However, the two of the three most important details were not included... what region of the country you live in and whether you have a manual transmission or an automatic.
I live in San Diego, and just signed up to use the SOCO commercial facility a mile from my house. They have ULSD ECD-1 fuel. I am anticipating the purchase of some kind of diesel vehicle. Until the hybrids are on the lots available for test drive, and without a premium over MSRP, I would not consider them. That leaves me one choice for great economy. I would probably go for a Passat TDI which only comes in Automatic. I may even buy a 6.0 Diesel Excursion they are getting up to 25 mpg, and the owners love them. Then I would get rid on my Suburban instead of the Mazda 626. My trips are short usually 3-10 miles of freeway. Or long trips to Vegas or Oregon.
What difference does this make to Hybrid vs Diesel? Or do you need this fact to skew the data for your arguement?
"whether you have a manual transmission or an automatic"
Once again.....what does this matter? You cannot keep ignoring the fact that diesels are known to get just as good gas mileage as Hybrids. As we say at the track.."Run what you brung". I'm sorry that the Prius doesn't have a manual model to get even better mileage. You keep ignoring the manual transmission in the diesel, once again, your way of skewing data to make the Prius look better. That is just plain wrong, it is there, it is a fact of life. Deal with it.
You asked for data John, it was given to you....the data is good data and rivals your data on the Prius and because of that all the sudden it isn't good enough anymore. You need for the diesel to fall flat on its face and if it doesn't you look for excuses as to why the diesel performs so well. I'm sorry that you go through life with blinders on and cannot see that both HYBRID and DIESEL technology are better than any straight gasoline model. That both have their pros and cons. Those of us who drive diesels see the pros and cons of both technologies and have chosen diesel for one reason or another, but do not discount Hybrids. I chose the diesel because of it's cost to own, my car was $6000 cheaper than the Prius, my fuel is on average $0.20 cheaper per gallon, I get almost the average MPG that you get (according to your spreadsheets), and I don't have to worry about replacement batteries. Yes, I will need to replace my clutch at say 100K miles (and that is being way generous), and lets say it cost $1000, that is still better than a $3000 bettery replacement. BUT, I DO NOT go around telling people why they should not consider a Hybrid and I would never do that. People have their different reasons for buying said vehicle and I respect that. The title of this forum HYBRID VS DIESEL isn't placed there so that one can bash the other.....it is titled that so that the pros and cons of both technologies can be listed. Until now, along with the data that you provide (and it is very good data), you have continually badmouthed the other technology. This is a disservice to you and your cause.....it's like mudslinging in politics. The mudslinger very rarely gets his point across and usually ends up looking like the bad guy himself. I'm not saying you have to embrace diesel technology, I know that your agenda is environmental protection and I respect that. I'm just asking that when you do receive the data you ask for not to make up excuses why that data is all the sudden not good enough. Accept the data, as we have accepted yours. You cannot discount MPG just because it comes from a manual transmission, it is a fact of life that the manual transmission is there, and until VW stops importing manual trannies, then you've just got to accept them.
It will be interesting to see the maintenance comparisons between the hybrids and the diesels. After all the reading I have done it is fairly evident that these battery packs are pretty resilient. Too bad we only have once choice for an inexpensive diesel (that being the VW). I was hoping some other manufactuers would bring some to market here. Nothing against VW, but I know too many people that have had countless problems with the new beetle as well as some audis. For me, I'm happy with my Accord coupe for the time being
> You cannot keep ignoring the fact that diesels are known to get just as good gas mileage as Hybrids.
How can I ignore NOTHING ?
If there was more than just a mention or two of data, then we'd have something to actually work with. But so far, it's basically only highway-only with a manual transmission. That makes even TDI-manual to TDI-auto comparisions impossible. So TDI to HSD is just cannot happen.
Also, your generic use of "hybrids" is very misleading. If nothing, you should narrow down to a specific design, like HSD. But better yet, the specific configuration, like Prius or Highlander (since they are quite different).
So if you desire a construction discussion, please provide detail.
If your main priority is to conserve oil, then perhaps the TDI is best value.
If your main priority is to pollute less, then you can't beat the Hybrids.
I don't know how much energy is spent mining rare heavy metals for batteries and iron etc. for building cars, but in some respects, it might be best to drive cars longer and replace them less often in order to conserve. I have no idea what the data would look like and it would be a different discussion.
"So if you desire a construction discussion, please provide detail."
What is a contruction discussion? Aren't we talking about cars? ; ^ )
Re the new clutch on TDI. My brother put 200k miles on his diesel and never needed a clutch. I have never used up a clutch and usually go to near 200k miles on vehicles. If treated right a clutch will not wear out. A new clutch would also cost well under $1,000 - more like $500.
What's everyone's opinion on resale value? I was just reading another forum and someone stated that dollar-for-dollar a gas civic/corolla was cheaper to buy/operate than a hybrid (or diesel). I agree to a point, assuming out-of-pocket and operational expenses are the only factor used. Which leaves resale value hanging on the tail-end as a big unknown.
Diesel resale value is pretty well known, even with high miles they're still worth good money. I can easily sell my nearly five year old, 85,000 mile TDI for over 60% of what I paid for it. Based on what I'm seeing '98 models with 150k miles selling for on ebay, it would appear I can keep my car another two years/70k miles and only lose maybe $2,000. Will a seven year old hybrid with 150k miles be worth 50% of it's new cost? What is the lifespan of the electric assist motor? I know a gas motor should easily go 200k miles if maintained properly (had two go over that in the last 10 years). Just replaced an electric blower motor in an air handler for our A/C at home and was thinking about this. Considering it was only four years old and the maintenance tech claimed that was about right.....I'm sure the electric motor on a car is built a bit better, but still something I'm curious about.
I think that electric engines in their basic form shouldn't break down much, just need some new bearings etc. but the technology that incorporates the brake into the generator and everything else has got to be extremely expensive to keep up when everything ties together like that.
6-7pm PT/9-10pm ET. Drop by for live chat with other members. Hope you can join us!
kirstie_h Roving Host & Future Vehicles Host
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
so...not only did I pay substantially less for my TDI from the get go (compared to Prius)..estimated resale at the five year mark is $300 higher than the Prius...and higher than both of Hondas Hybrids as well. Given the numbers the Civic Hybrid seems to be a better choice of Hybrid for those looking to save in the pocketbook area and pollute less.
