Slashdot Mirror
Hybrid Car Owners Not Likely To Buy Another Hybrid
An anonymous reader writes "A new study has found that people who purchased a hybrid car in the past are not likely to buy a hybrid for their next car purchase. 'Only 35% of hybrid vehicle owners chose to purchase a hybrid again when they returned to the market in 2011, according to auto information company R.L. Polk & Co. If you factor out the super-loyal Toyota Prius buyers, the repurchase rate drops to under 25%.' The study also found Florida drivers to be a bit more loyal to the hybrid segment than elsewhere in the country. 'It's hard to know what's causing the low repurchase rate. One reason is that about 17,000 people purchased electric cars last year, and other data shows that many of those were trading in a hybrid vehicle. Honda has been hounded by high-profile class-action and small claims court lawsuits over fuel economy issues with older models of its Civic hybrid. ... Hybrid vehicles represent just 2.4% of the overall new vehicle market in the U.S., according to Polk, down from a high of 2.9% in 2008.'"
The cost difference between a regular gas sedan and a hybrid of the same size is generally not offset by the savings in fuel costs for driving it. Why do it again if it didn't work the first time?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
I'd buy a diesel again in a heart beat. I get 40 miles to the gallon city in my Volkswagen Sportswagen. And diesel is 30 cents cheaper a gallon than petrol. Plus, the technology is robust. Diesel is definite the way to go if you want high gas mileage and low costs.
Hoist Number One and Number Six.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
...and thousands of Chinese boys will line up to sell their kidneys to get one.
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
It could be that people had unreasonable expectations from the hybrid to begin with, if you look at the advertising they promised a green car that doesn't use fuel and has flowers grow in its wake. In reality you ended up getting something that was marginally better fuel mileage than a compact car, but costs a lot more.
I drive a prius, I am disappointed with the fact that they STILL use outdated nimh batteries instead of lithium. Afaik they also don't use any of these new awesome ultracapacitors, so what the hell are they doing? The industry's stagnation annoys me, and I doubt I am alone.
Get ride of all the complexity caused by the hybrids (battery packs, motors, etc).
Clean diesel is here today.
I drive a VW Golf TDI - It's not slow by any means (140hp, a bit below average for a hatchback, but 240ib/ft of torque, over a wide rev range, so it's very driveable, great passing power, etc), has great handling (no skinny fuel miser tires that ruin the driving experience), and gets great mileage. (30/42 EPA, but those are quite conservative. I get typically 33-35 around town, at 60mph constant speed I'm at 51-53mpg depending on how smooth the road is, dropping down to about 45 at 70, and 41 at 78-80).
It also only costs about $25k, with plenty of standard equipment.
TODO: Something witty here...
My Honda Insight has served me beautifully, with almost 90 MPG lifetime average (I drive a slow 50mph). And it wasn't any more expensive than a regular car. My only disappointment is the lack of diesel hybrids. Many of them come with small 75hp engines, so they could use the extra 15hp that a Honda-style motor provides.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
'It's hard to know what's causing the low repurchase rate.
You could try, oh, maybe, *asking* them why not?
To some degree, but the first prius went on sale in the US in 2001, which was 11 years ago. Lots of people replace their cars far more often than every 11 years.
If you factor out Prius owners? The most popular brand of hybrid? The one bought by people who like hybrids? Yeah I suppose if you don't count the people who like hybrids, then only 35% of the rest still like hybrids?...
I'm on my second hybrid. Neither has been a Prius. The next one might be. I'd love an all-electric but I'm still waiting for a practical one. Maybe if they start selling the volt up here.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
"If you factor out the super-loyal Toyota Prius buyers, the repurchase rate drops to under 25%..." the summary mentions. Would that be kind of like saying, "If you factor out the number of humans alive on Earth right now, the human population of Earth is zero." or another favorite that might ring more bells for people, "Of course it's unlimited data. We only shut it off once you exceed 2GB per month."
My wife is happy with her 2005 Prius. She probably won't replace it for many more years. That is because she likes it. She will probably replace it with a newer Toyota Prius. I guess that makes her a super-loyal Prius buyer.
People here in CA were nudged to get a hybrid in no small part due to the ability to get a sticker that allowed solo driver access to the HOV lanes. Once that went away, a big part of the incentive went with it. I know some people who sold their hybrids in advance of the change, anticipating that the car would sell for more while they still could use the lanes.
So while hybrid owners might be unlikely to buy another, it could be due in part that without the HOV lane access they wouldn't have bought one in the first place. The story then would be "Car buyers follow temporary gov't incentive, move on when incentive goes away"
Most hybrids didn't offer better economy in the long run, once the added cost was factored in. They relied heavily on other incentives to make them more desirable in the first place. I'm surprised that those incentives didn't show up in the survey, or at least weren't mentioned in the report.
Good point. Also, I think a lot of people may be buying another car for other reasons...carrying capacity, power, whatever. How many little citycars does one family need?
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
Seriously. This study was released way too early. People don't buy cars that often.
It's possible that the same type of people drawn to an environment-saving car would replace their car at a lower rate than others though.
Even when Hybrids save you money, it is good to have a pickup truck or van for different uses than you'd use a compact hybrid for. Maybe people like to diversify the types of car they own.
God spoke to me
You could also write this article completely the other way.
2.4% of car purchasers buy a hybrid.
35% of hybrid owners would buy another hybrid.
So the headline could be "Hybrid Owners 14 Times More Likely to Buy Another Hybrid", which is completely different than "Hybrid Car Owners Not Likely To Buy Another Hybrid".
Civic Hybrid owner:
- Great on gas mileage
- Gutless.. I have an easier time passing people in my turbo diesel truck
- Weird issues with batteries.. Leave the car for a week, batteries are dead.
- Did I mention Gutless?
Overall, I've been happy with the gas mileage but I won't buy another hybrid. The experience outside of the good gas mileage has been disappointing. I'll probably try the diesel car route like a VW Jetta the next time around.
Do you inspect a roller coaster everytime you ride it?
This isn't totally surprising.
I was an early adopter of the Honda Civic Hybrid in July of 2002. I've had bad problems with the continuously variable transmission (which required multiple visits to the deader, but thankfully was fixed under warranty), hybrid battery problems (again thankfully replaced under warranty), and a bad ERG valve (which I had to pay for). And I felt I had to take it to the dealer for oil changes (since it uses synthetic oil). Compared to the Honda Accord I had for 10 years before this car, the Honda Civic Hybrid has had a lot of problems.
Also, there is a class action lawsuit from owners dissatisfied with their Honda Civic Hybrid's mileage that is close to settling.
