Cardcounter said:
Option 1 saves 4,341.08 gallons of gas and option 2 saves 3,574.47 gallons of gas!
Sure, but your options have nothing to do with the question you asked.
Your example is contrived - you've assumed that both the 15 mpg and 25 mpg car are going to be driven whether they're upgraded or not. This is a highly questionable assumption in that your example purported to be of a single car being driven a certain distance.
In that context, it is unquestionably better to have a 235 mpg car - your savings will be entirely dependent on the mileage of your new vs. old cars.
Now, if, as you've re-framed the question, that the "other" car will be non-idle and driving the exact same mileage while you're driving the fuel-efficient car to Vegas, then you are correct - it is better to upgrade the lower-mileage car first.
However, under the legitimate assumption that driving to the casino will put more miles than daily use, you can look at these figures. Assume that the less driven car is the low mileage car and that it does 5,000 miles per year; the more driven car is the higher mileage car and it does 10,000 miles per year.
Over 10 years,
Option "1":
50,000 miles / 15 mpg = 3333 gallons
100,000 miles / 235 mpg = 425 gallons
Total: 3758 gallons
Option "2":
50,000 miles / 25 mpg = 2000 gallons
100,000 miles / 43 mpg = 2326 gallons
Total: 4326 gallons
It's always better to use the most fuel-efficient car for the longest trips; if you're going to force the miles driven on each car to be equivalent, you should change your OP.