The monster trucks that you see plastered across billboards and revving it up at rallies cost tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of dollars for the people who own them. The average truck really lives up to its “monster” name – they usually weigh in between 10,000 and 12,000 pounds and are usually 11 feet tall by 12 feet wide. They are built specifically for short bursts of intense power, so their engines usually average about 1500 horsepower. Because these trucks are so huge and powerful, they are equipped with three shut off switches: one with the driver inside the truck; one on the rear of the truck, and one remote control kill switch which is held by an official in case the safety of the crowd is threatened. The driver is required to wear a five-point safety harness, helmet, gloves, a fire-proof suit and a HANS (head and neck support) device.

Monster Jam Events in Dollars and Cents

On average, 3,000 cars from junkyards are crushed as part of monster truck rallies every year. It takes a crew of eight people between 18 and 20 hours to construct a course for a monster truck rally. It gets dirty, too: 700 cubic yards of dirt are used for an arena, 3,500 cubic yards for a stadium. In fact, 700,000 cubic yards of dirt are used annually for the USHRA Monster Jam event.

The average Monster Jam fan is 36 years old, male and married with kids. In fact 61% of monster truck fans are male, 54% are married, and 55% have kids at home. Kids are big fans of the monster truck jams too: 35% of attendees are under the age of 12.

The Main Attraction: How Much Do Monster Trucks Cost?

The race team itself is one of the least costly aspects of owning and operating a monster truck. The team in charge of repairs and refueling, plus their food, lodging, and uniforms typically cost $250,000 per year. If that sounds pricey, consider the following:

Monster Trucks cost $250,000 to build, as all are custom-built. They also have $100,000 in spare parts.

Budget and repairs, including routine maintenance, emergency repairs, and equipment typically averages $120,000 per year.

The engines, which measure 575 cubic inches and use between 2 and 2.5 gallons of methanol per run, usually cost $35,000.

The body of the truck, made of a durable kind of fiberglass, costs $20,000.

Tires averaging 66 inches tall and 43 inches wide (at $1800 each), shocks (at $2000 per kit) and custom paint jobs (at $7000) round out the rest of the costs usually associated with monster trucks.

Add these costs together and you can see why ticket prices to these events can be expensive – the main attraction costs hundreds of thousands of dollars just to keep it up and running for each rally!

Ever wonder what those nifty shapes emblazoned on the front and back of your automobile are supposed to mean?  I mean really, what do two over-lapping ovals have to do with the Japanese auto maker Toyota?  The wonky ‘h’ used by Hyundai sort of makes sense to me and the masculine blocky ‘H’ of Honda is also logical because both auto makers used the first letter of their company name to create an easily recognized logo.

Really, a logo is supposed to create brand recognition in sort of a short hand, visual way. It is the advertising equivalent of making an ‘x’ for your mark instead of a full signature.  Logos are very effective. Not many people would want to run around with a tire or windshield wiper on their baseball cap, but plenty of folks are keeping the sun off their heads beneath a fancily drawn f-o-r-d on a blue oval or sport a VW on their T-shirt encouraging farfignugan.

It makes sense to have a logo, but who decided what the logo should be and why it should work?  Some logos are more chance than anything else. One of the most universally recognized logos on the planet is the Chevy logo.  It was designed in 1913 appearing for the first time in an advertisement in the Washington post and is said to have been copied from a wallpaper design.

Other auto makers put a little more thought into their logos.  Toyota is one such example. The loopy over-lapping oblong O’s are deceptively simple. These loops not only hide the letters in the name ‘Toyota’ but they also tie in the roots of the car maker’s beginnings as a fabric maker. Looking closely, you can see the thread passing through the eye of a needle. To see how the ‘t-o-y-o-t-a’ is hidden, click the graphic to the left.

BMW is another thoughtful logo and has changed very little in the last 100 years.  BMW started as an airplane maker at the time of World War ll.  Due to it’s aviation roots, the blue and white quartered circle represents a propeller in motion.

To explore other auto makers and their logos, see the graphic on the left and become enlightened.

When I was a kid we drove. A Lot. It was a sort of entertainment for my parents and a means of teaching us kids patience and self control.  I called it torture.  How many wiggly seven year olds do you know would relish the idea of sitting in a confined space sardine-style with their four siblings for endless miles along a deserted back road?

