Do Hybrids Really Make Sense?

[MobilOne]

To compare a hybrid to a non-hybrid and to keep an apples to apples comparison try the 4 door Yaris with cruise to the Prius C with cruise. That's about as close a comparison that I can find. I'll follow up on this later today or tomorrow.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

If someone has a 100 mile commute that is nearly all freeway driving, then a gasser with the proper gearing and aero profile might be the way to go. Stop and go urban driving; a hybrid tends to be the right tool.

Not the case, at least for the Gen 1 Insight. It's much better at highway driving than just about anything else - high 70s mpg or better in level cruise - but (my experience, anyway) not all that great at urban. It's all down to Honda having 'right-sized' its IC engine for highway cruising.

[jcp123]

But a two-seater Insight I is hard to justify for most people, myself included. Not to mention that as old as they're getting, most people would regard it as a project they don't want to get into.

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I don't think people have any idea what sort of car the Prius is. My mom keeps calling it a tiny car, and asks me what it's like driving the little thing. A Prius and a Fiesta aren't comparable vehicles. I could just as easily compare a moped and a Fiesta and then ask, why not get the moped that is $10k less expensive?

As already stated, the proper way to evaluate hybrid vs non-hybrid is by looking at models that have both options. Anyone trying to do wacky comparisons like a Fiesta to a Prius is being intentionally misleading, and really has no interest in knowing what the value of they hybrid components are.

So what about the article I posted before comparing the fiesta to the prius c? that is pretty even. Comparing the htbird version of the same car to the non-hybrid always looks better because they hide the cost of the hybrid with lots of other options and possibly even sell the hybrid at a loss on the back of the profitable normal version.
If you want a new car to go from A to B for the least impact on your wallet no hybrids are the best choice. I'm talking new and we are talking cars here. Talking about motorcycles and busses is the apples to oranges.

[planetaire]

Originally Posted by MobilOne

To compare a hybrid to a non-hybrid and to keep an apples to apples comparison try the 4 door Yaris with cruise to the Prius C with cruise. That's about as close a comparison that I can find. I'll follow up on this later today or tomorrow.

Here are compared a Toyota Auris-diesel, a Auris-gasoline and a Auris-hybrid-gasoline. Auris is not far from a Prius, heavier then a Yaris.

That's the only comparison I have seen in real driving conditions with the "same" car.

For example, Nox:
-cold engine, diesel 1,05, Gasoline 0,103, hybrid 0,02 g/km
-hot engine diesel 0,74 Gasoline 0,075 hybrid 0,02 g/km

So with cold engine, gasoline 5 times more then hybrid, hot engine 3,75 times.
(Diesel is 10 times the gasoline !)

[RedDevil]

Ah, nice. Of course the issue goes beyond fuel efficiency alone

How hybrids do when it comes down to cleanliness can be seen in this old article on Jaffa's Juicy Bits about the Green Car Awards.

Thanks to Uriel on InsightCentral.net:
Late to the Party - I2 was UK's cleanest car in 2011 - Page 2 - Insight Central: Honda Insight Forum

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by jcp123

But a two-seater Insight I is hard to justify for most people, myself included.

I honestly don't understand why, since maybe 19 out of every 20 cars I see on the road have a single person in them.

As for being a 'project'... Well, this IS the Ecomodder site :-)

[jcp123]

I have one car right now...a wife, two kids. 2-seater = nah.

[oldtamiyaphile]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

As already stated, the proper way to evaluate hybrid vs non-hybrid is by looking at models that have both options. Anyone trying to do wacky comparisons like a Fiesta to a Prius is being intentionally misleading, and really has no interest in knowing what the value of they hybrid components are.

Here is proof -> Compare Side-by-Side

The Camry gets 28 MPG, and the hybrid gets 41.
The Accord gets 31 MPG, and the hybrid gets 47.

You're still cherry picking. The question behind this thread is whether hybrids actually make sense. You're comparing a run of the mill standard car with a fully optimised hybrid. As we all know, simply adding some of the features of a hybrid like aero tweaks, stop start, LRR tyres etc to a normal car will show that the hybrid does indeed NOT make sense.

Mercedes E220 BlueTec 51.4/74.3/64.2 (Imperial)
Mercedes E300 Bluetec Hybrid 70.6/68.9/68.9 (Imperial)

Both use the same 2.1l diesel, both have all the eco tweaks. The hybrid costs $10K more yet does worse on the highway and is basically the same combined. Even the big advantage on the city cycle doesn't really help it's cause because the monetary gains of 50mpg vs 70mpg are actually pretty slim. Yes the hybrid is faster, but it's also 100kg heavier.

If you don't like my using a Mercedes as an example, find another ECO car with a hybrid option to compare to.

[redpoint5]

The argument against hybrids is analogous to being against wall insulation. Sure, someone without wall insulation could have the same utility cost as someone with wall insulation, but they would have to use directed heat lamps for warmth like Frank Lee. Likewise, you could spend a similar amount on fuel buying a regular gasoline powered vehicle as a hybrid if you are wiling to sacrifice acceleration, utility, modern conveniences...

Originally Posted by Hersbird

So what about the article I posted before comparing the fiesta to the prius c? that is pretty even. Comparing the htbird version of the same car to the non-hybrid always looks better because they hide the cost of the hybrid with lots of other options and possibly even sell the hybrid at a loss on the back of the profitable normal version.
If you want a new car to go from A to B for the least impact on your wallet no hybrids are the best choice.

You mean these 2 cars? 36 vs 50 MPG.

Using the example you provided me, the Prius c and the Fiests SFE, I ran the numbers through the cost of ownership spreadsheet. I found the Prius c would have an overall cost about $1,000 less than the Ford after 10 years of ownership.

Did you run the numbers and arrive at a different conclusion?

As iterated before, hybrid technology is a long term investment. If someone wants to trade in vehicles every 3 years, they will save money by getting non-hybrid cars. Those people really aren't interested in saving money in the first place.

Originally Posted by oldtamiyaphile

You're still cherry picking. The question behind this thread is whether hybrids actually make sense. You're comparing a run of the mill standard car with a fully optimised hybrid. As we all know, simply adding some of the features of a hybrid like aero tweaks, stop start, LRR tyres etc to a normal car will show that the hybrid does indeed NOT make sense.

Mercedes E220 BlueTec 51.4/74.3/64.2 (Imperial)
Mercedes E300 Bluetec Hybrid 70.6/68.9/68.9 (Imperial)

Both use the same 2.1l diesel, both have all the eco tweaks. The hybrid costs $10K more yet does worse on the highway and is basically the same combined. Even the big advantage on the city cycle doesn't really help it's cause because the monetary gains of 50mpg vs 70mpg are actually pretty slim. Yes the hybrid is faster, but it's also 100kg heavier.

If you don't like my using a Mercedes as an example, find another ECO car with a hybrid option to compare to.

You accuse me of cherry picking examples? I merely picked the first 2 vehicles that came to mind; the ones that also happen to be the best selling cars in the US. In your own example you even concede that Mercedes built the hybrid to improve acceleration. If that isn't a cherry-picked example, then I guess I don't know what the phrase means.

I'll provide the very next car that came to mind. This one built for fuel economy in both versions, and both having start-stop technology. The Ford Fusion. 29 vs 42 MPG.