In my opinion, if one is shopping for cheap transportation then a hybrid isn't likely the answer. In the case of Civic, good buys can be had on regular ICE models. Greenhybrid dot com has a database populated by car owners, real hybrid owner data. The average tank mpg over 37 HCH's is 47.5MPG. 10 HCH's there are beating the controversial EPA estimates. The average tank mpg over 57 Prius II's is 49.0MPG. 7 Prius's are beating EPA estimates.
At that rate you will never recover the cost of the car for fuel savings.
I bought my HCH not for fuel $ savings but rather to stop consuming so much fuel. I also bought it because it is top of the line Civic. I keep my cars for ~10 years. At that time I'll have about 160K miles. Battery warranty is 10yr/150K miles.
I bought it last January and my first few tank averages were around 53MPG, and now that I've learned how to drive it for max economy, I'm achieving 58-60MPG tank averages, +700miles from 13 gallons of gas, tank after tank.
Is this normal? No. Is it achievable, duplicatable? Yes, by some. Do I drive slow? No, around the speed limits.
I've found that HCH has a VERY large MPG variation due to conditions and habits. Bad conditions with bad habits and perhaps way down to low 30's MPG. However, Better conditions and good driving habits can get you better than 60MPG tanks. Wow! That's a 30MPG variance! My Grand Caravan has about 5-7MPG spread.
In my personal case I'll likely break about even in cost over 10 years. In the mean time I'm enjoying the top '04 Civic, reducing personal consumption and significantly less often fill-ups among other things, and don't have to find a station with diesel fuel.
Diesel cars are also fighting a bad U.S. public reputation. I'm not sure if diesel cars can make 58-60MPG tank after tank, week after week. BTW, a cool 4mb Prius- HHC hybrid animation I made: http://www.steve-dez.us/pj1.mpg I'll be finishing & upgrading it this weekend.
Very good points, except for this comment: "The automakers are not going to subsidize this technology just to look good." Sorry, but just look at Toyota. They got into the SUV game faster than anyone and had more SUV models for sale than anyone else, but are "excused" because they sell the subsidized Prius and keep the hard-core tree-huggers happy.
If the Sierra club ever researched how much polution is created in very poor countries to create the materials to manufacture a hybrid car (motors as well as batteries) they would be recognized as the major environmental disaster in the making that they are.
But we don't have to worry about hybrids in huge numbers, because there aren't enough of the rare elements on this planet to support high volumes. And if the volumes rise, watch the prices of the elements for the "rare-earth magnets" plus cadnium and molybdenum rise dramatically (pushing the cars over $50k).
excellent animation. What program did you use? Clever idea, not sure the Prius crowd will share my enthusiasm. As for the diesel I would imagine a person with a stick shift TDI Jetta would have to drive carefully to maintain 50-55 mpg range. They seem to have no trouble 45-50 mpg consistently. Thanks for the info on the Civic Hybrid. I had kind of dismissed it with some of the negative posts.
"If the Sierra club ever researched how much pollution is created in very poor countries to create the materials to manufacture a hybrid car (motors as well as batteries) they would be recognized as the major environmental disaster in the making that they are."
Look at the pollution produced by the life time of the car. Yes, it does generate a little more pollution to produce a HSD car but overall is greener than traditional gas only car.
As you can see, most of the pollution is during driving the vehicle. With diesel engine life time being claimed one million miles, diesel will pollute the most by significant magnitude.
Very interesting chart. What that chart is telling me is the building of the car is the major portion of the pollution in the case of HC, PM, Sox & NOx. If I drive my car only 45K miles in 6 years. And the Prius owner drives 100k miles in that same 6 years then buys a new hybrid. He is a gross polluter compared to me as I still have my car and will keep it till I get something good enough to replace it. I think your assumptions on the diesel are without any grounds. First if the person with a TDI drives his car 1 million miles He will have put out way less pollution than the guy that bought 5-6 new hybrids over that period of time. This is great news for the long lived diesel. Probably something the Europeans have known all along, and the automakers did not want us to know. Thanks for a good post.
It appears that in this year alone sales of hybrids will exceed sales of diesel passenger cars in the US. I doubt diesels will ever be embraced by the US public. With the advent of so many hybrids coming to market over the next few years it looks very promising for their market share to increase albeit quite small. If the US had more choices for reasonably priced diesel cars, then the tables would be turned for sure. VW has a very small market share compared to Toyota. We need more choices!
We are the richest country in the world and have very limited choices in vehicles. I think the hybrid business is still experimental. Many vehicles promised only 3 delivered and one of those discontinued. The most likely to be available is the Ford Escape and it is pushed out to September 2004. The other Toyotas sometime in 2005, maybe? The Silverado sorta hybrid is limited to 500 fleet vehicles. I don't think the automakers are telling the whole truth on these hybrid delays. They run the risk of losing market share to other economical vehicles such as the VW TDI. TDI's are selling very well even if the rest of the VW line is sagging. That is there best line in Europe and can ramp up production a lot easier than for the hybrid. And don't forget the added pollution in manufacturing the Prius and other hybrids. Many countries may block the added pollution in their air, so we can drive a low pollution car in this country. These third world countries are learning our game.
Thanks for the compliment. I'm using Lightwave 3D 8.0. The ending is still inproccess. I Plan to make a series of these for posting around the net forums for fun. Any car that gets a consistant MPG of 45-50 is excellent :-)
Make the suburban out of aluminum and other lighweight materials to bring it down to 3500 lbs, put high pressure low rolling resistance tires on it, reshape it just a tad for better aerodynamics, toss in a VW 5 cyl diesel with about 300 lb-ft of torque and you could get 45 mpg on the highway if you keep it around 65-70. Want more oomph use the MB 3.2 liter CDI and mileage may drop a couple of mpg, but 350 ft-lbs will be 20 more than the 5.3 liter sub has right now.
Efficient cars are a piece of cake to make, marketing is the problem. Mileage just does not sell to the mainsteam because it is rarely marketed as being cool (there have been a couple of amusing attempts: Hyundai insinuating the size of a vehicle as the invererse of something else, and then later showing people filling up heavy construction vehicles at the gas station). Toyota scores big for marketing - especially when the first generation Prius cost nearly twice as much as an Echo, and barely got better mileage (than a manual Echo), and had about the same room. The new Pruis is better on both accounts though. VW has to overcome peoples stereotypes about diesels, so they have a lot of market to do before they can go mainstream, but they are still selling well.
