Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
The Future of Hybrid Technology
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I don't see the 50% being possible before 2010, unless the government declares marshal law and orders manufacturers to proceed at "flank speed" regardless of the cost.
Even if 50% of production in 2010 was this new ICE technology, how long does it take to replace 230M vehicles. Meanwhile the vehicle fleet is growing to 300M by 2020? And the economy grows 2% a year, and say we keep energy growth to 1% by conservation. Do you think in 2020 when we're nearly getting to fully implement this new ICE technology that we'd be using less energy than today.
My answer is no. The Earth's population, and economic growth, and desires will ensure that energy usage continues growing; the only thing that will limit usage is economics or a decline in supplies, which is inevitable, if all we have is current technology.
If we are to survive with an advanced technological society and an Earth capable of supporting billions of people, we're going to have to be optimistic that some physicist at Lawrence Livermore, Stanford, MIT CERN, or such finds a way to tap a new basically limitless energy source.
By the way, if wherever you live gets too hot, there's plenty of inexpensive land in the Dakotas, Montana, Minnesota, etc. Canada might even become habitable and its land more useful for agriculture. And Alaska is basically empty.
The issue of fossil fuels to me is....Detroit shoving gas guzzling SUV's down our throat. Well, at least down the affluent society that could care less how much fuel they squander. Hybrids are the beginning of the smart & green choice which I see you agree with. If our good government can only see the forest for the trees they would embrace the new technology and encourage the trend.
I like the true story of ME pulling into a gas-station a few months ago when gas was really way up there over two bucks. A lady was pouring PREMIUM gas into her (get this) HUMMER. She asked me about my "cute" car. I responded with the usual hybrid info, you know...450 miles to a tank...50 plus mpg's and how effient the dang thing was, but the nozzle stopped at $13.29 and as I left her she was still pumping with the pump reading $75.00. I SMILED!
I don't buy it. If people did not want SUVs & PU trucks Detroit would build what they wanted that fit into the parameters the EPA sets for them. Detroit is sitting on a narrow fence that Toyota & the other Asian car companies are not faced with. Detroit has workers that get higher wages than the workers in the Toyota factories here. They have better retirement plans. Toyota with it's "Goody two Shoes" image still builds two of the worst polluting vehicles on the planet. They just happen to have more cash available for image building vehicles like the Prius. This is a company that in one year is doubling the capacity of their midsize PU trucks to 225k units for US sale. They act like it is a big deal to jump from 12k to 15k units per month on the Prius. Why aren't they building a new factory in the USA to make the Prius? They are building a new one in San Antonio to build PU trucks. It is probably because they would never get the EPA to sign off on the additional pollution inherent in the manufacturing of the Prius.
As far as Hummer drivers with a $75 gas fillup, she must have been blond. The Hummer2 uses regular unleaded and has a 32 gallon tank. Unless your gas was over $2.50 per gallon it should have been running out on the ground. I doubt the money was important to her, just as it is insignificant to the average Prius driver. People that make $100k plus per year do not have a budget where gas makes that much difference.
As to your statment that the people in the 100K bracket don't care about fuel costs...well lets see what happens when gas goes over $3.50. Wanna bet which cars are going to be popular and which ones are going to be dust collectors?
Culliganman(stickin with my PRIUS)
P.S. I think that she was envying me not visa-versa, at least that's what it sounded like as I drove off. By the way...If your interested. There are huge discounts on those HUMMERS and assorted GUZZLERS if you want to bail them out and help Detroit. Sorry.. No discounts on Prius though.
What good is it to pay your people better if your product is inferior? Ford (Detroit) is the pollution leader.
quote Gagrice-"Toyota with it's "Goody two Shoes" image still builds two of the worst polluting vehicles on the planet."-end quote
And nearly the greenest on the planet - they earn a pass. The Union of Concerned Scientists says:
"The new Prius will be the greenest mass-market car ever to hit the streets," said Jason Mark, Clean Vehicles director at the Union of Concerned Scientists. "By combining extremely low emissions of smog-forming pollutants with high fuel economy, the new Prius is a shining example of the gains possible with available technology."
quote Gagrice-"They just happen to have more cash available for image building vehicles like the Prius. This is a company that in one year is doubling the capacity of their midsize PU trucks to 225k units for US sale. They act like it is a big deal to jump from 12k to 15k units per month on the Prius. Why aren't they building a new factory in the USA to make the Prius? They are building a new one in San Antonio to build PU trucks. "-end quote
Car companies build cars in locations which help them make money. Toyota execs are not dumb, thus their $40 billion in cash or whatever huge number they have. If it will make them money to build the Prius in the USA, they will, and if not, they wont. It has nothing to do with anything other than that.
