Slashdot Mirror


Redesigned, Bulkier Honda Insight to Challenge Prius

In what probably amounts to good news for consumers eyeing a hybrid for their next vehicle purchase, Honda is resurrecting the "Insight" name, this time in the form of a five-seat, Prius-like hatchback. The automaker's announcement included the tantalizing statement that the cost would be "significantly below [that of] hybrids available today," but provided no further details on pricing. Although Honda may have some trouble unseating Toyota's dominance of this particular hybrid market, hopefully the Insight's reintroduction will help to make hybrid cars even more affordable to consumers. This is also welcome news to folks like myself who, after the initial flurry of excitement when the now-retired original Insight was introduced in '99, were left scratching their heads at Honda's hybrid strategy as Toyota picked up their dropped ball and ran with it.

12 of 638 comments (clear)

  1. Re:The problem is... by maino82 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, and don't buy that new computer now, because in a few months it will be obsolete!

  2. Re:The problem is... by maino82 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Very true, but you seem to be ignoring the fact that other cars also cost thousands of dollars. Granted, their is a premium for a hybrid, but using your own numbers as an example (and my own experiences with a $17,000 regular civic vs. a $20,000 hybrid civic), your hybrid will pay back that $3000 premium in about 6 years assuming gas stays the same price (which intuition tells me it won't). Considering my last 2 cars have lasted me over a decade each before finally crapping out, that's a pretty good ROI. Granted, past performance of vehicles is no guarantee of future performance, so there's no telling if the hybrid will last me 12 years, but it's not unreasonable to believe that it probably will.

  3. Uhhh by moosesocks · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why not just buy a Civic or a Fit?

    They're both pretty nice compact cars that get fantastic mileage (~34mpg) without any fancy hybrid stuff.

    For a good bit less than a Prius (which you couldn't even buy at the moment if you wanted to), you can get a car that gets better mileage, drives better, and is likely to be considerably more reliable.

    On the other end of things, diesels are beginning to make a very big comeback, as virtually all of the traditional downsides to diesel engines have been taken care of. The fact that they get 40+ MPG makes them pretty attractive.

    Also, now that the natural gas industry has woken up to the fact that there is a metric shit-ton of money waiting to be made by packaging and selling their product as automotive fuel, I imagine that we'll be seeing quite a few CNV vehicles in the upcoming years.

    --
    -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  4. Re:The problem is... by LaskoVortex · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem is with hybrids is that for most you end up paying more than you would your current car:

    Yes, but a new hybrid isn't competing with old cars. Its competing with new cars. Your argument could be made of ANY new car. Better logic would be to subtract the gas savings from the cost of a new hybrid and compare that number to the cost of other new cars.

    --
    Just callin' it like I see it.
  5. Re:The problem is... by phantomcircuit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because nobody is trying to push BMW's as a cost saving measure?

  6. Re:The problem is... by Bombula · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not as simple as just gas mileage. The other major factor is resale value. The Prius is currently (and for several years) the leader in value-retention. I could sell my 8-month old Prius right now for sticker price. You simply cannot do that with a Chevy Malibu or a Ford Taurus.

    So the calculus for the cost of owning the car depends entirely on what you plan to do with it afterwards. In my case, I'm financing my Prius and will sell it after 2-3 years and recover something like 1/2 to 2/3 of the sticker price. The total cost of ownership per month therefore ends up being lower than any other car of comparable quality/size/features.

    If it was just about gas mileage, you'd be right. But it's more complicated than that. So you're wrong. Sorry! :P

    --
    A-Bomb
  7. Re:The problem is... by SoapBox17 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is possible to own a paid off car that must be replaced. I would venture that most people who are looking at buying a car have pretty much committed to buying one, its just a question of which one.

  8. Re:Sometimes you've got to ask yourself... by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Hey, if they can ever make a hybrid that isn't as fugly as a Prius, call me.

    Why can't they make more 'green' cars that look svelt like the Tesla? At a reasonable price.

    I want looks, style, performance...and if they throw in the mileage, I'm interested.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  9. Re:The problem is... by rock56501 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hybrids tended to have a minimal savings per month ~80-100 bucks~ but had a massively larger investment upfront were always smaller in size and had weaker engines than the cheaper gas car.(people seem to forget hybrids in addition to higher cost don't have good financing)

    I hear this argument all the time (I own a 2008 Prius). I paid $24K for my car. People say that I paid $10K more than a Kia (or whatever compact car you want) so I will never really see the savings.