BTW the Jetta/Golf are not even close to being the most efficient diesels that VW makes. The Lupo sold in Europe (about the size of the original Rabbit) gets 100 mpg.
Fortunately, most people don't want to make compromises just for the sake of MPG. Lupo is a prime example. There quite simply isn't a market here for a very striped down (including safety features), rough ride vehicle like that.
> Echo
It can't compare. The quality of the build is very different from Prius. For example, Prius has fabric from Lexus in it. Echo has the low-end Toyota fabric.
Make the suburban out of aluminum and other lighweight materials to bring it down to 3500 lbs.....Efficient cars are a piece of cake to make, marketing is the problem.
Might be a cost issue with all that aluminum too, lol! Course economies of scale are on their side. Six months sales figures: Suburban/YukonXL 84,590, Prius 21,783. Might sell a few more if they got 45mpg!
Cost is definately a big part of it, but people can be convinced to pay quite a bit for items they don't really think they need if they are marketed correctly.
You just need to convince someone that they could need to tow something someday and they might spend $40,000 on a Suburban (or insert any other large vehicle that tows a lot) instead of $30,000 on a minivan, or $25,000 on a station wagon(under $20k right now for a Subaru wagon). convince them that cloth will be horribly stained if kids spill something and they may spend $1,500 for leather etc. etc. You have to play on their fears that what they have won't be adequate, and people tend to purchase more than they need.
How often do we buy vehicles that do things we will never need because we think we may someday.
With the right marketing people could be convinced that higher mpg matters - or course higher gas prices help too. Detroit just will never market better gas mileage as being a good thing because it runs counter to their mantra (and their entire way of doing business) that bigger is better (and more profitable).
Good points dudleyr Back to diesel vs hybrids. I believe with the evidence that is coming out about the added pollution of manufacturing a hybrid we can make a real good case for small diesel vehicles being cleaner than hybrids over their respective lives. If the post that USBSeawolf2000 gave us is accurate as I am sure it is, hybrids have a large pollution factor to overcome before they ever get off the truck. If they are in need of new batteries after 150k miles that is another large pollution hit. I truly doubt that a case can be made that hybrids are less polluting than a modern long lived diesel burning ULSD over 200K miles.
All along the diesel-supporters have been arguing that reduction of PM is completely realistic. Now that fact is being ignored to make the hybrids appear dirtier.
The simple truth is if a person can maintain his car for a longer duration the overall pollution will be less. If your Prius were to go 300k miles without battery replacements it would pollute less than a VW TDI at 300k miles. It is very clear to me that the bulk of the pollution especially in the hybrids is in the manufacturing. That may be part of the reason for a shortage of batteries. I think the whole process needs further study. The hybrid may just be a band-aid. It may work out to be the technology for the next 20 years. I don't know. All I know is that there is not a vehicle on the market that I would buy right now. The improvement overall in the last 15 years is pathetic, especially in fuel consumption.
It seems to imply that you've already proclaimed judgment on the hybrids that haven't even been introduced just, the Camry-Hybrid. Without configuration & pricing detail, that's hardly objective.
It also seems to imply that the problem has been identified, even though no clear goal has ever been stated. Is it to reduce imported oil? Or is it to totally eliminate it? And does that mean we'll still be using our own? What about emissions? To what degree do they need to be reduced? SULEV? PZEV? ZEV?
And what the concept hybrids, those also have ultra-capacitors and those with the ability to be recharged via a plug?
Lastly, what the heck is the time-scale? How long should a design remain in production before the next generation is introduced?
I believe the hybrid is a temporary fix to a much larger problem. You ask some very good questions that most of us would like the answers to. I believe the issue of batteries is a real one that will plague the hybrid industry. More so in the larger vehicles. I think we will see a size limitation on the effective use of hybrid technology. If the Prius turns out to be a relatively trouble free vehicle for 200k-300k miles, it will stay with us at least 10-15 more years. The small hybrid is the only significant advance in fuel mileage I have witnessed in the last 20 years and it is marginal. I could buy a Civic in 1983 that would blow the sox off that Prius and it got 45-50 mpg. I believe the fuel usage that can be attained with diesel is a more proven technology in all size vehicles than the hybrid. I also realize making the diesel clean burning is not going to be cheap. I don't believe for a minute that the Hybrid is cheap either. Only time will tell which technology is the best. I am open to anything that gets better mileage than what is offered in the US today. I am also willing to go out of my way to use fuels that will accomplish that while helping the environment. There is no excuse for the fact that we are still using high sulfur fuel in this country. There are millions of diesel PU trucks, big trucks, buses, trains & ships that would benefit our air by burning ULSD. The amount of pollution caused by a VW TDI is insignificant in the big picture of pollution. Especially in the light of it's reduced dependence on our depleting oil supply. I would also bet the VW TDI is less polluting in the manufacturing stage than a comparable size hybrid.
Yes cars like the Civic were very efficient 20 years ago, and have not improved much since. Unfortunately today people are more concerned about Horsepower and acceleration so small cars seem to be geared very short and this hurts their mileage. My wife had a 1983 Quantum that ran at 2100 rpm at 60 mph - the current Passat with twice as much power runs at 2600 rpm. Add taller gears and mileage improves, unfortunately a car is considered weak if a downshift is required going up a hill. Add on all of the additional safety equipment required today (airbags, side impact beams, rear center light etc), and they have a lot to overcome.
If car makes tried to improve mileage they easily could. Put a tall 6th gear on the Civic (keep the other 5 gears the same) and it would get phenomenal highway mileage. Might have to downshift once in a while, but so what you don't have to put the car in 6th gear in the first place if you don't want to.
Long story short - conventional cars can get great mileage. Take the hybrid equip out of an Insight and it will actually get better mileage on the highway, and will have a slight loss in the city, but will still get excellent mileage.
I'd like to finally get answers to those questions too.
Without well defined goals (like the hydrogen mystery), it's really hard to come up with a solution.
I'm a programmer. So the perfect analogy to this is to create software for a not-well-known audience that will run on a not-well-known platform to solve a not-well-known problem. You've got a rough idea what should be accomplished, but you are bound to fail since you really have no clue how it will truly be needed or how it will actually be used.
