The aggressive fleet incentives that manufacturers are currently offering commercial fleets present the opportunity to give serious consideration to substituting a compact SUV on a selector in lieu of a traditional intermediate-size fleet sedan, so long as it is capable of fulfilling the fleet application. When you compare lifecycle costs during a 36-month service life, a compact SUV actually has a lower monthly total cost. Interestingly, they are also less expensive at a shorter 24-month cycle. One advocate for short cycling compact SUVs is Gary Rappeport, CEO and president of Donlen Corp., a fleet management company headquartered in Northbrook, Ill. “The opportunity exists today for fleets to think out of the box,” he said. “Today’s high incentives change the dynamics for fleets and present the opportunity to not only migrate to a more upscale vehicle, but also operate them within a shorter 24-month replacement cycle.” In the chart below, Donlen compares the lifecycle costs of three intermediate-size sedans kept in service for 36 months against three compact SUVs kept in service for 24 months. Counter-intuitively, the average total monthly cost for a compact SUV is substantially less expensive than an intermediate-size fleet sedan. Upon analysis of this data, there are five factors that favor using a compact SUV for a shorter 24-month replacement cycle.
1. Operating Costs are Reduced
By short cycling, a vehicle remains covered under the new-vehicle warranty for a greater percentage of its service life. “As a result, there is substantial operating cost savings by avoiding the significant maintenance costs for fleet vehicles that occur in years 3 and 4,” said Rappeport. During the first two years of service, most maintenance expenses are for oil-filter-lube and other related preventive maintenance. “By reducing vehicle service life to 24 months, there are significant savings opportunities in maintenance. If you reduce maintenance costs, there will be a parallel reduction in downtime since drivers are scheduling less maintenance. Although SUVs traditionally have had a reputation for poor fuel economy, the smaller engines in compact SUVs often have comparable mpg ratings as those of intermediate-size sedans,” added Rappeport.










