Re: Hybrids Not The Answer - Yet.
Jed Rothwell wrote: Zell, Chris wrote: Consumer Reports claims hybrid gas mileage is 19 mpg lower than the EPA says and are among the worst in mileage exaggeration. http://autos.msn.com/advice/CRArt.aspx?contentid=4023460 But they are the best in mileage! According to the Consumer Reports list on this page! I think it's also worth noting that CU admits that they made a *mistake* in their comparison of hybrids with other cars. The added the extra depreciation _and_ the extra initial purchase cost to the cost of owning a hybrid, and so concluded that overall the hybrid was more expensive. In a response to a letter in a recent issue they stated that by erroneously double-counting the higher price they skewed it toward conventional vehicles; without the double-counting, the hybrids came out cheaper. I don't have the details but I might be able to find the issue if anyone cares. (And if I actually saw this in someone else's letter to Vortex, rather than in CU itself, then I will apologize and will feel intense embarrassment as penance.)
RE: Hybrids Not The Answer - Yet.
At present, even defenders of hybrids seem to admit that over all cost savings from higher gas mileage - and apart from subsidies - mean you have to run them for 15 years or rack up an extreme amount of odometer mileage. Maintenance costs on such a new technology are likely to high , as well. - although constant speed gas engine might do very well as to lifetime between rebuilds. For God's sake, somebody throw a diesel in here! ( given the extreme longevity of some truck engines) The premium over the price of a regular car is a problem. I sincerely hope that it follows the path of VCRs - which dropped from $2000+ ( Cartivision from Sears) down to the present $80-90 at Walmart. If it doesn't drop, we've got a problem. When I see more energy used in the manufacture of hybrids, I mean all the costs of manufacture from raw materials upward , into finished parts - and I don't trust any academic estimates in this - only free markets can tell us the answer. ( Old Soviet joke: Gorbachev said that when Communism takes over the world, they will have to leave New Zealand alone, to get some idea of what prices should be!) What do we save in hybrid manufacture? No mechanical powertrain. What extra do we pay for? More batteries, more complex controls ( Asian factories can bring the cost down) , a big electric motor ( possibly combined with some braking generation). You still need an engine big enough to power the car up long hills, after the batteries give out. ( if this is not provided, I expect to see stalled hybrids on the shoulders of highways around Scranton, Pennsylvania - any one remember 30,000 lbs. Of Bananas by Harry Chapin?) If anyone can make this work ( $ -wise), I think Toyota can. Good Lord, is copper $4 a pound today? Jed Rothwell wrote: Zell, Chris wrote: Consumer Reports claims hybrid gas mileage is 19 mpg lower than the EPA says and are among the worst in mileage exaggeration. http://autos.msn.com/advice/CRArt.aspx?contentid=4023460 But they are the best in mileage! According to the Consumer Reports list on this page! I think it's also worth noting that CU admits that they made a *mistake* in their comparison of hybrids with other cars. The added the extra depreciation _and_ the extra initial purchase cost to the cost of owning a hybrid, and so concluded that overall the hybrid was more expensive. In a response to a letter in a recent issue they stated that by erroneously double-counting the higher price they skewed it toward conventional vehicles; without the double-counting, the hybrids came out cheaper. I don't have the details but I might be able to find the issue if anyone cares. (And if I actually saw this in someone else's letter to Vortex, rather than in CU itself, then I will apologize and will feel intense embarrassment as penance.)
Re: Hybrids Not The Answer - Yet.
-Original Message- From: Zell, Chris If anyone can make this work ( $ -wise), I think Toyota can. Toyota had better watch their back: http://vvcars.com/ Terry ___ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com
Re: Hybrids Not The Answer - Yet.
Zell, Chris wrote: Consumer Reports claims hybrid gas mileage is 19 mpg lower than the EPA says and are among the worst in mileage exaggeration. http://autos.msn.com/advice/CRArt.aspx?contentid=4023460 But they are the best in mileage! According to the Consumer Reports list on this page! It is obvious why there is such a large difference between actual and measured performance with hybrid cars. They are more sensitive to driving conditions and the driver's skill than regular cars. I usually get 45 to 50 mpg, which is 10 or 15 mpg below the EPA city driving estimate of 60 mpg. However, I have gone for hours at a time getting 75 mpg. The record is 110 mpg for a full tank. No ordinary car will have that range of performance. Given the cost premium over a regular vehicle, it's likely that hybrids are actually wasting more energy thru their entire lifespan, beginning with construction at the factory. The construction at the factory does not take any more energy for a hybrid than any other car. Actually, since hybrid production lines are the newest and best, it probably takes considerably less energy. The other numbers depend upon how much you drive. Assume that Consumer Reports are correct and the Prius gets 45 mpg (which is actually the bare minimum in my experience). The best non-hybrid is the Volkswagen, which gets 34 mpg. None of the others come close. Compare the Volkswagen to the Prius. The average US driver goes ~12,000 miles per year, and it true that at that rate the Prius will not pay for itself compared to the VW. But for anyone who drives a lot more, it will pay. Some numbers: Prius list price: $21,725 VW Jetta: $17,900 Difference: $3,825 Gasoline savings per year at 12,000 miles: 85 gallons, $256 (at $3 per gallon). Payback time: 15 years Payback time if you drive 24,000 miles: 7 years. Look at a Honda Accord, starting MSRP $18,224, 25 mpg (Consumer Reports) Payback time if you drive a Honda Accord 24,000 miles: 2.7 years How about a Ford Crown Victoria LX? MSRP $24,510, 16 mpg. You lose going in, and at 24,000 miles per year every year you pay an extra $2,901. After 7.5 years you have lost enough to pay the entire cost of a Prius! You could have had a free automobile with the money you have wasted on fuel. There may be some smaller, cheaper cars that get 34 mpg like the Volkswagen Jetta. My Geo Metro probably does, and the little bitty cars in Japan do. However, compared to a Jetta or a Prius, the Geo Metro is -- not to put too fine a point on it -- a death trap. It has very light construction and virtually no safety features except for seatbelts. The tires slip on a wet pavement as easily as bicycle tires do. On a level pavement, it will not go about 65 mph with the gas pedal fully depressed, and even at that speed it rattles and shakes like a Model T Ford. It also carries far less baggage, and the people in the back are crammed in. These limitations are not a problem for me, because the Geo Metro is far safer than a motorcycle or bicycle, and I seldom go over 45 mph with it. As for those little bitty Japanese cars, years ago when a friend of mine accidentally dropped the rear wheel off the road into a ditch, he and I picked up the car and put it back. As I said they are much better than motorcycles but you would be crazy to drive one on a US Highway. - Jed