Clearly, daily commute congestion is a serious problem. That eliminates the non-hybrid diesel solution for a very large number of people. A gas "full" hybrid, like HSD which can be driven without the engine running at all, easily surpasses engine-only diesel in that situation. So that means there is the potential for multiple solutions, which is a mindset most people have a very dificult time accepting... but it is reality we must face. Different vehicles for different purposes. Hmm. What a concept. Remember when SUV was for "driving off-road with cargo" not "driving alone to the office"?
Longevity is another very real problem, for all models & technologies of vehicles. There is a significant absense of data, nothing solid to draw firm conclusions with beyond the 150,000 mile mark... especially since some people simply desire change at that point, whether the vehicle still runs fine or not. The appeal of improved safety is a very strong vehicle replacement factor too. And of course, there is always a possibility of an accident damaging/destroying the vehicle and a possibility of unacceptably low resale value.
How much oil there really is available and how much of an impact vehicle emissions has is a subject of strong debate. So expecting everyone to agree on the problems is a tremendous challenge. That means taking a large step will be next to impossible. Fortunately, "full" hybrids a big enough step for a large & diverse market to be interested it. So even without agreeing, progress can still be made.
With all the money & politics involved, I sincerely don't expect answers. The solution will simply emerge from the chaos, complete with initial doubt & resistance. Nonetheless, it will happen. HSD is, by far, the current solution with the greatest potential.
My main concern is highway mileage. That is why the hybrids don't have the appeal they have to some. My understanding is they are not real good for very short trips to the store and back either. So they are designed to be at their best as commuter vehicles. That is fine they have their place just not in my scope of need. My buddy had a 1983 CRX I believe it was. It was so much fun to drive and got great mileage. You are right about all the devices they add to protect the passengers & the air. I don't put a lot of mileage on a vehicle so I want it to last a lot of years with few miles. That is an unknown also with the hybrid. A diesel I know I can leave for a month come back and fire it up and go. Year after year after year. That is not proven to be possible yet with the hybrid.
My '80 Scirocco was similiar. It got 45 mpg on the highway and never had a tank below 30 mpg driving in the DC area. Or course it only weighed 2000 lbs, and the speed limit was 55 back then so I averaged about 62 on the highway. The CRX got even better mileage. Honda has the HX now but they only make it as a coupe, not a mainstream sedan.
Although I think the first generation of hybrids offered little gain over conventional gas engines. They are doing better now. The battery situation worries me though. I would actually reccomend a Prius to someone who wanted an automatic, and a TDI to someone who wanted a manual, so I am for both technologies. The main thing is they are showing that high mpg is possible in a livable package. Hopefully this will bring more fuel efficient cars more into the mainstream.
What worries me is that the upcoming hybrids are going to once again add to the HP wars not the MPG wars. The new Accord Hybrid is going to be a 6-cylinder, that may not do much if any better than the I4 Accord on gas (especially the manual). Unfortunately HP is what sells.
Boy would I love to have the European Accord deisel. The one that set all the speed records and still gets 50 mpg. I would take that any day over the upcoming Accord V-6 hybrid.
> My understanding is they are not real good for very short trips to the store and back either.
This misconception originated from the classic Prius. To reduce emissions, the catalytic-converter must be hot for the cleansing of exhaust to occur. The source of that heat was exclusively from the engine. It required gas to be consumed just for the sake of getting the engine hot, so MPG would suffer during the first few minutes of driving. The design is different with the new Prius. Toyota added a 3-liter thermal storage container. When you power-off the hybrid system, hot coolant (anti-freeze) is pumped into that thermos. (It will remain hot overnight and warm for up to 3 days.) Then later when you power-on the hybrid system, that hot coolant is pumped into the head of the engine. Heat for the emissions system is available significantly faster than in the past. That allows the engine to shut off much sooner, which saves gas.
When "short" is referred to, it is usually quite vague, since each person has their own interpretation based on their own traditional driving experiences. For Prius, the Multi-Display reveals efficiency detail. So owners quickly discover what "short" actually means. For many, that is about 30 MPG on the first 5-minute segment shown on the "Consumption" screen. And since both the engine & emissions system are usually still hot when you leave the destination of your short trip (grocery store, bank, retail store, mall, gas station), warm-up is reduced to almost nothing. That first 5-minute segment on the drive home will be yield considerably higher MPG than on the drive there.
In summary, the impression some have of "short" trip MPG is a bit misleading.
I'm with you, that Accord Diesel sounds like a winner we may not see in this country. The only thing that comes close is the E320 CDI @ $58k. And it will not get close to 50 mpg. I think the larger hybrids will prove to be less than what folks are hoping for. Like you say people want 0-60 in six seconds and 50 mpg. Not likely with a hybrid. I believe the only chance for high performance and over 45 mpg fuel efficiency in a decent size vehicle is with modern day diesel technology. Hopefully the government will hold the oil companies to the 2006 deadline for ULSD in this country. It should have been mandated 10 years ago.
especially since some people simply desire change at that point That was a very thoughtful reply, so I will try to do likewise. I'm like everyone else I desire change in vehicles. My circumstances also change. Where I run into a roadblock is when I ask myself "why am I getting rid of a car that is in great condition" I maintain it as recommended, it does not pollute anymore than when it was new. Then I ask what is out there that is significantly better than what I have now. I spotted the Prius right off the boat and thought it was a great concept. I drove it and it was more than I expected. My then wife needed a new car as her 1990 Camry was showing it's age. I had her go for a test drive. She could not get past the looks. Maybe if we were still married she would like the new one that is better looking. I read your response on the short trip aspect of the Prius. That sounds like an interesting solution to the earlier problem. My situation is that I make a couple short trips a day when I am home. Most every place I shop is within 3 miles. Actually one of those GEM electric cars would be adequate. Except the roads all around me are posted 45 mph and those are not legal on roads over 35 mph. Many times I need a small pickup to get plants and cement blocks so I take the Suburban. It is over kill for those trips. The problem is no one sells a small PU that gets much more than 18 mpg around town. Why take the loss on the Suburban for 4 mpg. No way you can justify that. I have an old Mazda 626 beater that runs fine. So as much as I would like to get a new vehicle I cannot justify expense of buying a new vehicle.
I almost bid on a VW Rabbit diesel the other day on ebay. It went for $2200 in excellent shape. We know they can produce a small diesel PU that gets 50 mpg. They won't bring them into this country, and that is my frustration. They think everyone wants a big truck. I think we are forced by the automakers into big trucks because there are no small trucks that get decent mileage. They know if it is only 3-4 mpg better the logical decision is to get the most for the money.
