 31×1 31

5 100 5 × 100 500

× = = =16.1 % of participants were 20−30.
31 1 31× 1 31

14 100 14 ×100 1400

× = = =45.1 % of participants were 31−40 .
31 1 31 ×1 31

11 100 11 ×100 1100

× = = =36 % of participants were 41+ ¿.
31 1 31 ×1 31

14 | P a g e
 Bar Chart showing number of vehicles owned by participants
in the questionnaire
25

20

15

10

0
One Two Three Multiple

22 100 2200
× = =
31 1 31

70.96 %∨71 % , this percentage represents the amount of people who owned one vehicle

7 100 700
× = =¿
31 1 31

22.58 %∨23 % , this percentage represents the amount of people who owned two vehicles .

1 100 100
× = =
31 1 31

3.22% or 3%, this percentage represents the person who owned three vehicles.

1 100 100
× = =¿
31 1 31

3.22% or 3%, this percentage represents the person who owned multiple vehicles.

15 | P a g e
 Do you plan on purchasing another vehicle?
30

27
25

20

15

10

5
4

0
Yes No

27 100 2700
× = =
31 1 31

87.09% or 87%, this percentage represents the number of people who planned to purchase

another vehicle.

4 100 400
× = =
31 1 31

12.90% or 13% this percentage represents the number of people who didn’t plan on purchasing

another vehicle

16 | P a g e
 Chart showing types of vehicles owned by participants
25

20

15

10

0
Car SUV Both Other

20 100 2000
× = =¿64.51% or 65%, This represents the percentage of people who have a car/(s).
31 1 31

6 100 600
× = =¿19.35% or 19%, This represents the percentage of people who have a
31 1 31

SUV/(s).

3 100 300
× = =¿9.67% or 10%, This represents the percentage of people who have both.
31 1 31

2 100 200
× = =6.45 %∨6 %, This represents the percentage of people who have an other
31 1 31

vehicle.

17 | P a g e
 Chart showing Brand of vehicles Owned by participants
14

12

10

0
BMW Honda Toyota Kia Nissan Mitsubishi Subaru Suzuki Volkswagen Belta Mazda

1 100 100
× = =3.23 %, This represents the percentage of people that owned the brand BMW,
31 1 31

KIA, Subaru, Volkswagen, Belta and Mazda.

11 100 1100
× = =35.48 %, This represents the percentage of people that owned the brand
31 1 31

Honda.

12 100 1200
× = =38.70 %, This represents the percentage of people that owned the brand
31 1 31

Toyota.

3 100 300
× = =9.68 %, This represents the percentage of people that owned the brand Nissan
31 1 31

and Suzuki.

18 | P a g e
 4 100 400
× = =12.90 %, This represents the percentage of people that owned the brand
31 1 31

Mitsubishi.

Chart showing prices of particpants' car(s)

in USD
6

0
1 5 9 5 4 6 8 4 3 7 7 ed
.8 .6 .3 .4 .9 .2 .5 .7 .2 .9 .9 ift
225 580 548 806 741 032 322 967 903 870 870 g
$ , , , , , 0, 0, 2, 3, 3, a s
$2 $3 $5 $7 $9 $1 $1 $1 $1 $2 W

1 100 100
× = =3.23 %, this percentage is a representation of the number of people who paid
31 1 31

$255.81, $516.13, $2,580.65, $2600.00, $3,548.39, $5,438.87, $5,806.45, $6,451.61, $7,741.94,

$10,645.16, $10,967.74, $11,290.32, $13,548.39, $13,870.97, $22,580.65, $23,870.97, those

who couldn’t recall as well as those that were gifted.

2 100 200
× = = 6.45%, this percentage is a representation of the number of people who paid
31 1 31

$8,387.10, $9,032.26, $10,322.58 and $12,903.23 for their vehicle(s).

