Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
http://www.iaff.org/HS/Alerts/051306%20Hybrid%20Vehicles.asp
Also, the math is currently around $13K in extra up-front investment and the years to recover on 15K/miles-a-year at current fuel rates is closer to 20 years
So your math shows $4100 saved in 5 years. If you only spend half of $6700, or $3350, and get back $4100, that's $750 on a $3350 investment. That's over 20% return. That's four times the best CD rates I see out there.
Not sure where your $13k upfront differential comes from. You comparing Base vs Hybrid Limited? Is that all they have on lots?
This technology really ends up being great for the high-mileage driver in stop and go traffic. Think taxicab. I agree that the usual folks who drive a lot, drive a lot on the freeway, where this investment makes no sense. That's why I bought my 2007 Highlander with a four-cylinder. Then, it had the same freeway mileage as the Hybrid, and a smaller difference in city mileage as now, and a much higher price spread. Can't wait to see what the 2009 Hybrid ratings will be, and what price they ask for the new 2.5L Dual VVT-i vs. the 3.3L in the Hybrid. Heck, the 2.7L Base model may be they way to go (again).
1. Toyota intentionally obscured the price difference by converting essential features to extra-cost options in the Hybrids. For example, comparing the Limited to the Hybrid Limited, auto air is standard in the Limited but all that is standard in the Limited Hybrid is manual air in the front row only (serious, we’re talking no AC at all standard in the back two rows of the Hybrid Limited, not base). Now Toyota knows no one is going to accept no AC in the rear and makes it a standard factory installed option in virtually all the Hybrids they ship. But by the time you get done adding the rear AC, climate control for the front and auto-AC upgrade for the rear to get to comparable for the non-Hybrid Limited, you’ve added several $K just to get apples-to-apples.
2. The other major delta is Hybrids sell near-to or at full MSRP and have no incentive program). The non-hybrids are typically selling below dealer invoice after you factor in the current Toyota incentive program. This gap has only grown bigger over time which is why the average delta has grown from $11K to $13K.
You still didn’t answer the questions about how you came you your positive return based on the assumptions in your original email. The $4,100 was based on your math, not mine. In your reply you mixed-and-matched, taking the savings rate based on one set of assumptions and applying the to your hypothetical reduced delta cost between the up-front purchases based on a different set of assumptions. That doesn’t make any sense. I would really like you to explan the logic, per my previous questions, based on the asusmptions you laid out in your first email.
Doing any assumptions based on a $6.7K is useless because you can’t get a comparably –equipped Hybrid anywhere near that. You don’t have to believe me. Believe the WSJ or USA Today or Edmunds or whatever credible third party source you want.
There are three elements to the hybrid economic viability, really. Initial cost, resale recaptured, and fuel saved. The first is controlled my the supply chain, the second by the marketplace, and the third by the technology. At this stage of the product lifecycle, the initial cost is higher than it will become, Time will tell about he resale value as well. The technology of recapturing braking energy and expending for acceleration is now well proven. The economic viability is the question.
My point is that in judging this viability, don't forget about two key elements: the initial cost is offset by the higher trade-in (or resale value); and the payback period, whatever it is, must compared to the alternatives for investment.
If I could find a 5-year CD that paid 10% for $11-13k initial investment, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. Tens of thousands people would. Heck, a 6% CD would be a winner. The extra 4% may be judged as a cover for the non-FDIC aspect.
Over a million people have already bought hybrids. Many of them (and I know several) have done it, in large measure, just to be green. Making economic sense has to be part of this for me. Right now, it's not bad, and getting better all the time.
More and more capital is being invested to bring the cost of it down. While this is going on, no one is asking you to buy one. But every incremental one that is sold is helping to lower the cost for me any everyone (and possibly you as well). Please don't discourage them by implying that a multi-year payback is a bad thing. It simply isn't. At a time when other historically good investments offer such low yields, such as US T-bills, (see link title), investment will and should move to alternatives.
So, they cost a lot more and are not exactly "Green". Gotta love marketing spin.
Is it spin if that is what the customers want?
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
Sure, there's a few people that seem bent on burning as much gas as they can in their lifetime, because the planet isn't gong to explode in their lifetime. They neglect the fact that wars are fought for oil and resources. And that their tax dollars and fellow countrymen and women are spent in the process.
I agree the Hybrids will do better on resale, which is only useful if you are buying versus leasing because ironically Toyota gives you little residual value benefit when computing leases right now. And interesting the residual benefit has been pretty modest until this year when the gas prices surged and everyone wanted a hybrid and there was a shortage. It will be interesting to see if that sustains itself.
Me - not sure what to do. I just checked the weight of the current V-6 Highlander - 4,000 lbs. in Sport and Limited trim. Even the addition of the 2.7L option will not make it an economical drive around town. I hope the Venza is 600-800 lbs lighter. Just turned 22k on my 2007 4-cyl Highlander. Running just fine, too. Not exciting, but fine.
Actually it uses the Toyota setup from the Camry (4cy engine). I thought the HH uses a V6 Hybrid combo and that's the reason the Escape out performs (on FE) the HH. Weight would not make up the 5 to 7 mpg difference.
Odometer = 12,400
Long term mpg average = 18.88
High MPG = 27.93
Low MPG = 11.93 - result of 20 F below temps, lots of idling and heavy use of the remote starter
Most driving is in-town with the summer average at 19-21 mpg and winter average at 14-17 mpg. Highway mpg is 23 to 28 depending on the wind direction, wind speed and road speed (local highways 65 to 70, the interstate is 75).