And, I do plan to drive this car for at least a few more years. I do think I've saved money, as well as creating less polution. And for my next car I will be considering a hybrid, a plug-in hybrid, or an electric car.
...the cars are so efficient, they don't make much heat. So if you live in the North, your car heater may not ever heat up your car, since it uses non-existent engine heat. The AC works much better.
Also, in snow, most of these very-low-riding vehicles bottom-out on almost no snow as they are lowered to reduce drag.
Mountain driving isn't too sweet either... nothing like hearing the gerbils scream as you go up an incline and watching your battery go dead halfway up a mountain (then you have half an engine).
Now mine is very old, so maybe the idea has gotten much better...
If you factor out the super-loyal Toyota Prius buyers, the repurchase rate drops to under 25%.
The numbers are interesting indeed... but factoring out "the super-loyal Toyota Prius buyers" just to drop it from 35% to 25% doesn't really help the argument as much as make the reader question the research methods involved.. considering any laymen already has in the notion hiding in the back of their mind that that Pri'i make up for quite a bit of the cumulative hybrid market share (it's got ~3 generations head start on all other "mainstream" hybrids).
And when said laymen goes to google such a statistic and finds that even last year ( http://www.hybridcars.com/market-dashboard.html ):
Regular Prius and Prius V combined [represent] 58 percent of total hybrid sales.
... Well it's like saying death rates are dropping, if we factor out the "super deadly" causes of death such as heart disease and cancer.
The super-loyal-ty-ness-ess of Pri'i owners here obviously shouldn't be considered a factor that would affect the results, as much as they are a key metric in determining such a result (loyalty begets repurchase as it is an indicator of some set of factors said survey is attempting to measure in the first place... duh?)
That's patently false. The current Volkswagen TDI's for instance, are 50 state legal (including CA), and don't require urea. The move to Ultra Low Sulfur fuel as a requirement in 2010 did a LOT to take care of the emissions.
TODO: Something witty here...
I have a Honda CR-Z. It's a hybrid, though I couldn't really care less. I bought it because I thought it was a pretty cool little car. The gas mileage was pretty sweet, but I bought it for the looks; I think it kinda looks like a spaceship escape pod. Yep.
Google: "All your data are belong to us."
Bought a hybrid Saturn VUE in Dec, 2006. And, when we needed a second vehicle, didn't even consider a second hybrid. Got a used minivan in Jan, 2011. Uses 30-50% more gas, but trying to get a vehicle to fit all those car seats with hybrid? Far too expensive. I'll save more by spending on gas than buying new w/hybrid.
I'm likely to buy an electric. My commute + daily chores are well within the range of electric vehicles. When I buy the electric, the hybrid will still be around, but only for the occasional longer trip. Hopefully, by the time the hybrid dies, electric vehicles with 200-300 mi range will cost much less.
Hybrids CAN pay for themselves on a couple conditions. #1 you must use the vehicle for 100K miles or more. #2 you must be able to do math #3 you probably need to be doing a lot of city driving.
Let's do some math for the 2012 Ford Fusion Over 100K miles at 26mpg you will burn 3846 gallons of gas.
At $3.50 per gallon that's $13461 in gas.
For the hybrid, it's 39mpg (combined as is the 26 figure above). so this works out to $8974 in gas.
For a savings of $4487.
If I recall correctly, the price adder for that car was higher than that, so not a win. However, the savings goes up by 50 percent if you drive it for 150K miles. The savings will also go up with gas prices. It also gets better if you do predominantly city driving (I used the generic "combined" EPA figures). At some point it will be a net savings. This trivial example also neglects some other nice things like not wearing out your brake rotors (a non-trivial cost) or reduced number of oil changes (a trivial cost). It also neglects the cost of battery replacement - something which people worry about but I have not heard being a real world issue.
A Prius OTOH can be had for much closer to $20K and is generally a winner compared to any non-hybrid car so long as you drive 100K miles. I'm not a fan of it and would not buy one.
As volumes go up we can also expect the cost differential to come down.
So there we have the reason - it's not obvious weather you save dollars. Many people actually DO save money with a hybrid - particularly Prius owners.
...but we have all those things??? I'm confused.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
'It's hard to know what's causing the low repurchase rate.'
No it's not, it's called a "fad"
My 2011 Impreza cost me $20,000, and is a compact car. The only 4wd hybrids are large SUVs, which cost $30,000. Even at $4.00 a gallon, $10,000 buys a lot of gas. At 21 miles a gallon, $10,000 buys over 57,000 miles worth of gas!
Furthermore, Subaru service charges a lot less money then Honda service, and their accessories cost less. Honda charged me $400 for rubber floor mats, and Subaru charged me $100 for rubber floor mats.
Now, had I not wanted 4wd, I probably would have bought the Insight. I really prefer its quietness and smoothness over the Impreza. On the other hand, given that Honda service is expensive, regular mechanics won't work on Honda hybrids, and that the Insight would probably be worthless after 7 years, I'm probably going to spend less money owning the Impreza.
No, I will not work for your startup
rural drivers in the "flyover states" dont want hybrids because they have relatively cheaper gasoline, free parking, emaciated public transit, and limited congestion problems. speaking for california we have plentiful public transit, expensive parking and gas thats brutally pricy as well. combine it with the fact that the average angelino spends 3 days a year stuck in traffic, and you have a tough time selling anything with four wheels, let alone a hybrid.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Seriously, some people act like everyone drives hundreds of miles a day. Guess what? they don't. It is by far the exception, not the rule. If you drive 75 miles each way to work you are by far in the minority. Most people in that situation would move closer to their workplace.
For the average commute, an electric with even a 73 mile range (the low estimate on the LEAF) would work fine. The average commute is 16 miles, one way. That means you could go to work, get off work, go somewhere else, and go home and still be fine (remember it refuels every night).
I get tired of this bitching like everyone needs a car that can drive tons of miles so that is a reason electrics can't work. No, not at all actually. Some people do. For them, electrics are out. However most other don't, for them it is an option.
I knew a number of people who bought hybrid suv's. There are convential gas hybrids which are only slightly smaller vehiciles that now get better gas milage than their hybrids do and at a lower purchase price. None of them want another hybrid at this point.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
Yeah, the increase in smug levels around San Francisco ruined any chance for the electric VW microbus to take off. ...props to South Park...
http://green.autoblog.com/2006/09/23/vw-builds-an-electric-micro-bus/
A hybrid is a significantly more complex vehicle that uses more toxic parts than a regular car.
In addition, a few million retired Baby Boomers (this is the only type of person I see driving a Prius) driving hybrids will not impact the environment at all.
