Do Hybrids Really Make Sense?

[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by oldtamiyaphile

... Certainly for many people in Europe, where cars are taxed into the thousands of dollars per year you can see how someone with a ICE Golf sized car pays thousands a year in tax, while mr Hybrid SUV in some cases pays nothing, even though in all likelihood he's putting out more CO2.

Let's hear it from an European then - me.
First of all my car was not precharged when it was tested for economy. Its EPA number is not high and easy to beat, even in our horrendous traffic.
Some of the PHEV hybrids have artificially good ratings due to precharging and the small test cycle, but not the ordinary hybrids.

There are two kinds of economy related consumer car taxes in my country - a buyers tax and the road tax.
The buyers tax had a system where it was raised or lowered based on CO2 output - for the vehicle type. The idea being that when someone buys a SUV anyway, it better be the one that gets best economy. The bigger the car, the more effect efficiency upgrades have on them. It has changed lately, but it still does something like this.
They just look at economy, not whether it is a hybrid or not.
EV's and plugin hybrids have a taxation reduction in the lease market, but private buyers don't profit from that.

Then there is the road tax, based on vehicle weight and fuel type.
Hybrids may deduct 125 kg from their registered vehicle weight before taxation; as to prevent that car buyers would have to pay more for having hybrid technology making their cars heavier, even though it improves economy.
For me it saves me € 88 per year.
Can't really say they are throwing money at me by the bucketfull for having a hybrid.
But as I have to pay my own fuel, I don't care. It saves me enough on our ridiculously high fuel prices anyway.

But even if it did not I would not care. I love this car! I like the way it drives. I love the sub 2000 RPM on the highway. I love the opportunities to harvest back energy when forced to slow down, and the almost silent running in EV mode 9not that it is loud when burning gas).

Bah!

I've fallen into your trap again.

Here I was argueing that hybrids make sense on other areas than cost, and all you do is keep hammering on cost, and I get into that discussion again.
Who cares.
Most people who spend money on cars don't care about economy.

My dad recently bought a hybrid because it was a high seating small car with a nice and responsive automatic tranny.
He drives just a couple of 1000 miles a year. He could not care less about economy.
Waht majkes sense to him is the way the car behaves.

Maybe we should change the thred title to 'do hybrids really make cents?' so then at least its clear that it is about money with the exclusion of such worldly luxuries as comfort, safety and reliability?

Bedtime, goodnight.

[ME_Andy]

[RedDevil]

That a hybrid horse?

[gone-ot]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

That a hybrid horse?

...and, if it is, is it a NiMH or a Li-Ion horse?

[RedDevil]

Don't know, but the Duracell horse is still up and running.

[oldtamiyaphile]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

Then there is the road tax, based on vehicle weight and fuel type.
Hybrids may deduct 125 kg from their registered vehicle weight before taxation; as to prevent that car buyers would have to pay more for having hybrid technology making their cars heavier, even though it improves economy.
For me it saves me € 88 per year.
Can't really say they are throwing money at me by the bucketfull for having a hybrid.
But as I have to pay my own fuel, I don't care

I've fallen into your trap again.

Here I was argueing that hybrids make sense on other areas than cost, and all you do is keep hammering on cost, and I get into that discussion again.
Who cares.

You've missed my point perhaps because your country doesn't charge a CO2 based road tax. The point is not COST, the point is these schemes are intended by government to reduce fuel use (CO2) but if the numbers aren't realistic, they're circumventing the intent of the law. Admittedly this also applies to ICE's with cheated figures.

Besides, which if I was arguing based on cost, I'd be on the pro-hybrid side. A Ferrari with no CO2 tax (just quitely saving $2000+ a year, depending on country)? That's got to be a bonus.

How do you know your car wasn't pre-charged (whether externally or via the ICE) prior to the NDEC test? I know non hybrid starting batteries are often pre-charged for the sake of some 5% gain. It's a common trick by OEM's.

[oldtamiyaphile]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

And as I showed a few pages back, using actual numbers (with references), the break-even point for a 2000 Insight vs the same year Civic in the US is well under the 190K miles mine has actually been driven.

FWIW, Here are my references, since apparently my numbers are unbelievable :

New Honda Insight VTi-L review: Car Reviews | CarsGuide

The Insight was originally priced at nearly $50k from 2001-2004 and after being dropped for six years was re-introduced in December 2010 at a sub-30k price with 113 sales that month and 715 in 2011.

Used Car Research - Used Car Prices - Compare Cars - RedBook.com.au

Used Car Research - Used Car Prices - Compare Cars - RedBook.com.au

As much as $30k for a current Insight is a bargain, I'd rather drive a Civic diesel that's cheaper and uses less fuel.

[RedDevil]

If we are to compare Insights and Civics, lets take the current ones.

New Civic hatch, manual, diesel engine:
Specifications
S trim (bare): € 22,890, Comfort: € 25.790.
It is supposed to get 3.6 to 3.7 l/100 km.
In reality it gets 5.43 l/100 km on average.

The Honda Insight is no longer cited on Honda's site since quite recently but the base level came in just under € 20,000.
Top spec with leather seats, park sensors, navi was about the Civic Comfort price.
So for the trim level it was way cheaper.
It was supposed to get 4.4 l/100 km...
Reality says 5.42 l/100 km on average.

Its emissions on anything but CO2 are way less than the diesel - in fact it is cleaner than any other car except EV's and hydrogen cars.

So on paper the bare manual Civic diesel uses less fuel - just by volume, as diesel is 20% heavier than gasoline, but nvm. - than the auto Insight gas hybrid; in reality it does not!

The Civic diesel uses a staggering 50% more than the brochure said.
The Insight? Less than 19% more.
Maybe they did precharge the battery, but data like this does suggest otherwise. How would they have precharged the diesel to exaggerate its FE by that much then?

Can't compare Insight to Civic?
Jazz to Jazz, both gas and CVT then.
Average FE for the Jazz CVT : 6.55 l/100 km
Average FE for the Jazz Hybrid CVT : 5.33 l/100 km, so 20% better.
This is real world data.

My country is very close to having the highest fuel prices in the world, how is that for CO2 related tax?

Now what exactly was I missing in your point?

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by oldtamiyaphile

For a car to make sense it needs to be economically viable.

That's true, but face it: there are a lot of cars out there that a) cost more than even the $40K Australian Insight; and b) get far worse mpg. For instance

• Cadillac Escalade: $72,970 - $91,875
• Porsche Cayenne: $49,600 - $146,000
• Range Rover: $69,220 - $102,920

The companies that make these seem to stay in business, so the cars must be economically viable, no?

FWIW, Here are my references, since apparently my numbers are unbelievable

The link just shows a blank page. However, I never said that your numbers are unbelieveable. The only part I don't believe is that the $40K price of the Gen1 Insight in Australia wasn't due to taxes, import duties, or some such. Given that price, of course it's going to take a long time to make up the price difference between that and a cheaper alternative.

However, if you compare against a vehicle from the above list, or many others (average new car price in the US is a bit over $32K), the Insight, Prius, or similar hybrid is ahead from day 1.

[SpartyBrutus]

I recently bought a Sonata 1.6T Eco after considering the Sonata hybrid. The hybrid price premium was ~$3000 US versus a comparably equipped 1.6T Eco. I didn't think that I would recoup that in lower fuel costs or higher resale value if I went with the hybrid.

As you might expect, Ill be working to beat both the 1.6T Eco (32mpg) and hybrid (38mpg) EPA estimates. We will see.