"If the post that USBSeawolf2000 gave us is accurate as I am sure it is, hybrids have a large pollution factor to overcome before they ever get off the truck."
The most polluting cars are those that are almost at the end of their life. As you drive more than 150k or more, the engine looses power, efficiency and increases pollution.
Diesel engines' pollution increases after each year of use more than gas engine cars. It is one of the reason diesel cars don't meet CARB emission standard. One year operation of an old(200k+ miles) diesel car probably pollute more than pollution emit by manufacturing a new car. It is an important point to note.
The most polluting cars are those that are almost at the end of their life. As you drive more than 150k or more, the engine looses power, efficiency and increases pollution.
Thank you for the good information on the chart. I have a close friend that operates a Smog Test Station in San Diego. According to him a 15 year old car that has it's emissions equipment maintained is nearly as clean as a new vehicle. I would agree that the older an engine gets the more it will have blow-by etc, causing it to pollute more. Is that additional amount anywhere near the amount required to manufacture a new vehicle? To do an overhaul on a diesel is a matter of rings and bearings to bring it back to new specs. That is very insignificant compared to a whole new car. We need to keep our vehicles longer. I think cars are getting like computers. Keep them a couple years and toss them on the recycle pile. This is a very bad trend. I have a 20 foot dumpster filled with computers that no one will accept. They will have to be shipped 2500 miles to the closest recycle facility. How much resources will that take?
That is very unrealistic for those of use that live in the North.
Just look at the oil-change document I published (on my website). The photos of the underside of my 2004 Prius reveal rust already.
The sand blasts and the salt eats. That, along with the wet freezing cycles, tears apart a vehicle. It just plain won't last as long as you'd like. It is a fact of life. Over 90% of the population here replaces their vehicle by year 10. Convincing them not to would be nearly impossible.
It's a reality you cannot change without actually doing something to prevent the deterioration of the vehicle too. What are *YOU* going to do about it?
There are exceptions of course. Any place that salts the highways will have a deteriorating affect on vehicles. I have a farm in Long Prairie and know too well what it did to my 1974 Dodge Van. Total rust through in 6 years. Most of the country is not that bad. MN outlawed studded tires that alleviate the need for salt on the roads. Of course studded tires tear up the highways. That is a regional problem. The places that have the most vehicles per population is CA and TX. They do not have a rust problem so that excuse for replacing every few years does not exist. I am surprised that your Prius underside is showing rust after one winter. No one except VW goes over 10 years rust through warranty that I know of. I've never known anyone that collected on a rust through warranty. More rust protection would add more weight. Catch 22 for you up in MN. AK uses a lot of volcanic ash on the roads in the winter. I think it is hard on paint.
It is the entire northern part of the United States that suffers, not just MN. Remember, those on both coasts have much wetter winters. So they have rust issues too. That many people make it a rule, not an exception. As a consequence, our vehicles are safer and more reliable... since they are newer.
Your downplay of "every few years" doesn't accomplish anything. Those are just words, not something attributed to an action. Anyway, 9 years is actually a long time... just ask anyone going to school or having to put up with an administration that doesn't support their needs.
Action, not words.
For example, maintain a spreadsheet documenting your MPG.
Average age of an automobile is 9.0 years in 2001 and for pickups the average age is 10 years. The average age of a vehicle has steadily increased since the late 1960's. Source of the information is NHTSA. Your quote that 90% of the population replaces their vehicle by year 10 has no basis in fact and I suspect it is anecdotal evidence from the world of John.
FWIW my Integra is 14.5 years old and is just now starting to have a couple of tiny very light rust spots. It has lived in MD, VA and SD all use salt. It is not garaged.
These days rust is not that big of an issue. Had a '76 Volare that rusted through the fender in less than 2 years.
As a consequence, our vehicles are safer and more reliable... since they are newer.
Where do you get this information. There is no way in the world cars in MN are on the average newer than they are in CA. That is a big part of my gripe. People in CA drive them two years and trade off to get the latest gadgets. Sound familiar. I imagine our used car lots have newer cars on average than your citizenry is driving. The only old cars I see are driven up from Mexico and most of them are newer in the last 10 years. Not keeping a car until it is used UP is a problem everywhere.
Comments
However, the two of the three most important details were not included... what region of the country you live in and whether you have a manual transmission or an automatic.
(Type of driving was the third.)
JOHN
What difference does this make to Hybrid vs Diesel? Or do you need this fact to skew the data for your arguement?
"whether you have a manual transmission or an automatic"
Once again.....what does this matter? You cannot keep ignoring the fact that diesels are known to get just as good gas mileage as Hybrids. As we say at the track.."Run what you brung". I'm sorry that the Prius doesn't have a manual model to get even better mileage. You keep ignoring the manual transmission in the diesel, once again, your way of skewing data to make the Prius look better. That is just plain wrong, it is there, it is a fact of life. Deal with it.
You asked for data John, it was given to you....the data is good data and rivals your data on the Prius and because of that all the sudden it isn't good enough anymore. You need for the diesel to fall flat on its face and if it doesn't you look for excuses as to why the diesel performs so well. I'm sorry that you go through life with blinders on and cannot see that both HYBRID and DIESEL technology are better than any straight gasoline model. That both have their pros and cons. Those of us who drive diesels see the pros and cons of both technologies and have chosen diesel for one reason or another, but do not discount Hybrids. I chose the diesel because of it's cost to own, my car was $6000 cheaper than the Prius, my fuel is on average $0.20 cheaper per gallon, I get almost the average MPG that you get (according to your spreadsheets), and I don't have to worry about replacement batteries. Yes, I will need to replace my clutch at say 100K miles (and that is being way generous), and lets say it cost $1000, that is still better than a $3000 bettery replacement. BUT, I DO NOT go around telling people why they should not consider a Hybrid and I would never do that. People have their different reasons for buying said vehicle and I respect that. The title of this forum HYBRID VS DIESEL isn't placed there so that one can bash the other.....it is titled that so that the pros and cons of both technologies can be listed. Until now, along with the data that you provide (and it is very good data), you have continually badmouthed the other technology. This is a disservice to you and your cause.....it's like mudslinging in politics. The mudslinger very rarely gets his point across and usually ends up looking like the bad guy himself. I'm not saying you have to embrace diesel technology, I know that your agenda is environmental protection and I respect that. I'm just asking that when you do receive the data you ask for not to make up excuses why that data is all the sudden not good enough. Accept the data, as we have accepted yours. You cannot discount MPG just because it comes from a manual transmission, it is a fact of life that the manual transmission is there, and until VW stops importing manual trannies, then you've just got to accept them.