We did come up with a game to pass the time: counting road kill.  Not the kindest game, but we were obviously limited in our entertainment choices.  On the other hand, we did see some really neat specimens like a four-point buck, the huge porcupine, and even a rattle snake.  My personal favorites were the skunks because they sparked much conversation in the car for miles afterward, and I figured it was a very poetic way to repay my parent’s for the forced confinement.  I’ve always had a very well developed sense of irony.

When I was a teen, I had my first experience with being the producer of such road kill. I was driving my beater truck after dark and the deer just jumped right in front of me. The truck didn’t stand a chance and was considered totaled.  Road kill accidents take a heavy toll not only on animal life, but on pocket books as well.

The numbers don’t lie; there are nearly one million animals killed by cars every day pouring more than eight billion dollars into repair shops’ registers every year.

The type of animal varies by topography, traffic patterns and geography, but speaking generally, squirrels and rats are the biggest victims of road kill incidents.  Find out what road kill is most common in your neck of the woods by clicking the graphic.

If you look at the statistics and think that those numbers just can’t be right, consider how many squirrels you see on the roadside when compared to deer. Stop and consider this: what are you more likely to observe when you are streaming down the freeway at 60 mph: an animal the size of a teacup purse pooch or a 150+ pound deer?

Not only is the deer more visible, it also makes a better story to tell at parties.  How many would relate the sad tale of running down a fuzzy little squirrel?  Only the most cold-hearted or unrefined persons. But when you show up with a new car, the story about that deer just tumbles out whether you really wanted to tell it or not.

In spite of providing one with a story to tell, road kill really isn’t a laughing matter. I never saw any of the deceased grinning as we played our game. The cost in terms of life and insurance bills is huge.  The lesser thought of toll is that of family loss: 32 million cats and dogs are victims of road kill each year.

Fortunately for your wallet and for those lives senselessly taken, road kill can be reduced in a number of ways.  First, try to avoid driving at times when animals are most active.  Also, having your headlights in good working order and adjusted to the proper height is very important as well.  Finally, keeping your braking systems maintained and not driving too fast, especially after dark, will keep your bumper from making contact with those fuzzy animals that share our roads.

The seven year olds of today have other means of road trip diversions.  They won’t miss out.

Fast cars. Now that I have your attention, what is one of the most iconic figures associated with speed and the automobile?  Mario Andretti? Dale Earnhardt, perhaps?  There’s always the heroic paring of the bat mobile and the masked avenger.

Me, I’m partial to James Bond. There was just something about those winding European roads, the flirtatious chases with a mysterious woman (that you know is no good) and the Aston Martin complete with a champagne dispenser in the glove box and rocket launcher in the tail pipe.

There is something that Q missed however: a car that really means speed.  I mean really hooks.  The James Bond Aston Martin is laughably slow when compared to the Bugatti Veyron.  This tight piece of machinery is currently the fastest, and not coincidentally, most expensive car in the world.

Boasting a land speed capability of 267 mph, this car really lays down tracks. And with the blazing ability to arrive from a stand still to 60 miles per hour in 2.05 seconds it can achieve top speed before .007 could ask for anything to be shaken, not stirred.

The Bugatti Veyron is not the only car that outmatches the efforts of Q or now his replacement, R.  The list of the top 10 fastest and most expensive cars on the planet is conspicuously devoid of the Bond Aston Martin – with or without aquatic capabilities.

Perhaps, being the top super agent of the super secret, super spy organization of such a small country makes certain tools out of reach, even for Bond.  These super cars cost about as much as M uses to fund the entire working of the MIS. Starting from the top the Bugatti Veyron costs over a million dollars new. The bottom of the barrel, the Porsche Carrera GT, which is laughably out matched by the Bugatti, would still leave James smirking in its rear view mirror with a retail cost of a mere $440,000.00. To see which cars round out the top 10 most expensive cars list, click the graphic.

Maybe there are other factors at play.  Super cars aren’t only super fast and super expensive; they have super high upkeep costs as well. Even James Bond needs to refuel every now and then. Super cars cost about $10,000 annually for fuel. This compares to other, less super vehicles that cost about $2,700 each year to run 20,000 miles.