Our environmental problem consists of two real problems and many false ones. The real problems: (a) overpopulation and (b) reckless industrial growth. The fake problems: inefficient lightbulbs, unrecycled condoms, non-hybrid cars, non-"green" cleaners, etc.
If we want to stop our slow but ongoing ecocide, we need to change the way we live. You can start by buying a car with a reasonably sized engine, making as few trips as possible, and keeping that car for 20-30 years as once was done.
Futurist Traditionalism
The article doesn't say how the study was conducted or what the collected data was. It just gives an interpretation.
It says that 35% chose to purchase a hybrid again. So are we to assume that the others purchased something else? It doesn't say that. How many of the remaining 65% chose to not buy a new car at all?
The article doesn't say how the study was conducted. Was some of the data collected at dealerships that don't sell hybrids?
Does the study consider only new car buyers, or does it include people buying clunkers? Because clunker-buyers might not know or care whether a clunker is hybrid.
By and large, hybrid owners love their hybrids. You know who doesn't like hybrids? Outdated automobile manufacturers who don't have the technological prowess to develop them. They wouldn't be behind a phony study/article, would they?
"Excluding Prius owners"... well there's your problem. Of the hybrids people would likely be trading in (2000-2008ish), only the Toyota Prius is worth a damn. All the others in that year range had tiny electric motors which barely gave any hybrid boost at all. If the "hybrid" you're trading in is basically an ordinary car with a cordless drill motor strapped to the fan belt, of course you're not going to be loyal to it.
I used to drive a VW diesel (which I think for the purpose of this discussion is a similar category to a hybrid). I quite liked it, but I deal with snow and/or poorly maintained dirt roads often enough that I decided to get an all-wheel drive car. Unfortunately, there aren't really any good all wheel drive hybrid cars, so instead I got an old Subaru.
It's a shame - for 90% of my driving, the TDI was fantastic. But it's because of the 10% of the time I'm in a different environment I opted for something else.
I used to drive a diesel. (Diesel engines take a while to heat up, so my car felt cold in the winter.) My car just happened to have heated seats. It's not a feature that I thought would be important when I purchased the car, but I must say, those seats did a great job keeping me warm until the engine warmed up enough to run the heater.
So, if you factor out 60% of hybrid owners the repurchase rate drops to 25%. I heard if you factor out people who like red cars, only 10% of people will buy a red car.
Hybrids haven't been here for long, the people who buy a new car every 5 years are not a representative population.
It seems good to read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy (or other articles on the topic). If the article is correct that 2.4% of new cars sold are hybrids (which sounds reasonable) then the base rate expectation for a "random person" buying a hybrid is low. If the probability of a previous owner of a hybrid buying one next time is 35%, that's still around 14 times the base rate expectation.
Now clearly, car buying habits are hardly monte carlo style distributions. There is a considerably greater "loyalty" to specific cars than just the random assignment of an available vehicle to a driver. Most of that is probably pretty closely tied with income and socio-economic status. Also, obviously occupational effects matter; and also regional ones do. But consistency in brand or style in repeated car purchases is most certainly far lower than 100%.
It is not at all clear from the evidence given whether hybrid-loyalty is greater or less than other types. For example, I *just* bought a Honda Insight (which seems a lot less common than Toyota Prius, despite what seem to be even more favorable reviews; name recognition does seem big here). Like literally days ago, so I'm probably not good evidence in any direction about next vehicle purchase. But prior to that (and still), my partner and I own an Audi A4--a brand that probably sells no more than 2.4% of cars in the US (i.e. the brand as a whole, not the specific model which must be lower still). Even if a hybrid were out of consideration and I could only consider a conventional gasoline engine, I think there's much less than 35% chance I'd choose an Audi for my next car. Not because I have any particular criticism of Audi, but just because there are lots of other choices, even given similar driving patterns and socio-economic status. I could buy a Saab, or Volvo, or Acura, or maybe on a bit pricier side a BMW, Mercedes, Lexis, or slightly downscale a Buick or Lincoln, or a VW which comes from the same factory even. All of these are pretty comparable, and brand loyalty might lean my decision slightly, but there's a long way to go between the base rate--even of only "semi-luxury sedans"--to get to 35% brand retention.
Buy Text Processing in Python
Base MSRP for Toyota Prius: $24,610 - 51 MPG Highway, 48 MPG City
Base MSRP for Ford Fiesta: $13,200 - 40 MPG Highway, 28 MPG City
The Prius costs $11,410 more but gets 11 MPG Highway and 20 MPG City better than the Fiesta.
Disregarding anything other than Highway or City driving, a Fiesta requires 2,500 gallons of gas to go 100,000 miles on the highway whereas a Prius only requires 1961(rounded up) gallons. The difference? 539 gallons.
100,000 miles in the city requires 3571 gallons in a Fiesta and only 2084(rounded up) in a Prius. The difference? 973 gallons.
You want to know why a Prius is a hard sell to most working class people who cant afford to be environmentally conscious for the hell of it? The Prius only saves them about $3900 in gas, at best(City Driving), over a Fiesta assuming a 100,000 mile lifetime but the Prius costs 11,410 more than the Fiesta. Added to that, the idea that you will need to change the batteries out in the Prius at some point which is another $2,000 and you might start to see why it's a hard sell.
After 13 years it's still the only car with a direct drive transmission; no clutch, nothing but gears between crankshaft and wheels. In fact, that's the main basis for the hybrid design; using two motors is really incidental, they just enable use of the transmission. Everything else in the design (engine stopped when car stopped, Atkinson cycle engine, electric air conditioning, etc) also follows from use of what Toyota calls the "Hybrid Synergy Drive". What's a little strange is that the car was designed by an American team of engineers based in California. Would be interesting to find out the whole story there, it's pretty difficult to get details other than the head design engineer on the project died a few years ago.
I would venture that the main reason behind not buying another hybrid is the lack of helpful tax credits like back in 07-10. Without the tax credit, that extra cost is harder to swallow compared to a non-hybrid version.
Seriously, it is INSANE to buy a car with parallel hybrid. You inherit the worst of both ICE and Electrical. That is just crazy. For cars, you should either buy electric (like tesla model S), OR an ICE using gas/diesel. You would buy ICE if you are going to be traveling more than once a month more than the distance of the electric car. However, if you only go longer distances say, 2-3x a year, then you are much better off with electric. The cars will pay for themselves.