19 | P a g e
5 100 500
× = = 16.13%, this percentage is a representation of the number of people who paid
31 1 31

$9,677.42

Chart showing whether or not participants

believed the cost of their vehicle was worth it

2 1

28

Yes No Not sure

28 100 2800
× = =¿ 90.32%, this is the percentage of participants who believed that the price of
31 1 31

their vehicle(s) was worth it.

2 100 200
× = =¿ 6.45%, this is the percentage of participants who believed that the price of
31 1 31

their vehicle(s) was not worth it.

1 100 100
× = =¿ 3.23%, this is the percentage of participants who were not sure whether or
31 1 31

not the price of their vehicle(s) was worth it.

20 | P a g e
 Chart Showing Participants' Preference
towards vehicles
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
oa da an W ve
r al al al nc
e
ot az ss er er er
y M Ni BM Ro e n e n e n e re
To nd in
g
n
g
n
g ef
a/ La s rs
i i pr
nd V' a c ks No
o SU C u
H Tr

❑ × ❑ =❑
❑ ❑ ❑

21 | P a g e
 Chart Title
2; 6%

29; 94%

SUV Car

Chart showing Features participants found most

expensive on their respective vehicles
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
ne io
n
io
n es rin
g
cin
g is t es ca
r gy ne
gi is s is s tur e i ss tur a olo No
En fe
a
St
e r v A ea of hn
sm sm Se ng sF ec
r an ran e nt s & rivi u a rts T
T
d
T m ht or
d rio lP
an a in lig g u xu e ra
t c L
ne nt
er ati kin Ge
n
ngi E m rac
E to T
th Au
Bo

Chart showing Fuel Economy on Participants'

vehicles
1; 3% 1; 3%

3; 10%
9; 31%

6; 21%

9; 31%

Very Good Good Average Not Good Bad Not sure

22 | P a g e
 Chart showing cost of maintainance for par-
ticipants' vehicles
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e it
00 500 ,33 ,00 ,25 ,00 ,50 ,00 ,00 ,00 ,25 ,00 ,00 ,00 ,50 ,00 ,00 sur a b
4, 8 10 11 12 12 15 20 22 23 25 30 31 37 43 50 ot te
N ui
Q

Chart showing participants' answer to possibly

changing vehicles.

4; 13%

12; 39%

15; 48%

No Yes Perhaps

Chart showing the length of time par-

ticipants owned their vehicles for
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
s a r rs rs rs rs rs rs rs rs e
th ye a a ea a a a a a ur
on 1 ye ye 4y ye ye ye ye ye ts
m 2 3 5 6 10 11 12
6 No

23 | P a g e
24 | P a g e
 Analysis of Data
A total of 31 participants took part in the questionnaire, 21 males and 10 females.

From this we can deduce the percentage of males and females who took the questionnaire.

From the total of 31 participants, 1 classed in the 15-19 age group, 5 classed in the 20-30 age

group, 14 in the 31-40 age group and 11 classed in the 41+ age group. From this we deduced the

percentages of each resulting in;

Of the 31 participants; 22 owned one vehicle, 7 owned two vehicles, 1 person owned 3 vehicles

and 1 person did not specfiy but instead said they had multiple. From this we deduced the

percentage of people who had one, two and three vehicles, respectively.

25 | P a g e
 Discussion of Findings
Based on the presentation of data it can be said that the participants in the questionnaire were

predominantly male. The age group of those that own vehicles can also be derived from the information

obtained, it tells us that most of the participants were in the age group 31-40. The majority of these same

people only owned one vehicle. Most persons were planning to purchase another vehicle, with the new

vehicle being a different type of vehicle from the one they already own. Once again majority of the

participants owned a car, this may be due to the cost of a Car in comparison to the cost of an SUV, with

the price of the car being significantly lower than that of the SUV. As was backed up by our findings,

Honda and Toyota were the two major brands that consumers purchased vehicles from proving that we

were correct in using them for the focus of our case study.

26 | P a g e
 Conclusion

27 | P a g e