The difference is the fuel economy.  Super fast cars are not planet friendly green machines that only sip at the gas tank. NO, these engines are built to SWALLOW gallons whole, generating speed, not savings.

Other costs are likewise high: insurance, maintenance and licensing fees.  I don’t know about you, but I think I’d rather see Bond sticking with the Aston Martin and able to spend his money in other ways like drinking, gambling, and on impeccable clothing.

For the rest of us, there’s still the dream: super spy and the bigger better super car.

So you live in a big city and walk everywhere you go.  You literally put about 60 miles per year on your car, but your rates are 50% higher than your lead-footed, rather-drive-on-the-left-side-of-the-road friend who never got over Nascar’s rejection.

Why are his rates lower than yours even though he has enough tickets to equal the number of dollar bills you use to pay for your car insurance premium each month? It’s because he lives in the country, and some number crunching car insurance guy in some dimly lit office somewhere figured that statistically your buddy has a lower chance of getting into a wreck and costing the company money.

Now that doesn’t seem fair does it?  This pricing conspiracy goes even farther than that.  When you dreamed about growing up and settling down in a home of your own, you probably never spent any time at all dwelling on the cost of car insurance.  You are older and wiser now, and living in, say, Louisiana, will cost the average driver over $2,500 just for car insurance.  How do you think the schmuck living in La. feels when he finds out his neighbor across the boarder in Arkansas pays nearly $900 less?  Adding insult to injury, Texans and Missippians also pay less, by over $1,100 annually!

If you’re curious to find out how much you could save by just pulling up stakes and moving, click the graphic to the left and find out.  From the top paying state, Louisiana, to the cheapest auto insurance costs in Maine, there is a difference of $1,600.

Well, don’t blame the American Capitalist society scum and auto insurance corporate greed for the seeming fleecing of certain regions.  Globally speaking, car insurance companies change THEIR premium rates at the odometer’s flipping of a mile the world over.  In Ireland, which is a tiny island smaller than many western US states, the premiums can take a leap over a thousand pounds per year.

Globally speaking, location is not the only mitigating factor insurance brokers use to determine policy costs. Car insurance companies also take a close look at drivers themselves.  It is not surprising that an individual’s driving record can send costs rising or falling, but in India, the type of car you drive is also a factor.

Never before has the meaning of the phrase ‘what kind of car do you drive?‘ had the potential to bypass your pride and hit you where it really counts: your pocket book.

There are, of course, other unusual qualifiers like age, gender (yes, auto insurers are not above the stereo type of female drivers, but in this case girls actually post the smaller risk, so women on the whole pay less), location, make, and model of your car.  To find out which countries charge for what with a world-wide overview of car insurance facts, check the graphic above.

The United States’ auto insurance industry is not unaffected. Most of the seemingly strange factors thrown into the premium equation around the world are represented by some mandatory question on your insurance forms.  It is a seemingly inescapable fact, or is it?  Notice Germany somehow has managed to take location out of the equation as the average cost of insurance in Deutschland only varies by 200 deutschmarks. Hmmm….

There is something you can do now to toss a certain amount of the random statistics out of your personal auto insurance premium.  Get an OBDII usage based insurance policy.  As shown in the infographic, there are some clear benefits to this particular kind of big brother device.

New Hampshire stands alone. The tiny state is the only one in the country that does not have a law requiring adults to buckle their seatbelts while driving.

In every other state, adults who are caught without a seatbelt face fines. But New Hampshire residents tend to be fiercely proud of their independence. A recent news story by ABC News cited the stubborn streak of this proud state as the main reason why it’s resisted a seatbelt law for so long.

The story quoted an editorial in New Hampshire’s largest newspaper that said that by adopting a seatbelt law, the state would change forever. Residents would have to accept the fact that the state could bully its citizens into doing the right thing, the editorial said.

In other more pliant states, though, motorists need to wear their seatbelts or face sometimes heavy fines.

And drivers are also responsible for protecting their children, too, in the majority of states. Every state except for Mississippi and Iowa require children under the age of 13 to be restrained while traveling in a car. Depending on the age of the child, this restraint could be either a seatbelt or child car seat.

So who’s right? Are the residents of New Hampshire, with their proud independent streak, right to happily drive with their seatbelts unbuckled? Or is it the rest of the country, where drivers and passengers are breaking the law if they don’t buckle up?