The one place that makes good sense for hybrids is on large vehicles. In particular, a F250 and above, or just about any commercial vehicle, including semis. One these, a series hybrid with Natural gas would not only save you money with NG, but the series hybrid allows for great torque as well as great economy. With such an approach, a semi could get 30-50 mpg, where as today, the new ones get 7 mpg and have horrible torque.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
To some degree, but the first prius went on sale in the US in 2001, which was 11 years ago. Lots of people replace their cars far more often than every 11 years.
It took until 2004 or 2005 for the Prius to rise to prominence and sell in higher numbers. I've ridden in one with around 250,000 miles on them (complete with the original battery), so yeah I think there are many who are simply holding on to a good thing.
We currently have a 2010 Prius and a 2011 Leaf. The Prius replaced a 2001 Prius that went to our son. The 2001 is getting a little long in the tooth (mostly because it's managed to be rear-ended 5 times, one of which nearly totaled the car) so the plan is to replace the 2010 Prius with a Tesla and then the 2010 Prius becomes our son's car.
But like you, I suspect our shift to EV is not in any way representative. It's just one factor among many. As you say, a lot of the tech associated with hybrids actually isn't the hybrid part and it's showing up elsewhere. Add to that the fact that the hybrid brand has been weakened by things where the hybrid part didn't really buy you that much and in some cases almost nothing - and the people who bought those are bound not to waste the extra $$$ a second time.
By not looking at the reasons why people are planning to switch, what they're planning to switch to, or even when they're planning to make the switch, the study changes from being informative to little more than a curiosity. Hell, for all we know most of them are planning to hold on to their hybrids until electrics fall in price.
I miss the old days of pushing my '78 AMC Pacer around town on errands. Man, that thing got GREAT mileage because it would barely ever start or stay running long enough to burn gas.
Good times... good times...
Most of the current crop of non-plugin hybrids have battery packs that are too big. All you really need for a mild hybrid is an alternator/starter combination motor, a small battery pack, an engine that can shut off the gas to its cylinders while running (preferably a few at a time) and the electronics to control it all. This really shouldn't cost very much at all above a non-hybrid version, but should help with occasional acceleration and city driving.
I recall one luxury car company actually did this - don't remember which one - and I think they got a small but respectable MPG increase. But I haven't heard of anything like this recently. I have heard, around here on Slashdot, that government tax breaks may be related to battery pack size, which if true might explain that.
(T>t && O(n)--) == sqrt(666)
Looking forward to replacing my '94 Subaru wagon with an AWD/4WD hybrid.
But, there's no such product on the market.
I would buy a new Prius to replace my 2001, but I don't need -- it's in excellent condition.
FTFA, "If you factor out the super-loyal Toyota Prius buyers ... No other hybrid was anywhere close [in overal sales]." Well no duh. If you factor out the Prius, what do you have left? Cars that have hybrid engine options that sell at a premium. As a Prius owner, 7 years and 47000 miles later, I may not even have to buy another car!
www.itjerk.com
not to be picky but that would be 2000( 12 years ) as the Honda Insight went on sale in early and the 2001 Prius went on sale in July of 2000.
BTW, I think many who purchased the GM and Ford SUV hybrids are probably the majority of those who would not get another hybrid. The fuel economy improvements on those heavy wind pushers were minimal at best.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Bought in 2003 for $13k with 24,000mi
136,000+mi
45mpg avg (EPA 41mpg)
I'm very happy with it. I would buy again. I'd actually buy new if they come out with a 40mpg hybrid minivan.
Three other people have bought hybrids because of my experience.
TFS didn't say, so I did some back of the envelope calculations. Someone posted that Prius owners make up 58% of all hybrid owners. I didn't check that, nor check to see how the number has changed over time, but assuming it as a constant, I come up with: 48.8% of Prius owners would buy another hybrid. That's less than half, but just barely. And it's nearly twice as many as the 25% for non-Prius owners.
So, instead of spinning that hybrid owners don't like hybrids, we could just as easily spin that hybrids other than the Prius suck. (Which is a closer match to what I've been hearing from people over the last several years.)
There's a lot of other questions left unanswered here (like why?, and is the age and/or efficiency of the hybrid technology--which has reportedly been improving steadily--a factor), but I'll leave those for others to raise.
Took me a moment to realize, this statistic is totally meaningless. The average new car buyer keeps their car for at least 5-6 years -- more if they like the car. The vast majority of hybrid sales occurred after 2004.
The reason only 35% of people who're selling their hybrid buy a new hybrid is because the people who *like* hybrids are STILL DRIVING the one they bought a few years ago!
This statistic is basically like saying, "The majority of kids who throw their dinner plate on the floor say it tastes 'yucky'. Therefore, the majority of dinners are yucky."
Ask this question again once the hybrid market has stabilized, and you may get a very different answer.
If you don't stop drivin' that hot rod Lincoln
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Yep. I bought an 06 in late 06 and got a call about a year later offering to buy the car back from me for (slightly) more than I paid for it, so they could sell it to someone else. (They're pretty eager to buy it again now, even though it is now 5.5 years old. I ran the numbers and thanks to rising gas prices, if I did sell it, I think I'd have about $3k less depreciation than expected.)
If you factor out the super-loyal Toyota Prius buyers, the repurchase rate drops to under 25%
So basically if you don't count the people who are likely to buy another hybrid, then people aren't likely to buy another hybrid. Instead of trying to claim that "the hybrid market is broken" how about admitting that every hybrid sucks except the Prius? And no, I don't own a Prius or even a Toyota.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
One would hope that is the case. However, people usual equate newer with better. This isn't always untrue either. It may not be economical or eco friendly, but it's true.
I've a Civic Hybrid and you're partly right at least on my case. I've never cared about gas prices, this was a bet for future techologies. It was clear a hybrid car wasn't a solution, but there was this craze about gigantic SUV and the industry balance has to move to the other side. Now I refill my gas tank monthly.
Here in Mexico City had a lot of tax benefits for hybrid owners, these tax breakes will pay for the difference in 5 years. So it's a long term "investment". If car companies come with a better technology, I'll probably buy it in the near future.
They should have asked "Will you replace your hybrid with another hybrid?" -- If you have a Prius, you may consider buying a truck as a supplementary vehicle to help move big stuff around. Hybrids aren't luxury cars, but since they're fairly new the owners are likely to be people who can afford more than one vehicle. Usually people who own more than one vehicle go for extremes -- the truck and the hybrid, the van and the Miata, etc.
Regardless, I can would never drive a hybrid. The battery is just too much of a liability. My car may be old but at least I can take care of the maintenance myself and parts are cheap. Then there's the resell value -- who wants to buy something that depends on a battery that's already undergone countless charges and drains? Maybe someday Tesla will produce something so amazing it even blows off Jeremy Clarkson's socks and my mind will be changed, but I'm not holding my breath.
