By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
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.