It depends upon how you look at it. If you think the government has no right to tell you how to be safe, then the New Hampshire residents are right. If you don’t want to die in a car accident then the rest of the country might be right.

Staying Alive

The statistics are simply overwhelming when it comes to the wisdom of wearing seatbelts. According to the Virginia Division of Motor Vehicles, for every 1 percent increase in safety belt use, 172 lives and close to $100 million in annual injury and death costs are avoided.

The division also says that seatbelts, when used properly, cut the number of serious traffic injuries by 50 percent and fatalities by 60 percent to 70 percent.

And of every 100 children who unfortunately die in auto accidents, at least 80 of them would most likely survive if they had been properly secured in a child safety seat or restrained by seatbelts.

These numbers make a convincing case that you should wear seatbelts, at least if you want to survive a serious auto accident.

Sloppy Motorists?

Unfortunately, statistics also show that many parents never secure their young children properly, even when they do purchase child safety seats.

And this has been a long-running problem. Most parents do purchase child safety seats for their children. Unfortunately, too many of these parents don’t use these seats properly.

According to the numbers, three out of four families with child safety seats use them incorrectly putting their children in danger should they get into a serious auto accident.

And here’s a particularly chilling statistic: While 80 percent of U.S. children are properly immunized against contagious diseases, less than 10 percent of them are properly restrained when traveling in a car.

As the infographic attached to this story shows, driving laws vary from state to state. But one thing should be constant: If you want to give yourself and your family members the best odds of surviving a serious auto accident, wear your seatbelts and take the time to make sure that your children are properly restrained while traveling.

It’s been a long-running debate between drivers in a race to Disneyland, the Grand Canyon, and other top tourist attractions and researchers who say that driving too fast = more accidents and deaths.

The researchers say that higher speed limits have led to a greater number of driving accidents, both minor and serious. Drivers in a hurry argue that increased speed limits help them get where they need to go with less hassle. They also say that when everyone’s is traveling faster, there’s no reason for more accidents.

Turns out, the researchers – not much of a surprise – might be right.

A new study shows that fatal traffic accidents have increased since states have put into place higher speed limits.

The study’s results, of course, don’t prove that the speed limits are the reason for the higher deaths.

- Distracted drivers chatting on cell phones could be a cause.

- The fact that more cars are on the road could be at fault.

- Even increased road construction can lead to a jump in serious accidents.

But really, the research doesn’t look good for those who say that higher speed limits are in no way linked to a greater number of auto accidents.

The Researchers Take the Upper Hand

Researchers at the Division of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences in the School of Public Health at the University of Illinois, Chicago found that 12,545 deaths and 36,582 injuries could be linked to the higher speed limits that states started to post from 1995 through 2005.

The United States dropped its 55-mile-an-hour national speed limit in 1995, opening the door for states to post their own limits. If you’re driving across the United States now, you’ll likely run into a range of limits, depending upon whether you’re traveling a highway located in a rural area or one skirting the edge of a major city. In general, you’ll find highway speed limits ranging from 50 miles-an-hour to 75.

While compiling their numbers, the researchers discovered an increase in deaths on all types of roads of 3.2 percent since the national speed limit disappeared. Rural interstate deaths increased 9.1 percent. Urban interstate deaths jumped by 4 percent

No Change Likely

It’s unlikely, though, that states will lower their speed limits anytime soon. Commuters have grown used to the higher speeds. And though a speed limit of 70 miles-an-hour doesn’t save drivers much time when they’re stuck in a traffic jam with fellow motorists puttering along at 10 miles-an-hour, that higher limit works wonders when drivers are zipping home at non-rush-hour times.

However, just because speed limits have increased, don’t think that police officers are passing out fewer speeding tickets. Just check out the infographic attached to this story: A motorcyclist once received a ticket for traveling 140 miles-an-hour over the posted speed limit in Wabasha, Minn. This meant that the cyclist was traveling at an amazing 205 miles-an-hour.

In fact, if you have a bit of a lead foot, be careful when you’re driving in Florida, Georgia or Nevada. These states pass out the most speeding tickets every year.

Watch out if you’re motoring through the Chicago, New York City or Washington, D.C. metro areas, too: These three cities have the highest number of traffic cameras designed to snap shots of speeding motorists. Speed through one of these areas, and you might find a speeding ticket in your mailbox one afternoon.