quote Gagrice-"It is probably because they would never get the EPA to sign off on the additional pollution inherent in the manufacturing of the Prius."-end quote
You are exagerrating that "additional pollution" factor. I posted a PDF file a few days ago that showed that the "lifetime pollution" for the Hybrid was far lower than the non-hybrid similar car, even with the pollution being merely "slightly higher" in the mfg phase. Only VERY SLIGHTLY higher. The chart I saw used "giga joules" as the gauge, and the manufacturing process had Hybrids at 68 and non-hybrids at 60, but at the end, in the Lifetime measurement, the Hybrids were at 170 and the gasser at 265.
So there is no "hybrid manufacturing means more pollution" factor that would keep Toyota or any other hybrid manufacturer in trouble with the EPA. ( Ford makes the Escape Hybrid here. )
Oil prices shoot above $ 50 / barrel. Expect more people flocking to Hybrids.
Maybe you'd like to answer my previous question of when we could expect 50% new vehicle production to be hybrid? Then we could start calculating how quickly the entire fleet will be converted.
Personally, my property tax and insurance costs decrease every year on my V-8 Firebird and that money pays for any increase in fuel prices. Gasoline costs are not really a major consideration if you're buying $25K+ vehicles. The people who will be hurt are minimum wage to $15/hr workers who are barely getting by.
An increase in gas to even $3/gal. will result in what a $600 - $1000/year increase? That's not much to someone laying down $60K for an Escalade or a Hummer. Heck, I probably lost more than that in the stock market today, and I definitely have to work for a living.
People are still affected by the electric vehicle phenomenon of the late 1990s, and they STILL think the Hybrids "have to be plugged in" or "you cannot drive them through water" or "it will only go 200 miles before it has to be recharged."
For some unknown reason, those are STILL misconceptions that the USA public has about Hybrids.
And again, almost all news stories about hybrids include a quote from some poor soul who cannot get "anywhere near" EPA MPG numbers.
Not for everyone, some people may calculate.
GM has reduced the MSRP of some vehicles (with V8 engine) by nearly $ 1,500.
Reason : People are turning away from such gas-guzzlers.
When extra $ 30 billion (3 billion barrels * extra $10) goes away from this country, it bites.
But here is a true parallel "full" hybrid.
- Electric Motor at highway speed (>65mph)
- -or- Combustion Engine at highway speed
- -and- has a plug for recharging, so people can drive to work every day without burning a single drop of mideast oil
http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=article&storyid=312
troy
me: I can run my car without burning a single drop of Mideast Oil too. Just buy oil from Mexico. ;-)
Since many areas of the country are asked to conserve electric usage, plugging more than a few cars in, would be disastrous. And before you say those cars will be recharged off renewable energy such as wind and solar power plants, I'd like to see when those would be built. Since the population of the U.S. increases a few million people each year, we need a few dozen power plants built just to keep up with growth, never mind new applications for electricity.
Not EVERY hybrid deal is an economic mistake. Kernick, please use your vast and impressively acquired education to analyze this:
I bought a 2004 used HCH and there was a comparable used EX on the lot which had a bunch of options I did not care about really, but was the closest thing in regard to "creature comforts and options" as the Hybrid.
I negotiated both cars, and the "out the door" price difference was $1524.
Figure in the $225 tax break the HCH gets and the final difference was $1299.
Assuming I would have gotten EPA for the EX (I do almost exclusively city driving) which is 32 MPG and the Hybrid is 46, that's a 14 MPG difference.
Assuming an 18,000 mile year, my first year, I save $345 a year in fuel. At that rate, the "hybrid premium" is paid off in less than 4 years. (3.76 years)
Look for a deal like that and get yourself a Hybrid!!
PS Dont try to play the "buy a DX/LX/Corolla/Neon" card either - those cars are not in the "creature comfort league" of the EX and the Hybrid, and certainly not as clean in emissions as the Hybrid.
me: yes I was going to quallify my post and say people "shouldn't be buying" $25K+ vehicles if gas is a cost issue. But banks and car companies don't mind if people spend their last penny on transport. A $10K 2 year old car would do them fine.
GM has reduced the MSRP of some vehicles (with V8 engine) by nearly $ 1,500.
me: I read that article yesterday, and the reason they did that was because the sticker price was higher than that of Dodge and Ford in similar models. The sticker price can scare people off. So rather than have a sticker of $35K with $8K off in rebates and package discounts; you'll see a more palatable $33.5K with $6.5K in rebates and discounts.