Hopefully there really is a lot of dissatisfaction among hybrid owners (I'd be dissatisfied if my car couldn't beat a dirt bike in a half mile race) that will lead to more bivalent liquid hydrogen/gasoline engines.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
That trafic signal is there only because a car is a danger for everything around it. There is no need to control the bike (and the ciclist will even control hinself if he wishes to live - what's not granted).
"What's not granted" with this sort of intersection is a cyclist's ability to stop the cross traffic in order to get a green light to cross the road safely. As the operator of a vehicle (albeit a non-motorized one), I'm under the impression that I have the right to an eventual green light. I'd just prefer not to have to wait ten minutes in order to be "chaperoned" through an intersection by whatever car occasionally happens to show up. There's no pedestrian call button or marked crosswalk at this intersection either, or I'd have been using that. Nor does the city seem to want to fix the sensors so that they can see my bike.
1. All hybrids come with low rolling resistance tires. The tires on my wife's car needed to be replaced after 20,000 miles. Tires were worn down to the tread wear indicators. I replaced then with 40,000 mile + tires. Cost about $1000.
Gas mileage dropped by about 1-1.5 miles per gallon. We were getting 23.6 mpg. Now we get about 22 mpg. At an extra $1000 every 20,000 miles, I will take the loss of MPG.
For such a thrifty guy, I question your tire purchase decisions. I recently replaced all four tires on our car with LRR tires for about $500, with a rated lifetime of 100,000 miles (Kumho eco Solus). Rather than spending $1000 every 40,000 miles, maybe spending half as much, for 2.5 times as long life would be a wiser use of your money. LRR tires may improve fuel economy by as much as 3 or 4%, so can be cost effective even if higher priced than non-LRR tires. Obviously if they are actually cheaper that's even better.
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/vehicles/fuel_economy_tires_light.html
What kind of moron drives 150 miles a day to work
Someone who can't afford real estate substantially closer to work, as mark-t mentioned. Or cases where two people living together work far from each other: if one moved closer to work, the other would have to drive 150 miles a day.
Its because most consumers don't actually understand what hybrids are really for.
Its amazing how many people (including the motoring media) in the US incorrectly believe that the reason for buying a hybrid over a normal car is to save gas money. This is not even close to the actual reason hybrids were invented, so its no surprise that it doesn't really work out that way either.
Don't believe me? Go compare the price and MPG of a Toyota Prius compared to, say, a Toyota Yaris.
The real reason hybrids came about is as a way to reduce CO2 emisions for a greener environment and to fight global warming, mostly regardless of cost of ownership.
But the green angle doesn't look so good either when you factor in the (actually quite nasty) emissions from the production and disposal of all the extra stuff like Lithium batteries that that go into a Prius over a conventional car.
While you may have a point, some of it is offset by the errors in your analysis.
CO2 emission is virtually the same thing as fuel usage - if you have low CO2 emission you necessarily have low fuel usage (for a gas powered vehicle at least), and if you have low fuel usage you necessarily have low CO2 emission. No matter what the vehicle, each gallon of gas you burn produces the same amount of CO2.
I do not know the details of the hybrid battery disposal/recycling, but that is the only "extra" stuff in a Prius compared to any other "conventional" vehicle. All of the battery components can in principle be recycled, which doesn't mean that it actually is unfortunately.
Source: Baum & Associates, via http://www.hybridcars.com/news/march-2012-dashboard-44059.html
There were incentives that made them worth it.
Particularly in California, where you could get a tax rebate and carpool lane access stickers for your Prius. Now that that is phased out, people no longer buy Prius, and they go for the Volt or the Leaf, where you can get stickers still (the white ones instead of the yellow ones)..
Generally going South on US101 before 9AM, when the car pool lane is closed to non-carpools, it's pretty much empty, while the other lanes are bumper-to-bumper gridlock. Those stickers added considerably to a Prius' resale value (in fact, the same car with the stickers and without had a $2000 difference in resale value.
Don't know about other hybrids but my 2006 Prius has 120K on it now and has never needed anything but maintenance and tires. It seems to still run as good as when it was new and it definitely saves a lot of fuel. Would I buy another one? Maybe...maybe not. It would depend on what I wanted the car for when the time came. If I was hauling firewood, towing trailers, transporting a big family or dealing with a mid-life crisis and needed a lot of raw power to impress women...then no. If I wanted reliable and thrifty transportation that hauls up to four fairly comfortably...then yes. TFA is misleading because...honestly...does ANYONE ever really buy the same car again? Our life circumstances change and the car we were happy with at one point is no longer suitable at a different stage. The 2-seater that we loved when we were 23 isn't so appealing when we're 34 with kids. That's just reality.
Hybrids are an alternative for drivers who want to be green, think of diesel as the soot spewing lorries and buses of yesteryear, can't live with the short range and abysmal interior space of of pure electrics, and can afford the price premium.
Well, I'm sure there are some people who feel that way but I'd bet not a lot of hybrid owners do. I own one. A 2007 Prius. I bought it because at the time it was the best decision to conserve gas. I researched the daylights out of my purchase before I bought one. I think you'll find a lot of hybrid owners do the same. It's not really a "joe sixpack" kind of a car in the first place.
And now we have cars like these on the way. 60mpg, decent acceleration, and about half the price.
This will be the next big green transport. Turbo diesel. Because biodiesel is ridiculously simple to make. And carbon neutral - that'll be important soon here too, once the world gets their collective heads out of their asses and decides to do something about global warming. Diesel will be the next Big Green Thing.
Here, read this. It's a fantastic study on how feasible it would be to switch the USA entirely to algae biodiesel. Unfortunately it is no longer hosted at UNH but the wayback still has a copy. It's a brilliant read and a future I'd like to be a part of.
And I really think things will go that way too someday. Drilling for oil is problematic (Gulf BP disaster for example), not carbon neutral and contributes to global warming, and there is always the specter of "peak oil" lurking about. Someday maybe we'll simply run out of oil. What then? The two best answers are Biodiesel and Hydrogen. Hydrogen is sexy, but problematic. Difficult to store. No existing infrastructure to distribute it. No efficient way to make it. That leaves Biodiesel.
And everyone who buys a diesel helps usher in that future. So yeah, my next car will be a turbodiesel of some sort.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
As a hybrid Civic owner, I can say that the class action lawsuit is bunk. Driven responsibly, the car gets the originally advertised mileage and more. Set the cruise control to 60mph, and my 2005 Honda Civid Hybrid gets a reliable 60+ mpg. Drive it to the extreme, and it can get 80+ mpg. Most of the class action sign-ons received a letter that offered them a $100 check in return for their signature. Plenty signed, no doubt, to collect a 'free' $100. I suspect few of them really know what their gas mileage is, and how much it varies with driving technique.