We used some E10 (89) gas early on with the Highlander. The E10 is generally about 10 cents less per gallon, however, our experience is that the mpg drop with E10 makes regular plain gasoline a better deal.
For comparison here is our previous 03 Sienna with the 3.0L V6 (FWD)
Odometer = 26,000
Long term mpg average = 16.47
High MPG = 26.23 (vacation to Jellystone, used a lot of 85 octane fuel) Generally the highway mpg was 22-24 mpg.
Low MPG = 9.03
Tires: O.E. Brigstone Dueler set at 35 Psi
Oil: Mobil 1 5W-30 SUV
Btw, I'm impressed with your overall mileage given that the 08 is much larger than my 04. We never break 20 mpg in the city and 23-24 is the best we can do on the highway at 70 mph or less.
Overall average 21.95 which was 1 mpg less than the same trip last year. Not sure if this was due to slightly higher speeds or new tires (Bridgestone Alenza replaced the OEM Michelins) or a little of both. Best tank 23.6, worst tank 20.4. Trip computer was always 1-2 mpg higher than actual.
Anecdotal evidence indicates support for data I have seen that says there's about a 2.5 mpg increase for each 5 mph speed decrease. I was going to try that theory on the way home but had to give it up to get home by the 4th quarter of the Super Bowl.
At least the gas was over $1/gal less than last year.
We bought a new 2009 2WD V6 Sport Model a week ago. We drove from Sacramento CA to Fort Bragg CA 180 miles one way. First 60 miles are freeway at 70mph, then 90 miles of two lane highway through mild cures and hills at max 55mph and frequent small towns with slower speed limits of 35-45 mph. The final 30 miles are frequent tight turns lots of up and down hills average speed 30 mph due to curves. We averaged 24 mpg going and 26 mpg returning the same route (based on computer reading). We had 2 people in the car plus 200-300 lbs of cargo. Only 500 miles on the car at the end of the trip. So far pretty happy with the results! :shades:
We now have 3200miles on the Highlander. Driving where there are lots of stop lights around town or short trips to and from nearby stores we get around 17mpg. If I can cruise down a boulevard without getting too many stops I get 19mpg. Continuous highway driving with minimal stops and a heavy load we are getting 24-26mpg. Average around town plus extended highway driving combined is about 20mpg.
Technique: I try to anticipate stops and take my foot of the gas early and take advantage of the glide then I don't have to brake as hard with I get to the stop. The Highlander keeps going pretty well. If I loose momentum too early I just barely put my foot on the gas. When I'm going down hill I take my foot of the gas and glide trying to minimize my breaking to take maximum advantage of the glide.
68,066 miles divided by 2,722.9 gallons = 25.0 miles per gallon
Do the math of # of miles driven divided by the numbers gallons of fuel used for a more accurate figure.
At 16mpg, I might as well keep my full-size 4wd crew cab truck!
A few comments I run synthetic oil and keep tire pressure up at the maximum. The transmission the highlander allows you to shift to neutral going down a hill and then back in when you need power, so if you drive it like a stick it can save you some gas mileage.
Best highway mileage seems to be around 60 MPH ( up to 27 MPG on a long trip, but that is slow) , If you buy gas the has ethanol in it will reduce you MPG About 5 MPG.
Counter-intuitive, I know.
Plus coasting in neutral is illegal most places since it's not the safest practice.
As far as it being illegal to shift my car how I want thankfully I do not live in that part of the USA. Yes I am a good driver and don't tailgate etc. .
Going downhill in gear, the drivetrain turns the engine over and the fuel injection shuts off.
Electronic gas gauges or a Scangauge II aren't going to be accurate in that situation I don't think.
Hypermilers will disagree.
Oh yeah, others say that going downhill in neutral is not good for your transmission; something about not getting oil to the gears.
If you're in neutral then you're coasting whether it's downhill, uphill or flat.
Going downhill in nuetral no transmisson breaking
I'm glad your transmission isn't breaking but I think you meant braking.
( M=M*V)
M = M*V ?? Therefore, V = 1?
all with less fuel
And you do this while not exceeding posted speed limits?
Yes I am a good driver and don't tailgate etc.
An uninformed person might regard your position as an oxymoron arguing that you cannot be a good driver without your transmission engaged.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
fueleconomy.gov says the car is only supposed to get 18/24 vs the sticker saying 20/27 range for the highway is supposed to be 22-32 ( in someone's dream!)
Toyota response is drive at 55mph -- Florida Highway Patrol cautions NOT to do that as the average speed on the TPK is 80 mph.....
Looks like Toyota may have a legal issue here...........
tony
I really wanted the GMC Acadia, but Detroit didn't produce a large SUV(90 cubic feet or more) with a reasonable fuel economy at the time.
The mpg is awful and seems to be way out of line with what I'm reading here. I live in the country, so most of my driving is constant, highway speed. Very little stop and go. Very little idling.
I'm doing the actual math, rather than relying on the digital readout. So far, I've put about 2,300 miles on the car and my best tank yielded 16.9 mpg. Basically, I'm hovering between 16 and 17 mpg.
Am I doing something wrong? Any suggestions I can take to the dealer?
HELP!!! :lemon:
Any thoughts from the collective brain trust?
Thanks!
Now I have 1000 miles on my 09, V6 base 4X4. The average is 20/21 for mixed city/hwy, I used "Snow mode" in the 3rd tank but didn't get any better than regular driving, there is somebody said "Snow mode" may improve mileage a lot but I am wondering if this would hurt engine in the long term.