no, you are misquoting me.
i said it was more economical. between car payment and insurance I am saving over $100 a month alone, not including the fuel. We don't use the vehicle to its capacity anymore, so it was a waste for us to have it. We really only used it for traveling, well hell my diesel gets better fuel mileage than the expedition, and we all fit in that plenty well. So for the amount we use it, it wasn't worth keeping it. Not to mention it was nickel and diming us to death with trying to fix the damn hesitation problems that 3 dealerships couldn't pinpoint. So yes as you can see, it is more economical having a car that is more fuel efficient, less on monthly payments, less on insurance, and has a lifetime warranty. (regular 3/36,000 bumper to bumper, 6 year/ 60,000 powertrain then after that as long as we own it all repairs are $100 total)
so effectively I am saving around $200+ a month by getting rid of the expedition. $200 a month that I can use to upgrade our house, or the diesel or whatever.