How can I ignore NOTHING ?
If there was more than just a mention or two of data, then we'd have something to actually work with. But so far, it's basically only highway-only with a manual transmission. That makes even TDI-manual to TDI-auto comparisions impossible. So TDI to HSD is just cannot happen.
Also, your generic use of "hybrids" is very misleading. If nothing, you should narrow down to a specific design, like HSD. But better yet, the specific configuration, like Prius or Highlander (since they are quite different).
So if you desire a construction discussion, please provide detail.
JOHN
If your main priority is to pollute less, then you can't beat the Hybrids.
I don't know how much energy is spent mining rare heavy metals for batteries and iron etc. for building cars, but in some respects, it might be best to drive cars longer and replace them less often in order to conserve. I have no idea what the data would look like and it would be a different discussion.
What is a contruction discussion? Aren't we talking about cars? ; ^ )
Re the new clutch on TDI. My brother put 200k miles on his diesel and never needed a clutch. I have never used up a clutch and usually go to near 200k miles on vehicles. If treated right a clutch will not wear out. A new clutch would also cost well under $1,000 - more like $500.
Diesel resale value is pretty well known, even with high miles they're still worth good money. I can easily sell my nearly five year old, 85,000 mile TDI for over 60% of what I paid for it. Based on what I'm seeing '98 models with 150k miles selling for on ebay, it would appear I can keep my car another two years/70k miles and only lose maybe $2,000. Will a seven year old hybrid with 150k miles be worth 50% of it's new cost? What is the lifespan of the electric assist motor? I know a gas motor should easily go 200k miles if maintained properly (had two go over that in the last 10 years). Just replaced an electric blower motor in an air handler for our A/C at home and was thinking about this. Considering it was only four years old and the maintenance tech claimed that was about right.....I'm sure the electric motor on a car is built a bit better, but still something I'm curious about.
My guess is that it is going to be more expensive to repair hybrid as the system is much complex than either gasoline or diesel engines.
I live at San Diego and I do not think I will ever own a diesel at California as the regulation is just too strict for diesel.
I do hope diesel becomes some kind of major player in US, so we all can benefit from the competition.
http://www.edmunds.com/townhall/chat/townhallchat.html
6-7pm PT/9-10pm ET. Drop by for live chat with other members. Hope you can join us!
kirstie_h
Roving Host & Future Vehicles Host
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
>
> What is a contruction discussion?
Rather than suggesting a correction to the obvious typo (constructive), the choice was to make a typo of your own. That's interesting.
By the way, at what point do you consider a clutch "worn out"?
JOHN
(I have ITALIC the vehicle I own)
Looking at Edmunds TCO...
04 Prius 4dr Hatchback (1.5L 4cyl CVT) Total Cash Price $24,536 CPM=$0.38
04 Civic Hybrid 4dr Sedan (1.3L 4cyl CVT) Total Cash Price $21,742 CPM=$0.36
04 Insight 2dr Hatchback (1.0L 3cyl G/E Hybrid CVT) Total Cash Price $22,710 CPM=$0.38
04 Jetta GLS TDI 4dr Sedan (1.9L 4cyl Turbodiesel 5M) Total Cash Price $22,307 CPM=$0.36
04 Jetta GLS TDI 4dr Sedan (1.9L 4cyl Turbodiesel 5A) Total Cash Price $23,446CPM=$0.38
But here is what really gets me...
Year 5 Expected resale value... (all things being equal)..
* This is a 5-year estimate (based on 15,000 miles per year). " Edmunds.com
04 Prius $9566
04 Civic Hybrid $9254
04 Insight $8915
04 Jetta GLS TDI 5M $9868
04 Jetta GLS TDI 5A $10,341
so...not only did I pay substantially less for my TDI from the get go (compared to Prius)..estimated resale at the five year mark is $300 higher than the Prius...and higher than both of Hondas Hybrids as well. Given the numbers the Civic Hybrid seems to be a better choice of Hybrid for those looking to save in the pocketbook area and pollute less.
In my opinion, if one is shopping for cheap transportation then a hybrid isn't likely the answer. In the case of Civic, good buys can be had on regular ICE models.
Greenhybrid dot com has a database populated by car owners, real hybrid owner data.
The average tank mpg over 37 HCH's is 47.5MPG.
10 HCH's there are beating the controversial EPA estimates.
The average tank mpg over 57 Prius II's is 49.0MPG.
7 Prius's are beating EPA estimates.
At that rate you will never recover the cost of the car for fuel savings.
I bought my HCH not for fuel $ savings but rather to stop consuming so much fuel. I also bought it because it is top of the line Civic.
I keep my cars for ~10 years. At that time I'll have about 160K miles. Battery warranty is 10yr/150K miles.
I bought it last January and my first few tank averages were around 53MPG, and now that I've learned how to drive it for max economy, I'm achieving 58-60MPG tank averages, +700miles from 13 gallons of gas, tank after tank.
Is this normal? No.
Is it achievable, duplicatable? Yes, by some.
Do I drive slow? No, around the speed limits.
I've found that HCH has a VERY large MPG variation due to conditions and habits. Bad conditions with bad habits and perhaps way down to low 30's MPG.
However,
Better conditions and good driving habits can get you better than 60MPG tanks.
Wow! That's a 30MPG variance!
My Grand Caravan has about 5-7MPG spread.
In my personal case I'll likely break about even in cost over 10 years.
In the mean time I'm enjoying the top '04 Civic, reducing personal consumption and significantly less often fill-ups among other things, and don't have to find a station with diesel fuel.
Diesel cars are also fighting a bad U.S. public reputation.
I'm not sure if diesel cars can make 58-60MPG tank after tank, week after week.
BTW, a cool 4mb Prius- HHC hybrid animation I made:
http://www.steve-dez.us/pj1.mpg
I'll be finishing & upgrading it this weekend.
Sorry, but just look at Toyota.
They got into the SUV game faster than anyone and had more SUV models for sale than anyone else, but are "excused" because they sell the subsidized Prius and keep the hard-core tree-huggers happy.