Concerning would I buy again... After calculating the fuel cost savings versus my former vehicle (50mpg vs. 19mpg), and since I bought it used at a significant savings over new, the vehicle has been 'free'. That is, the savings in fuel (at average $3.00/gallon over 100,000 miles) exceeds the price I paid for the car. So would I buy a hybrid again? Well, the last one was free, so how could I not. Unless I wasn't paying attention to the numbers, which is what I suspect happens with most car owners.
BTW, the Civic Hybrid has overall been the best car I've ever owned. Not for everyone, but perfect for many of us.
Who paid for the study, anyway...
It's pretty easy to switch it so that it runs the engine to generate heat to heat the interior. That said, the newer Prius has an electric heater as well to help with that. Of course, I live in a hilly area, so being too efficient isn't a problem.
Engine runs pretty fast going up inclines, but at 70 mph up a very serious hill there's no net battery drain (it does the normal charge-discharge cycle).
Never had any trouble with snow, except that the stock Prius tires are insufficient for serious weather.
For one, you got shafted on tires.
For another, I disagreed with you entirely until you got to "except for ... Prius". I don't know the situation for other hybrids, but the Prius has been around long enough that there's no motivation to take it to the dealer for regular maintenance. Any halfway-competent mechanic can work on them now. (It's true that this wasn't always the case, and may not yet be the case for other hybrids.)
You know, the -design- of the Prius et. al. was -not- to have it "pay for itself". This isn't surprising. My household refrigerator and washing machine don't "pay for themselves" either.
The Prius was tuned for -emissions- -efficency- not mileage. I knew this. For instance, in climbing hills the gasolene engine goes -much- faster than a comprable non-hybrid sedan. The higher speed is turned into electricty and then back into torque. If I punch it on the hill the engine goes faster still. The rule of losses in the transformation of energy dictates that energy (mileage) will be lost to transformation. Entropy must be paid. But the whole thing is squeaky clean.
People who expected to "make money" on their 40k car were idiots buying for the wrong reason. The rest of us bought for the green, and the smug, (be honest, there is smug to be had. 8-) and to drive down the price points as earily adopters.
And "mileage" is nearly the worst measurement of efficency there possibly could be. It is no wonder that big flat florida has people who -are- making back their money. The state is -flat-. If my commute were flat it would my mileage would be much better than it is today (42mpg). I have gotten 55mpg driving from Seattle to Portland, and only 48 driving the other direction (the sawtooth patern of the hills along I-5 is a determinant, very helpful going south, somewhat wasteful going north).
I lose most of my "mileage" in a prius in that once the engine starts it wants to run till it has "warmed up", which takes a significant part of my commute and is concentrated in the stationary time while I am stuck in surface street at terrible traffic lights, trying to get onto the highway. This meanst that all of my gas is spent pointlessly making heat.
I will likely not buy another hybrid though. I am planning on going electric next (e.g. leaf). Or to a Volt-Alike hybrid if I must.
Further on, I don't expect the electric to be much cheaper to run than the Prius. The state of Washington is gonny slap on a GPS tax any day, and electricty is clean but it aint as cheap as you might think. Ask anybody with an elevator or regularly used winch in a space they pay for. But I can aford the hit. I like having the smug, and I like having the cleaner tailpipe in general. -Someone- has to start paying to break the oil addiciton and having that opinion without willing to back it with my wallet would be hypocritical.
Full Disclosure: I also am midst of installing a geothermal heat pump in my house. I am expecting some savings, and some resale value improvement, but I doubt it will "pay for itself" for a very long time if ever. I'd like to back it with solar pannels because if I can get my energy bill down I expect to be able to sell the flash of having a negative electric bill several times a year when I sell the house.
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
sooner or later gas will be $12 a gallon in the US. sooner or later hybrids will be cheaper, last longer and get even better mileage. They aren't going away.
There are a few other cars that offer electric power, some even without a "regular" engine in them. However, there hasn't been any real development in actual purchasable cars at "normal" consumer rates for years and years. If you have a prius and want a new car after 5 years, what's the market for you? A lot of exciting new vehicles in all sorts of shapes, colors, classes and brands, some even pretty green, even compared to your prius and... wait for it, a prius. Oh, there's the honda and the Volt. They are all more or less compacts, fairly dull to drive, look utterly boring and even though they may have a tad more technology in them than the prius, they are still basically an oversized golf cart.
Tesla offered an expensive short radius all electric sports car. It was a novelty, it could be fun if your drives are without a weeks worth of groceries, kids or further than 50 miles from home, but it wasn't practical as a primary car for most people. Hybrid SUVs are just gas guzzlers, even if they are relatively easy on the fuel for a big, gas guzzling car, there is no real incentive to buy one except when your name is Al Gore.
The public is waiting for the next generation of hybrids and even if current hybrid owners are 15 times more likely to buy a hybrid again than non-owners, it's not going to happen until there is a new competitor on the block to tell the prius "exit stage left".
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
I have a secondhand 2003 Prius, now that there is a cheaper Prius C, at a reasonable price, I'll possibly buy another hybrid, now that the price has dropped.
There was an unknown error in the submission.
I think the reason that Prius owners are so loyal is that, put simply, the Prius is far and away the best of its kind. For the same money you can get faster cars, but none that will get you long distances with so little fatigue. The only other cars I can think of which are so good for long distances are Mercs, BMWs and Jaguars costing around 50% more to buy, and twice as much to run.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Or interest? You're spending an extra $5000 right now, and getting it back over 10 or more years (unless you drive a huge number of miles per year). If you want to make a fair comparison, you need to factor in a reasonable rate of inflation or equivalently interest. The $1 you save in gas costs in year 8 is worth significantly less than the $1 you forked out today to buy the car. (And this is even more true for the younger people that tend to be hybrid buyers, who will have steadily rising wages over the next decade or so, as their careers mature. For these people, the labor required to afford $1 in hybrid car purchase now is quite a bit more than the labor they're spared as a result of $1 in gas cost saved in year 8.)
Anyone who can convince himself that a hybrid makes economic sense in any but very unusual circumstances should not be allowed to manage his own 401(k) funds.
And here I spent $2k on Michelin pilot sport ps2's that are only good for maximum 30,000miles... the market caters to all people...
120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
The current Volkswagen TDI's for instance, are 50 state legal (including CA), and don't require urea.