Reason : People are turning away from such gas-guzzlers.
you: you're right that there will be some effect away from larger or sports vehicles. But it is the same population and society that created the demand in the 1st place. When gas is expensive there's a slight shift to economy; when its relatively cheap we want power and speed.
What you proved is the Hybrid Civics do not hold their value as well as the standard Civic. That made it a viable option. If you keep the car for 4 years you will be just past the break even point. IF the HCH at that time has stayed linear with the Civic EX resale value, you will have done good. Most hybrid owners will not fare as well as you.
Actually, again, Nope, because as I mentioned, the EX had other options that raised it's resale value up to that close to within the Hybrid, but those options were things I did not need or want.
Culliganman
Tuesday, January 25, 2005 at 05:00 JST
HONG KONG — Fortune magazine said Monday it has named Fujio Cho, president of Japan's leading automaker Toyota Motor Corp, as Asia Businessman of the Year for 2004. Fortune chose Cho for leading a company whose model lineup features some of the U.S. market's most popular vehicles.
http://tinyurl.com/5hlox
and:
It's mostly to groom a relative of the founder for the CEO job in a few years:
http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=101819
http://www.inc.com/articles/2005/02/drives.html
and:
"50 hybrid models on the way":
http://tinyurl.com/6k3x6
Culliganman
"TOYOTA FTX HYBRID CONCEPT
Toyota is hinting strongly at what the next generation of the Tundra should look like with its FTX concept on display at the show.
To be built in Texas, there is little chance that it won't be big, but the FTX is also pointing another — rather unexpected — direction.
Mounted on the truck's C-pillar is the word "Hybrid." Perhaps a gasoline-and-electric powertrain may be offered when the new Tundra bows next year.
This is only speculation on my part, but Toyota Canada does market the country's best-selling hybrid, the Prius sedan, and demand continues to grow. So who knows?"
http://tinyurl.com/6krew
So the U.S. population will increase 33%. So our energy usage should increase similarly, because those people are going to use hot water, have refrigs, cook, heat, AC, and buy manufactured goods. Now if hybrid vehicles are prevalent then by 2050, maybe we'll only be using 15% - 20% more energy. But energy usage will increase with population, and fossil fuel usage accelerates.
You have it backwards. The EMD engines are/were 2 stroke. The reason the ALCO were so smokey was their turbocharger design.
Culliganman(toot-toot)
Interestingly, EMD has managed to make the 710 "Tier 2" compliant for emissions and it's being used in the latest SD70ACe model.
BTW all recent "EMD" locomotives were actually produced in London, ONT. Both the London and LaGrange facilities, along with the EMD name and products were recently sold to a consortium of Greenbriar and Berkshire Partners.
"Toyota Motor (TM: news, chart, profile) followed with an 11.1 percent rise to 163,059 vehicles sold during the month. Toyota brand cars rose 22.4 percent, with the hybrid Prius continuing its torrid sales pace -- up 120 percent from last year to 7,078 vehicles"
http://tinyurl.com/7ykov
Wasn't Ford able to go from no production to 400K or 500K units in a year on the Mustang? And that was using manufacturing technology (no computers) of that era.
It seems awful strange that Toyota or other manufacturers can't seem to repeat what Ford did 40 years ago!
Look if hybrids are to have ANY effect on fuel usage; ANY! manufacturers need to start making them by the millions not a couple of hundred thousand units total.
They already are having an effect - look at the forum on this site about "lost gas tax revenue" that many of the states are crying about.
States like California are producing "stats" which show lost revenue, and are blaming hybrids.
Sure, the effect right now is small, but it will grow...
Funny, nobody said that all those "GAS HOG" SUV'S (Hummers, Escalades, Excursions and the like) should pay a penalty for excessive gas consumption did they? That makes more sense to me. Every time I'm in a gas station buying my usual 8-9 gallons of gas I resent the Gas Guzzler owner who flaunts his massive behemuth while dumping 35+ gallons of fuel into his bottomless tank. Then the beast pulls out to go 300 miles (if he's lucky) till he comes back to repeat this sadistic ritual. I, on the other hand, won't be back for the better part of 500 miles to sip my next tummy full.
Won't it be ironic in 15-20 yrs if there does become a shortage of fossil fuels and we can all ask the "GAS GUZZLERS" to bend over so we can thank them for their selfish thoughtlessness.