If the Sierra club ever researched how much polution is created in very poor countries to create the materials to manufacture a hybrid car (motors as well as batteries) they would be recognized as the major environmental disaster in the making that they are.
But we don't have to worry about hybrids in huge numbers, because there aren't enough of the rare elements on this planet to support high volumes. And if the volumes rise, watch the prices of the elements for the "rare-earth magnets" plus cadnium and molybdenum rise dramatically (pushing the cars over $50k).
And invest in mining stocks!
Look at the pollution produced by the life time of the car. Yes, it does generate a little more pollution to produce a HSD car but overall is greener than traditional gas only car.
As you can see, most of the pollution is during driving the vehicle. With diesel engine life time being claimed one million miles, diesel will pollute the most by significant magnitude.
Dennis
I think your assumptions on the diesel are without any grounds. First if the person with a TDI drives his car 1 million miles He will have put out way less pollution than the guy that bought 5-6 new hybrids over that period of time. This is great news for the long lived diesel. Probably something the Europeans have known all along, and the automakers did not want us to know. Thanks for a good post.
I'm using Lightwave 3D 8.0. The ending is still inproccess.
I Plan to make a series of these for posting around the net forums for fun.
Any car that gets a consistant MPG of 45-50 is excellent :-)
Efficient cars are a piece of cake to make, marketing is the problem. Mileage just does not sell to the mainsteam because it is rarely marketed as being cool (there have been a couple of amusing attempts: Hyundai insinuating the size of a vehicle as the invererse of something else, and then later showing people filling up heavy construction vehicles at the gas station). Toyota scores big for marketing - especially when the first generation Prius cost nearly twice as much as an Echo, and barely got better mileage (than a manual Echo), and had about the same room. The new Pruis is better on both accounts though. VW has to overcome peoples stereotypes about diesels, so they have a lot of market to do before they can go mainstream, but they are still selling well.
BTW the Jetta/Golf are not even close to being the most efficient diesels that VW makes. The Lupo sold in Europe (about the size of the original Rabbit) gets 100 mpg.
Fortunately, most people don't want to make compromises just for the sake of MPG. Lupo is a prime example. There quite simply isn't a market here for a very striped down (including safety features), rough ride vehicle like that.
> Echo
It can't compare. The quality of the build is very different from Prius. For example, Prius has fabric from Lexus in it. Echo has the low-end Toyota fabric.
JOHN
Might be a cost issue with all that aluminum too, lol! Course economies of scale are on their side. Six months sales figures: Suburban/YukonXL 84,590, Prius 21,783. Might sell a few more if they got 45mpg!
You just need to convince someone that they could need to tow something someday and they might spend $40,000 on a Suburban (or insert any other large vehicle that tows a lot) instead of $30,000 on a minivan, or $25,000 on a station wagon(under $20k right now for a Subaru wagon). convince them that cloth will be horribly stained if kids spill something and they may spend $1,500 for leather etc. etc. You have to play on their fears that what they have won't be adequate, and people tend to purchase more than they need.
How often do we buy vehicles that do things we will never need because we think we may someday.
With the right marketing people could be convinced that higher mpg matters - or course higher gas prices help too. Detroit just will never market better gas mileage as being a good thing because it runs counter to their mantra (and their entire way of doing business) that bigger is better (and more profitable).
Back to diesel vs hybrids. I believe with the evidence that is coming out about the added pollution of manufacturing a hybrid we can make a real good case for small diesel vehicles being cleaner than hybrids over their respective lives. If the post that USBSeawolf2000 gave us is accurate as I am sure it is, hybrids have a large pollution factor to overcome before they ever get off the truck. If they are in need of new batteries after 150k miles that is another large pollution hit. I truly doubt that a case can be made that hybrids are less polluting than a modern long lived diesel burning ULSD over 200K miles.
You have to choose.
Double standards are not appropriate.
JOHN
So what exactly does that mean?
It seems to imply that you've already proclaimed judgment on the hybrids that haven't even been introduced just, the Camry-Hybrid. Without configuration & pricing detail, that's hardly objective.
It also seems to imply that the problem has been identified, even though no clear goal has ever been stated. Is it to reduce imported oil? Or is it to totally eliminate it? And does that mean we'll still be using our own? What about emissions? To what degree do they need to be reduced? SULEV? PZEV? ZEV?
And what the concept hybrids, those also have ultra-capacitors and those with the ability to be recharged via a plug?
Lastly, what the heck is the time-scale? How long should a design remain in production before the next generation is introduced?
JOHN
If car makes tried to improve mileage they easily could. Put a tall 6th gear on the Civic (keep the other 5 gears the same) and it would get phenomenal highway mileage. Might have to downshift once in a while, but so what you don't have to put the car in 6th gear in the first place if you don't want to.
Long story short - conventional cars can get great mileage. Take the hybrid equip out of an Insight and it will actually get better mileage on the highway, and will have a slight loss in the city, but will still get excellent mileage.
Without well defined goals (like the hydrogen mystery), it's really hard to come up with a solution.
I'm a programmer. So the perfect analogy to this is to create software for a not-well-known audience that will run on a not-well-known platform to solve a not-well-known problem. You've got a rough idea what should be accomplished, but you are bound to fail since you really have no clue how it will truly be needed or how it will actually be used.
Clearly, daily commute congestion is a serious problem. That eliminates the non-hybrid diesel solution for a very large number of people. A gas "full" hybrid, like HSD which can be driven without the engine running at all, easily surpasses engine-only diesel in that situation. So that means there is the potential for multiple solutions, which is a mindset most people have a very dificult time accepting... but it is reality we must face. Different vehicles for different purposes. Hmm. What a concept. Remember when SUV was for "driving off-road with cargo" not "driving alone to the office"?
Longevity is another very real problem, for all models & technologies of vehicles. There is a significant absense of data, nothing solid to draw firm conclusions with beyond the 150,000 mile mark... especially since some people simply desire change at that point, whether the vehicle still runs fine or not. The appeal of improved safety is a very strong vehicle replacement factor too. And of course, there is always a possibility of an accident damaging/destroying the vehicle and a possibility of unacceptably low resale value.
How much oil there really is available and how much of an impact vehicle emissions has is a subject of strong debate. So expecting everyone to agree on the problems is a tremendous challenge. That means taking a large step will be next to impossible. Fortunately, "full" hybrids a big enough step for a large & diverse market to be interested it. So even without agreeing, progress can still be made.