Low sulfur is nice, but that doesn't affect NOx, which is what the urea is intended to take care of. According to VW, the 2012 Passat TDI models "use a special catalyst and urea-injection system that reduces NOx emissions by up to 95 percent. Filled by a 4.9 gallon tank located inside the trunk, the injection system delivers a range of approximately 15,500 miles."
So as you can see, current TDIs do require urea, and the tank will need to be refilled multiple times over the life of the car.
The Passat does, the Golf and Jetta do not.
TODO: Something witty here...
The most common induction loop sensor in my area is the 6 foot (1.8 m) octagon, which I can trigger most of the time even if it means laying my bike down. (Is that your "large circle"?) But I can't trigger the 6 by 20 foot (1.8 by 6 m) rectangle, and unfortunately, there's one of those on the most direct route to work.
You stop at lights with a bike ?
A bicycle is a human-powered vehicle and thus subject to the same rules of the road as any other vehicle.
As for highways, if you are in Australian you can bike on them!
There are two kinds of highways in the United States: uncontrolled access (those that pass through cities and become major streets) and controlled access (those accessible only by a few exits, and which have a minimum speed of about 95 km/h). "State" and "federal" highways are uncontrolled access, while "interstate" highways are controlled access. The term "interstate" is sort of a misnomer because "interstate" highways with three digit numbers don't leave the state; instead, they're a spur or loop to one city. Bicycles and other non-motorized vehicles can travel only on "state" and "federal" highways.
Sure, but if someone is complaining about purely financial payback issues, the PS2's probably are not the best choice....
They can be triggered by getting your wheel over any of the sides. I prefer the center one, as I would be triggering both he loops.
The 6x20 I'm talking about looks sort of like that, but there is no center one. Because there is no center one, the traffic engineers turn down the sensitivity so that large delivery trucks in adjacent lanes don't trigger it. Someone from the city's traffic department suggested that I make a right* turn on red, a U-turn on the busy street, and then another right* turn.
If you see a different one, just mimic a car wheel, and it will certainly work.
It ends up happening not to. I do mimic a car wheel to the best of my ability. I've tried upright on the crack, I've tried tilting slightly into the loop on the crack, and I've tried laying it down on the crack. Nothing trips it except a car. A bike wheel is so much smaller than a car wheel that its smaller metal surface doesn't generate enough induction. Should I bring a camcorder next time so that people like you can watch my video and tell me exactly what I could change in order to stop failing?
Its induces more changes in current
Except I don't know the exact timing of when the signal set's computer is going to poll the loop, and I don't want to waste energy and look like an idiot continually moving my bike back and forth for several minutes so that it happens to be changing at the moment the computer polls the loop.
* This is the USA; substitute left in GB/AU/NZ.
Hello APK, still trolling? Check my post history and you can easily find the titles. Here's a hint: look for stories about Xen for the first one...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
My wife and I have the 2005 Toyota Prius (40+mpg) and are currently debating on whether to try for another. The cost for the vehicle is higher than a standard car, and the new regulations make newer cars almost as efficient (30+mpg) as the hybrids in city. Our biggest issue has been the cost of repairs for the vehicle. The electric engine has given us more issues than the gas supplied side plus our other gas powered vehicle combined.
LA and the Bay Area are probably the canonical examples of places with a sharp cost-of-living gradient that encourages long-distance commuting. I guess trying to get that time back is one reason why people buy audio books.
One colleague drives a Toyota Prius, another a Volvo C70 Diesel. The Volvo has a better MPG than the Prius, and though the owner of the Volvo is not a pedal to the metal-type, he is anything but a relaxed driver. The Prius owner is one of those guys who drives dangerously slow because the CVT makes sure the engine starts whining as soon as you only look at the throttle. I'd love to drive electric, but hybrid ? No thanks.
Any thought I had about getting a hybrid evaporated when I saw that the Ford Fusion 2013 will have a turbo-charged, direct-injection I4 2.0 L engine that puts out 237 HP. The Ford Edge is a cross-over SUV with that same engine and gets 21 MPG in city driving. CITY DRIVING. I am going to bet that the smaller Ford Fusion will get better fuel efficiency than that.
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
The battery on my wifes Honda Civic 'went bad', whatever that means. I didn't care about the specifics, but a light came on on the dashboard, we took it in, they said the battery needed to be replaced. It had failed with less than 1,000 miles left on it's warranty. I can't even begin to tell you how much I would have RAGED if it waited a little longer to fail and we were in for thousands of dollars for a replacement. Of course, the new battery doesn't come with a new warranty, but they 'assured' us it will never fail, 'battery technology has improved a lot in the past several years'...yeah, probably true, but we'll see.
Comparing her Civic Hybrid to my Jetta TDI (Diesel)...I just really don't see the point in the Hybrid. Really seems like a whole lot of additional complexity for not much of an improvement in other regards.
Yup, a lot more motorcycle ridership would likely fix our organ shortage. Lots more organ donors!
It's about 20x more risk of death per mile on a motorcycle.
--PM
What timing... I take delivery of my first hybrid today, a 2012 Toyota Prius. I did some basic math in making my decision, so I'll share:
This vehicle will replace a 2005 Chevy Uplander that we drove an average of 27,500 miles per year. The Uplander is getting 17.9 MPG at this point (according to the onboard computer), consuming 1,536 gallons of fuel annually. At the current price of $3.95 per gallon in my area, it costs $6,068 per year in just fuel (87 octane). Running the numbers again for the Prius, and assuming 45MPG, fuel will cost $2,413 per year... a savings of $3,655 annually, or $304 per month. Even after my wife added all the bells and whistles and extended warranty (she did that while I was out of the room), we will only be seeing a net outlay of $170 per month. And when my 13-year-old son goes to college, he will take this vehicle with him.
The Prius owners that I know are extremely satisfied, and one has had his since 2003. Although there are many other factors to consider, my monthly budget is certainly a major factor. I'm viewing this purchase this way: I'm buying a new car for $170 per month.
I sure if you poll those that own a the following cars they would be more likely to buy another hybrid: -Prius -Fusion -Insight -Escape The others were just companies trying to sell towards a fad without much engineering behind it.
I love my Prius Hybrid. I think Toyota GOT IT RIGHT and keeps improving it! IMHO, I think the American car makers are just trying to do a cheap-and-it-doesn't-work-well-knock-offs. This Prius is my 2nd. I plan to always drive a Prius. I can't get over the pleasure of 50+mpg on my 80-mile daily commute!!! And cost? It cost less than my Jeep did 8 years ago. All of us in the United States need to get our nose in joint and set goals to produce good designs with 0% flaws. Be innovative and smart. The Volt is an embarrassment. Our ingenuity should have produced something that can do a quick charge costing less than the gas or power that charges it, gets an overall 100mpg adding up the electric 'run' and the gasoline-driven 'run,' and it needs to feel like a solid car (my 2011 Prius does). My maintenance on my old Prius (traded at @150,000 miles) and the new one is minimal. Do your homework!