    The fact is though, that the Prius is a mid-size car and when you compare the features to other mid-size cars, the "hybrid premium" is only $3-4K. With gas currently averaging $4.30/gal here in Hawaii, I save on average $1200/year over the Ford Escape that I was driving. That means I will have the "hybrid premium" paid off in about three years.

    As an aside that 11 year calculation doesn't take into account what happens when you need a new several thousand dollar battery - they supposedly have an 8 year life-cycle; chances are you'll have to replace it and that pushes the break-even point out to 15 years!

    Toyota tends to make very reliable cars and their warranty on the Hybrid system (including the battery) is 8 years/ 100K miles (10year/150K in Cal). The battery costs $3K (incl labor) to replace btw.

    At the end of the day, I love my car. I dont care what other people think of it cause I am the one who drives it, not them.

    Also, do yourself a favor and talk to your bank/credit union, you will see that you will usually get better financing through them than you will at the dealership.

  10. The missing factor in the "economics": fun + cool by sampson7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My 2002 Prius probably cost me more than a comparable non-hybrid car would have. But I love my hybrid -- and the reasons have nothing to do with economics and everything with being a nerd.

    1. I drive the most advanced and highly engineered car on the road today (well, other than other hybrids). The engineering in my Prius is far more advanced than anything BMW or Mercedes throws into their cars.

    2. I can drive silently on electric power only. Do you have any idea how cool that is? The freak'n car shuts off at traffic lights! If I go gently on the gas, I can drive 30/40 MPH on electric only and the car is SILENT!!! So freak'n cool. I've been dreaming of electric cars since I was a kid -- and I now have one (sorta)!

    3. I feel good about having supported a fledgling environmentally beneficial technology with my dollars. My purchasing decision in 2002 played a part in revolutionizing the car culture in this country and the world.

    4. Nerdy chicks dig Priuses.

    5. I drive a damned reliable and cheap to operate automobile that I enjoy driving.

    In short -- economics was largely irrelevant to my decision. Instead of buying a sports car (also generally an economically irrational decision), I decided to go the hybrid route. Actually, when I analyzed purchasing the car, I conservatively assumed that I would get 60,000 miles from the car before it started falling apart or incurred expensive repairs. I also assumed that the car would have no re-sale value, as I expected the technology would be largely obsolete by the time I went to sell it. Even with these "worst-case" scenarios, I bought the car because it was worth it to me to be part of the revolution.

    Of course, I'm now well over 60,000 miles and have had no troubles, but that's not really the point, is it?

  11. Re:The problem is... by shmlco · · Score: 4, Insightful

    'Course, the new Insight gets 60 MPG and only costs $19,000, so it would appear that efficiency is going up and costs are going down. And all your math is predicated on a $3,000 difference, and not, say, a $1,000 difference.

    Plus you're not considering the alternatives. If you're going to invest your savings, then so can I.

    I could, from day one, easily begin banking the savings gained from one $60 tank of gas a month vs. FOUR tanks of gas per month ($240 in the SUV I'm driving now), whichs saves $180/m or $2,160/y. Put $180 per month in the bank for six years, compounded at 5%, and you get $15,077, whereas you only made $4,020 on your inital "savings" of $3,000. Some savings.

    Now, you're going to say that I need to be considering a more comperable "alternative", like, say a Jetta TDI. But a TDI only gets 45/mpg, its fuel costs are roughly 15% higher in the US due to the price of diesel, and the diesel version of the Jetta cost about $1,500 more than the gas version. Plus there's a waiting list and dealer premuim for those as well. All of which means that the Jetta comes out on the bottom when you run the same kind of numbers.

    Finally, you're assuming that the guy who saved $3,000 invested it. From my perspective, it's equally likely the idiot put $3,000 down on a $5,000 72" flatscreen TV, and is now paying down his credit card at 18% interest. Compounded daily.

    --
    Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
  12. Re:Sometimes you've got to ask yourself... by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, internal combustion engines deliver their maximum torque at over a thousand RPM. Since you have the greatest need for torque at 0 RPM, you'd have to have some kind of bulky gear train between the engine and the wheels.

    This may not be cost effective.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.