With all the money & politics involved, I sincerely don't expect answers. The solution will simply emerge from the chaos, complete with initial doubt & resistance. Nonetheless, it will happen. HSD is, by far, the current solution with the greatest potential.
JOHN
Although I think the first generation of hybrids offered little gain over conventional gas engines. They are doing better now. The battery situation worries me though. I would actually reccomend a Prius to someone who wanted an automatic, and a TDI to someone who wanted a manual, so I am for both technologies. The main thing is they are showing that high mpg is possible in a livable package. Hopefully this will bring more fuel efficient cars more into the mainstream.
What worries me is that the upcoming hybrids are going to once again add to the HP wars not the MPG wars. The new Accord Hybrid is going to be a 6-cylinder, that may not do much if any better than the I4 Accord on gas (especially the manual). Unfortunately HP is what sells.
Boy would I love to have the European Accord deisel. The one that set all the speed records and still gets 50 mpg. I would take that any day over the upcoming Accord V-6 hybrid.
This misconception originated from the classic Prius. To reduce emissions, the catalytic-converter must be hot for the cleansing of exhaust to occur. The source of that heat was exclusively from the engine. It required gas to be consumed just for the sake of getting the engine hot, so MPG would suffer during the first few minutes of driving. The design is different with the new Prius. Toyota added a 3-liter thermal storage container. When you power-off the hybrid system, hot coolant (anti-freeze) is pumped into that thermos. (It will remain hot overnight and warm for up to 3 days.) Then later when you power-on the hybrid system, that hot coolant is pumped into the head of the engine. Heat for the emissions system is available significantly faster than in the past. That allows the engine to shut off much sooner, which saves gas.
When "short" is referred to, it is usually quite vague, since each person has their own interpretation based on their own traditional driving experiences. For Prius, the Multi-Display reveals efficiency detail. So owners quickly discover what "short" actually means. For many, that is about 30 MPG on the first 5-minute segment shown on the "Consumption" screen. And since both the engine & emissions system are usually still hot when you leave the destination of your short trip (grocery store, bank, retail store, mall, gas station), warm-up is reduced to almost nothing. That first 5-minute segment on the drive home will be yield considerably higher MPG than on the drive there.
In summary, the impression some have of "short" trip MPG is a bit misleading.
JOHN
That was a very thoughtful reply, so I will try to do likewise.
I'm like everyone else I desire change in vehicles. My circumstances also change. Where I run into a roadblock is when I ask myself "why am I getting rid of a car that is in great condition" I maintain it as recommended, it does not pollute anymore than when it was new. Then I ask what is out there that is significantly better than what I have now. I spotted the Prius right off the boat and thought it was a great concept. I drove it and it was more than I expected. My then wife needed a new car as her 1990 Camry was showing it's age. I had her go for a test drive. She could not get past the looks. Maybe if we were still married she would like the new one that is better looking.
I read your response on the short trip aspect of the Prius. That sounds like an interesting solution to the earlier problem. My situation is that I make a couple short trips a day when I am home. Most every place I shop is within 3 miles. Actually one of those GEM electric cars would be adequate. Except the roads all around me are posted 45 mph and those are not legal on roads over 35 mph. Many times I need a small pickup to get plants and cement blocks so I take the Suburban. It is over kill for those trips. The problem is no one sells a small PU that gets much more than 18 mpg around town. Why take the loss on the Suburban for 4 mpg. No way you can justify that. I have an old Mazda 626 beater that runs fine. So as much as I would like to get a new vehicle I cannot justify expense of buying a new vehicle.
The most polluting cars are those that are almost at the end of their life. As you drive more than 150k or more, the engine looses power, efficiency and increases pollution.
Diesel engines' pollution increases after each year of use more than gas engine cars. It is one of the reason diesel cars don't meet CARB emission standard. One year operation of an old(200k+ miles) diesel car probably pollute more than pollution emit by manufacturing a new car. It is an important point to note.
Dennis
Thank you for the good information on the chart. I have a close friend that operates a Smog Test Station in San Diego. According to him a 15 year old car that has it's emissions equipment maintained is nearly as clean as a new vehicle. I would agree that the older an engine gets the more it will have blow-by etc, causing it to pollute more. Is that additional amount anywhere near the amount required to manufacture a new vehicle? To do an overhaul on a diesel is a matter of rings and bearings to bring it back to new specs. That is very insignificant compared to a whole new car. We need to keep our vehicles longer. I think cars are getting like computers. Keep them a couple years and toss them on the recycle pile. This is a very bad trend. I have a 20 foot dumpster filled with computers that no one will accept. They will have to be shipped 2500 miles to the closest recycle facility. How much resources will that take?
That is very unrealistic for those of use that live in the North.
Just look at the oil-change document I published (on my website). The photos of the underside of my 2004 Prius reveal rust already.
The sand blasts and the salt eats. That, along with the wet freezing cycles, tears apart a vehicle. It just plain won't last as long as you'd like. It is a fact of life. Over 90% of the population here replaces their vehicle by year 10. Convincing them not to would be nearly impossible.
It's a reality you cannot change without actually doing something to prevent the deterioration of the vehicle too. What are *YOU* going to do about it?
JOHN
Your downplay of "every few years" doesn't accomplish anything. Those are just words, not something attributed to an action. Anyway, 9 years is actually a long time... just ask anyone going to school or having to put up with an administration that doesn't support their needs.
Action, not words.
For example, maintain a spreadsheet documenting your MPG.
JOHN
Your quote that 90% of the population replaces their vehicle by year 10 has no basis in fact and I suspect it is anecdotal evidence from the world of John.
These days rust is not that big of an issue. Had a '76 Volare that rusted through the fender in less than 2 years.
No matter, an attempt to discredit still doesn't change the statistic. It is still correct.
Also, your very misleading terminology of "average" rather than "sent to the junkyard" has been addressed already too.
No matter to that either, they are just words, not action.
JOHN
Where do you get this information. There is no way in the world cars in MN are on the average newer than they are in CA. That is a big part of my gripe. People in CA drive them two years and trade off to get the latest gadgets. Sound familiar. I imagine our used car lots have newer cars on average than your citizenry is driving. The only old cars I see are driven up from Mexico and most of them are newer in the last 10 years. Not keeping a car until it is used UP is a problem everywhere.