The Passat does, the Golf and Jetta do not.
Is the 2012 Passat not one of "The current Volkswagen TDI's"?
Simple translation:
The government needs to come down on these manufacturers harder with respect to their fakey-fake estimated EPA numbers. I have driven a Prius and I can tell you it gets 50 MPG just like it says it does if you simply refrain from driving like a 16 year old.
Honda's claims for their hybrids, on the other hand, are lawsuit worthy:
http://www.azcentral.com/12news/news/articles/2012/02/01/20120201woman-wins-suit-honda-hybrid-mpg.html
And if you RTFA on the website of the "researchers" , you have to wonder if they included in those "hybrid" owners people who bought "flex-fuel" vehicles, which are are pretty useless according to owner's I've talked to (they just allow you to use ethanol if you can find it) .
Finally the research on the reasercher's own site is opaque. It doesn't specify the study's methods were, what questions they asked , To whom they were asked and how those people were selected, what constitutes "a hybrid" or what even what their raw data was. It's just a results table.
Results without methods tells us nothing except what the "researcher" wants us to hear. Sorry, I am not sure this is even news or newsworthy as opposed to some propaganda piece designed to be put into some lobbyist firm or senator's mouth at some televised hearing or debate on whether Americans want hybrids or EVs or even cares about fuel efficiency.
Call your department of transportation.
My reply to Admiral_Grinder explains what good phone calls did.
In 2005-2008 when most of the first round of hybrids were being purchased, there were tax rebates that defrayed some of the additional cost of buying a hybrid instead of a traditional gasoline-only car. Since those subsidies have expired, the price of a hybrid car has effectively gone up by $1200-1500, which is a decent amount of money when you're car-shopping in the new-small-car range.
Consider also that there was a lot more money in pockets leading up to 2008, and lenders were practically throwing it at people if they so much as made eye contact. I saw loads ads for 0.9% or 1.9% car loans on a new car back then. That, in combination with the tax incentives, made it much cheaper to buy a new car, including hybrids. Now, interest rates on car loans are higher and money is tighter; the $3,000 premium on buying a hybrid is a bigger bite to chew.
Also, "returning to the market" in 2011? The real greenies are going to drive that hybrid car they bought in 2007 until 2020; at which point they'll probably be lining to buy electric.
I've done that at other intersections. But there is no such button here, as I mentioned earlier and as one can verify using Street View on the intersection in question.
How would a magnet affect an induction loop? I asked about a magnet kit at a local bike shop, and the sales associate had never heard of this method.
Apparently the hybrids other than the Prius must suck. I have a Prius, and I plan to buy a second Prius, and will likely replace the first Prius with another Prius when that time comes. My first 2005 Prius only has 100,000 miles on it, and I suspect it has another 100,000 left on it. The thing has required almost no maintenance, other than the periodic oil change. Everyone I know who has a Prius will buy another Prius, or already has. It's nice that it gets 45 mpg, but there are so many other ways that the Prius is simply a great car. That's why the loyalty is so high.
This result is therefore not inherent in hybrids since the Prius is a clear counterexample, but rather a characteristic of the particular implementation of most of hybrids that were quickly pushed out onto the market in response to the Prius success.
This is actual practical, usable advice for the OP, unlike the other replies given
After my Subaru Outback got wrecked, I had a rental for a month. For about three weeks it was a Prius. I kinda liked it. I averaged 46 MPG without changing my driving style. So I looked into getting a used one. There were none in my area (New England) for anything like a reasonable price. I ended up getting another Outback (I carry a lot of boat parts and other stuff, so I need some cargo space, and I like AWD in hypothetically snowy New England). I only get about 25 MPG but hey.
I've been told an interesting secret - pull the fuse for the front drive part of the AWD system, and you'll get about 2-3 MPG better. But that's a bit too far off the reservation for me these days (long past the days of rebuilding my VW engine for the fourth time). I'd have to find out about how the wear and tear is affected.
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
As a former tru_u_u_ck owner, I have to note that there is a significant group who actually _need_ trucks. Probably only about 1 in 5, but still. And the latest F150 and equivalent reportedly get MPG in the mid-20s on the highway. My old 1991 F250 got about 13, and the 1973 Chevy before that got about 7 - just before I gave it to someone who was going to rebuild it into a custom truck, and blew the engine up driving it home! :D Also, trucks only improve one's chances of procreation in some less-populated parts of the country. A lot of girls (especially city girls) just don't feel romantic climbing three steps to get into the cab, and riding what is essentially a self-propelled buckboard wagon. When I had my truck, for first dates I generally just rented a car.
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
The AC works much better.
Oddly enough, there's your answer. AC is more than 100% efficient on the heat side. They should build the AC so you either the hot side or the cold side blows into the car. It would also heat up almost instantly. Such AC systems (AKA 'heat pumps') exist - my boat has one. It either heats the water in the ocean and cools me, or heats me and cools the water in the ocean.
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
the increase in smug levels around San Francisco
Haha. I've lived out there before. Sometimes misspelling can lead to truth! :D
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
At $5-8000. That's a TON of gas right there even at todays high prices.
Actually, at 4 lbs. per gallon, $3.75 per gallon, it's 5333 lbs. - almost TWO TONS. :D
It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
I don't understand why any hybrid buyers would be getting a replacement car so soon, even if you bought a first generation. Cars last 30-50+ years. If these are only alsting a decade or less, there's your problem. That and they won't ever pay for the additional cost. Just as you come close to breaking even or actually break even, it's time to drop $5k-$10k on batteries.
- hybrids cost more upfront
- only the Prius eventually makes a difference in terms of
less money paid out for fuel
- hybrids have lousy resale values. The battery eventually has to be replaced to the tune of several thousand dollars.
- electric cars are coming out. Hybrids are transition vehicales
Well done for proving that no matter how you state a point, there's always someone that will miss it on purpose.
Let me make it simpler for you: There may be other reasons for buying a Prius (such as size), but saving money BECAUSE its a hybrid isn't (a good) one.
$1000 bucks for 15" economy tires??? Um, yeah, somebody got ripped off. My 18" 40 profile z-rated tires can be purchased and installed for roughly $600 with some decent shopping around the major brands.