Despite what the research says, it’s unlikely, too, that motorists won’t speed. Yes, we know that speeding increases our chances for a serious accident, but we’re also in a hurry. Far too often, our need for speed wins out over our need for common sense.

You don’t want to know how much time you waste sitting in traffic every year. Some studies estimate that the average urban commuter spends 46 minutes commuting to and from work each day. And that’s just the average: A lot of drivers – and you may be one of them – spend more than an hour getting to and from their jobs each day.

That’s rough, especially considering that most of us don’t even want to be at our jobs on a given day.

The Texas Transportation Institute estimates that U.S. residents spend more than 4 billion hours in traffic every year. They also waste more than 2.9 billion gallons of gasoline each year while stuck in traffic.

The institute boasts no studies charting the number of cuss words that U.S. drivers throw out during their average commutes. The number, though, must be astounding.

Get Out of the Car

It doesn’t have to be this way. You don’t have to fight your way to work each morning. There are plenty of alternatives to the car for getting to work. Depending on where you live, your city may be ahead of the game—check out the graphic to see where you stand.

Some of these are alternatives that you can turn to on your own. Others are ones that you’ll have to rely on your employers to institute.

For instance, instead of hopping in your car each morning, why not jump on your bike instead? Granted, this isn’t practical for all commuters. But many of us live close enough to our jobs to pedal to work. Not only will this save you gas money and help you avoid traffic-jam aggravation, it might also help you shrink your waistline.

And if you read the papers, you know this: Americans have some severe problems finding pants that fit them these days. A bit of pedal power can help us all squeeze into our jeans.

If you can’t bike to work, try the train or the bus. Yes, public transportation can be a drag. People smell. People talk loudly in their cell phones. They blast their iPods. Some of them even clip their fingernails on long train rides into the city.

But you can put up with this. It’s much better than dodging construction workers, potholes and drivers who are holding breakfast sandwiches in one hand and smart phones in the other as they navigate rush-hour traffic.

Besides, taking the train can be a bargain: You won’t have to worry about gas or hefty parking fees when you arrive at work.

The good news is that some commuters are searching for alternatives. As the infographic attached to this story shows, 8.7 percent of U.S. residents now either walk or bike to work. Of course, this percentage is dwarfed by the 87.7 percent who still drive to work each day, but progress is being made.

Businesses Need to Pitch In

Workers can make all the changes they want, but they won’t make much of a dent in the nation’s traffic-congestion problem until employers start doing their share.

Employers can do a lot to ease congestion. They can encourage their employees to work part- or full-time from home offices. After all, workers won’t be clogging up highways if their commute only requires them to head up their living room stairs.

Companies can also institute flexible starting times. Congestion isn’t helped when everyone’s racing to get to the office at 9 a.m. Companies that allow employees to head into the office early, or late, and then leave their cubicles accordingly at the end of the day, are doing their part to make rush hour just a bit less hellish.

What steps are you taking to free up space on our nation’s highways? If your answer is “nothing,” maybe it’s time to dust off that bike or pick up a train schedule.

It’s trendy to think that rising costs have put an incredible strain on our pocketbooks. After all, a gallon of gasoline is still nearly $3 in many states. Milk prices keep rising. And the cost of going to the movies? That’s reaching painful levels.

But in actuality, many products are easier for today’s consumers to afford. One of the most surprising of these? New cars.

It’s true that new cars cost more today. However, the average yearly salary of consumers is higher, too. In fact, it takes fewer weeks of salary today for the average consumer to buy a new car than it did in the mid-80s.

Getting that New Car with Less Pain

If you want some numbers to back this up, click on the infographic that’s running with this story. It spells out exactly how the number of weeks that consumers need to buy new cars has changed – or hasn’t in some cases – over the decades. How many weeks would you have to work to earn the money to pay for the vehicle you have now?

In 1980, it took the average consumer 23 weeks of salary to afford the cost of a new car. In 1985, this jumped to 29 weeks. Basically, consumers who put away all of their weekly salaries from Jan. 1 through late July would be able to purchase a new car with cash. (Of course, no one back then, or today, could afford to put away all their salary every week to save up for new wheels, but humor us.)