Culliganman(lets level the playing field)
Just remember you are a "GAS GUZZLER" to the person riding a bicycle or taking the bus or other mass transit. The Hummers are paying 5 times as much in road tax as you are. I can guarantee they do not do 5 times the damage. Maybe not as much as those hard little Prius tires that dig into the Hot pavement. If you were truly concerned about fuel usage you would have bought a high mileage VW TDI and found your local biodiesel dealer. Then you would not be using any Non-renewable resource. If you drove your Prius over 13k miles last year you used more gas than I did in my Suburban. We should all try to drive less and walk or ride our bikes more.
Then what is the reason many roads in California are barred to vehicles over 6000 lb.? (Or would you contend that road damage only starts to be a problem above 6000 lb.?
jprice '05 Silver, #1, 2800 miles, [non-permissible content removed]. mileage 46MPG
http://tinyurl.com/5lro6
Moved to taxation by the mile.
That is just...off the chart.....
Just because Toyota says the "average Prius buyer's household income is above 100K" does
NOT
NOT
NOT
mean that All or even MOST Hybrid owners are "wealthy."
Sure, some of them are, but last I checked, a household income of slightly over $100K does not make anyone "wealthy."
Let me ask you this: are "wealthy" people smarter with their money, in general? If so, does that mean that only "smart money managers" buy Hybrids? No to both.
Let's take a Poll:
Any Hybrid owners here at Edmunds consider themselves WEALTHY?
My vote: nope. I make enough to pay the bills and keep my kids fed and happy.
Second - the upcoming Supra (rumor has it coming for the 2007 year at the earliest) will: a) not look anything like the Volta, and b) will not be a hybrid.
Sorry guys.
It's Toyota saying that, not me. And to doubt them is not too smart, since they seem to know what they are doing.
And I'm pretty sure diesels outsell Hybrids in the USA right now, don't they? Don't they already have 2-3 percent of the market? Hybrids have less than 1 percent.
Diesels are NEVER going to be a big hit in the USA. Too much to overcome.
First that 2-3 percent includes PU trucks not just cars. I would be surprised if VW sold 50,000 diesels last year. MB sold all 5000 E320 CDIs that they brought in.
You may be right about diesels in America. I think I am right about hybrids never getting widespread sales. THEY are TOO expensive for the return you get at the pump. They sell to the upper middle class for a couple reasons. High tech & Green is an easy sell to the market segment that Toyota has targeted. You keep referring to your own situation. I take it your not in the demographic that was targeted. You bought your HCH very wisely after it was slightly used. You got it for a good price and will more than likely benefit financially. Not all will fare so well as you may. The few that jumped on the HAH bandwagon at $35k plus have already lost $8k to $10k of that price. If they keep the car forever it makes little difference. If they sell in 2-3 years they will have a BIG shock.
Until hybrids can be sold at a slight few hundred dollars premium over a comparable ICE only car, they will not get widespread acceptance. All the hybrids together will have to sell 170,000 to break past the 1% of sales. They have a long way to go, looking at the first two months of the year. Even the best selling Prius will have a hard time reaching the 120k planned for the US.
Do you think the major car companies are run by idiots, or by smart guys and gals? Do you think that overall, they make frequent unwise business decisions, or do they properly take their shareholder's future into account? Do you think they are just sheep who follow the leader (Toyota) and blindly develope Hybrids just to compete, when in YOUR REALITY there will never be a market for the cars?
If you agree with me that they DO know their business and they are pretty smart, then why on earth would so many Hybrid cars/SUVs be in the works to come out in upcoming years?
I think the market for hybrids (waiting lists, Escapes to fleets, etc.) has been shown already, and the car makers are addressing the short term problem of high gas prices by providing buyers with more efficient vehicles. Hybrids do not have to be 45+ MPG; they can be "more efficient than the comparable gas model" and still be effective to the buyers. Hybrids will certainly not end the fossil fuel problem, but they are the BEST stepping stone we have in the meanwhile, until fuel cell and electric technology mature and come down in costs.
The cost premium issue to me should not even be an issue. Nobody cares that the Prius MSRPs at 21K - why should you then care that the Civic Hybrid MSRPs at 21K when "other" Civics MSRP lower? You are getting what you pay for - a better car that will allow you to keep more money in your pocket over the long haul. If you want a cheaper Toyota than the Prius, buy a bare bones Corolla and get a cheaper car.
But don't try to act like paying more for a hybrid is "throwing away money" because it is not - you get a better car, with newer technology which provides incredible benefits, and you can care much less about the future of gas prices.
And I dont care how FAST hybrids become mainstream - they WILL because they are the best option in the nearer-than-ever future days of $3 to $4 per gallon gas.
Toyota's Vitz 5-Door Hatchback is a big hit in Japan with 31,000 actual orders against an estimated 10,000. It has
* Start / Stop feature.