In 1990, surprisingly, that 29-week number remained the same. It did shoot up, though, five years later. In 1995 it took the typical consumer 31 weeks of salary to be able to afford a new car. In 2000, this number dropped again, falling down to 26 weeks. In 2005 it remained nearly the same, 27 weeks, while it feel rather sharply in 2009 to 22 weeks.

Figuring this out is a relatively simple process: The average new car in 2009 cost $28,400. But the average consumer salary was high, too, in 2009, $68,424. With this spending power, consumers who socked away all of their weekly paycheck starting Jan. 1 would have the $28,400 they’d need for a new car by early June.

Stickers Still Shocking

Of course, this doesn’t necessarily ease the sticker shock that comes with buying a new car today. Cars today are more expensive than they’ve ever been, even factoring in inflation.

For instance, in 1930, the average new car cost $640. Adjusted for inflation, it’d cost consumers an average of $8,126 to buy a new car back then. In 1940, those figures rose to $830 and $12,862, still a bargain by today’s standards.

In 1980, even, the average cost of a new car adjusted for inflation didn’t come close to what it costs to purchase a new auto today. The average cost of a new car stood at $7,200 in 1980. Adjusted for inflation, that cost hit $18,503. Yes, that’s a nice car today. But that $18,000 figure is lower than the cost of the average new car filling the dealer’s lot.

And, of course, the price of the new car itself isn’t the only cost associated with driving that has risen dramatically over the years. The cost of gasoline, for example, has skyrocketed. In 1930, a gallon of gasoline cost an average of 10 cents! Today, many drivers, depending upon where they live, have to shell out nearly $3 for a single gallon of gas.

Gasoline is just the start of the costs associated with driving. The tolls on highways have risen, as has the cost of insuring a car. Repair work costs more, as does regular maintenance. In short, it’s not cheap at all to own and drive a car today.

The good news, though? At today’s higher salaries, it doesn’t take nearly as long to pay for that $3 worth of gas.

Minimum driving ages, the number of passengers young drivers can have with them at any time, the times of day that drivers under the age of 18 can drive…

These all vary depending on where young motorists are driving. They vary, even, across the United States.

For instance, in Maine, motorists under the age of 18 aren’t allowed to have any passengers with them as they drive for the first 180 days after they obtain their licenses. In Alabama, motorists under the age of 18 can have one passenger with them.

And that’s just one example of the differences in driving license requirements from one part of the country to the next. The differences are even more pronounced when comparing one country to another. Minimum driving ages vary widely across the world. While most states in the United States allow youngsters to earn their learner’s permits at the age of 15, many other countries require their residents to be much older before they get behind the wheel of a car.

For instance, in countries such as Sweden, Serbia, Malta, Germany and Italy, residents must be at least 18 before they can legally drive a motor vehicle. In other countries, though, drivers can be much younger: In Ethiopia, 14-year-olds can legally drive motor vehicles. In New Zealand they only have to be 15, while in Australia and Canada, they must have turned 16.

In the United States, there is little conformity when it comes to driving rules. For instance, depending on the state in which they live, motorists must have either one or two license plates on their vehicles. The residents in 19 states are only required to purchase one plate for their vehicles. Massachusetts is an especially vexing state: Here, drivers can have either one or two plates for their vehicles.

Three states, Washington, New Mexico and Utah, allow illegal immigrants to get driver’s licenses. That’s because the laws in these states don’t require applicants to prove their citizenship or legal residency when applying for licenses.

Other states boast different driving restrictions for young drivers. In most cases, drivers under the age of 18 are not allowed to drive unsupervised from the hours of midnight until 5 a.m.

But, as always, there are exceptions. In Idaho, motorists under the age of 18 are not allowed to drive from sunset to sunrise, a law that’s a bit vague. In Nevada, these drivers can’t drive unsupervised from 10 p.m. until 5 a.m. In Tennessee, that restricted time runs from 11 p.m. until 6 a.m. Virginia forbids young motorists from driving unsupervised from midnight until 4 a.m., while in New York state, young drivers can’t get behind the wheels of their cars unsupervised from 9 p.m. until 5 a.m.

The best advice for drivers of any age? They should study the rules of the road for their own states carefully. Police officers won’t be lenient based on ignorance of the law.