* Li-Ion Battery.
* CVT transmission.
It qualifies as Mild Hybrid. Since many people cannot pay the $ 3,000 upfront cost for a Full Hybrid, this Mild Hybrid is a choice for them. The same system (powerplant) can be applied
in Yaris in Europe and Scion in USA.
With improvements in Battery tech and decline in cost to 2K, we can have Diesel-Electric Hybrid
Further decline in cost to 1K, we can have CNG-Electric Hybrid.
We need all fuels with Hybrid versions in all.
Oil prices have hit $ 55 / barrel.
http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/03/markets/oil.reut/index.htm
Going back to telling me I'm a "gas guzzler too" is ludicrous. I drive a scooter for goffering around town (3K a yr) and I motorcycle another 4-5K when I'm not driving my Prius 11-12K a yr. I'd buy a diesel car if it could perform like my hybrid (quietly too) but they just don't. Gas abounds throughout the country while diesel pumps can still be difficult to locate. Sometimes diesel fuel is more expensive than gas (for no apparent reason other than oil co.'s do some gouging of their own).
Show me a diesel car with an 8 yr--100,000 mile warrantee on their drive train like Toyota's hybrid drive-train. Show me a diesel that's quiet like the hybrids and finally show me a diesel car with the "CVT" tranny like the Prius.
Let's not forget the diesel fuel gelling problem in the sub-zero winters that can put you out of commision. I know, I've been there.
Culliganman ( Hybrids--Catch the wave)
PS- I ride a bike too (weather permitting)
Man, isn't that the understatement of the year.
Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes, lol. ;-)
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
The Subaru Crew Chat is on tonight. Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
No, we don't all want hybrids. I don't care if oil is $150 per barrel. The more I learn about the various hybrid technologies the less I like them. I was a real fan when the Prius came out in 2000. After seeing the direction it has gone. It is not for everyone. I feel the Prius is designed as a 150k mile throw away car. As someone that keeps a car for the long haul that does not fit my needs. It is a fact that the hybrid cars as a whole will not save you any money over comparable non-hybrid cars. None of the other automakers are jumping in with a mass production mindset. Even Toyota is dragging their feet from all indications. Where is the future in that. Just read the Prius troubles forum. Too many reports of the car just quitting out on the highway. Some could have caused serious accidents. I find NO excuse for that kind of failure in this day and age. If we got several reports here how many failures went unreported? You can be lab rats for Toyota, I'll pass....
What indications? There are NO INDICATIONS that Toyota is dragging their feet on the Hybrids ! They have TWO NEW ONES coming out in 2005 !!! How is that dragging feet? They have upped the allotment to the USA to 100,000 Priuses in 2005 !!
Toyota is absolutely not dragging their feet on Hybrids !!
quote gagrice-"Prius is not for everyone."-end quote
Absolutely it is NOT for everyone - and no car or truck built in the history of mankind fits every possible need - but Hybrid TECHNOLOGY *CAN BE* for everyone !! If you need a Suburban, hybridizing it with the right technology mix might give you an additional 15% MPG gain and extra torque with no downside !!
quote gagrice-"Too many reports of the car just quitting out on the highway. Some could have caused serious accidents."-end quote
ANY CAR can die on a freeway and cause an accident - that is not a Hybrid phenomenon EITHER !!
quote gagrice-"As someone that keeps a car for the long haul that does not fit my needs."-end quote
Pure speculation on your part !! There are priuses in the world with more than 150K miles which have not had battery replacements !!
And, also, only 5-8% of car owners try to keep cars 200,000 miles - you cannot plan an oil free future by planning for such a small percentage of buyers !!
(gosh this one got me going.)
The only car that ever did that to me was an AMC Pacer I rented in Los Angeles. I would would put the Prius in the same category for sure.
At $45 / barrel, the sales of SUV's & PU's of GM, Ford has tumbled.
At $150, Uncle Sam will ban the sale/usage of Excursions/Suburbans.
So better be careful. Sales of Prius & Escape Hybrid in Feb-2005 is more than that of Jan-2005. Expect even better performance in Mar-2005.
Toyota is making more PU's because they built the plant for it. Now they are planning to build a plant for Prius, so around 2007/2008 timeline, American made Prius will sell in 100,000's.
However if the PU sales fall in the face of rising gas prices, they retool that plant to make Prius. And their Green Score will rise.
Suburban down 35 %
Tahoe down 23 %
Yukon XL down 21 %.
http://motortrend.com/features/news/112_news30/
Escape Hybrid posted Inifinity %, since it was not there in Feb-2004. Expect more Hybrid models to join.