You wanna get to know a car(especially one such as the Prius) get behind the wheel. The hybrids have alot going for themselves only they seem to get a bad rap for alot of "what if?" The point is...If the public wants to know(and they do), they will stand in line, pay MSRP, drive hundreds of miles to get one and praise them (all the above a reality). There aren't very many cars that have the ability to sweep across the automotive world with this kind of success. Sometimes it seems that in your desperation to critisize hybrids you grab at anything that can be contrived to dispell their popularity. Hybrids are here to stay just like SUV's are questionably fading fast. You have often contended that hybrids have yet to prove themselves. Well, I'm here to tell you that the proof is on the table. Those that want to know about hybrids are on the increase and the knowledge is on the rise at an ever fast pace. Is there reason to not by a hybrid? Only the speculation of "what ifs" & erronious info that simply lacks foundation. If you were right then why all the attention toward hybrids that have jammed the car world these last 3 yrs? railroadjames(here they come)
As for the future of the Honda Civic Hybrid, it is getting "long in the tooth" as of today, but is redesigned for new version this fall. The new version is purported to be "more powerful and more fuel efficient" than the current model.
As for the current model, this past Friday I drove my 2004 manual tranny Civic Hybrid from Phoenix AZ to Tucson AZ, speed limit mostly 75 MPH on the way there, and I drove anywhere from 60-75 mph, mostly around 68 mph. Then once at Tucson, I drove in and around the city for a few more miles over a two day span.
When I got ready to drive back to Phoenix, I filled up at Sam's Club for the $2.019 price, 3.482 gallons for 195 miles. That comes to 56.00 miles per gallon for that 195 miles.
So even "long in the tooth" Civic Hybrids are capable of amazing numbers !!!!
Crossovers accounted for 41 percent of total SUV sales last year, Pipas says, up from virtually zero in 1995.
Escape is one of the best selling CUV's. And Escape Hybrid also has some share. After all Hybrid CUV's make some sense as they offer lot of space and also mileage.
I think that anyone who actually buys and drives a hybrid - any hybrid - falls in love with a hybrid. The astounding Consumer Reports "I-would-buy-one-again" figures for the Prius and the Civic Hybrid attest to this falling-in-love phenomenon.
It's sort of like having someone see you walk down the street with your 20 year old beauty queen, and then having them tell you, repeatedly, "You aren't having any fun. You aren't having any fun."
They hope!!
I wonder why some people have no passion, or are afraid of having any? I imagine it has to do with a fear of loss of control. Or to putting dead cold money over human emotions and excitement.
It's Tuesday, so that means it's time for the first of our two weekly chat sessions. Tonight we'll talk Mazda and anything else that happens to come up!
For me it was an epiphany of "Why don't they make all cars like this!"
When you actually drive one every day and see just how well it works, and how in many ways it's just so much smarter a design than conventional cars, it becomes easy to turn into an evangelist.
For me it was an epiphany of "Why don't they make all cars like this!"
I think the answer is simple they are too expensive to manufacture. I don't see how anyone that drives less than 15k miles a year could justify the extra cost.
Then for me it is easier. They do not build a hybrid that is capable of anything but hauling people. If you need a PU or the ability to tow a trailer, your out of luck. If you need to get to your cabin through deep snow or mud too bad. I am taking a wait and see attitude. If a practical diesel or hybrid comes along with the capabilities I expect. I would be inclined to buy it. I really could car less if gas goes to $10 a gallon. I am not going to buy a vehicle that will only do some of what I need just to be part of the "Green" crowd. I think the diesels are going to sneak in and steal the thunder out of the hybrids. Here is our next vehicle purchase for this summer's vacation. It gets 22 mpg and has a kitchen, toilet, shower & bed. Plus it will tow 5000 lbs. What hybrid will do that?
Yeah... the light comes in through the fiber optics... and the heat goes out through the same path (glass conducts heat).
Since *most* of our energy is spent on either heating and cooling, it would be wiser to build windowless buildings, so the energy can not escape through the glass.
"With a more capable battery pack extending EV operation of the car, the Valence/EnergyCS prototype delivers up to 180 mpg for an average commute of 50–60 miles per day. The vehicle will also be part of the Monte-Carlo Fuel Cell & Hybrid Rallye on April 2."
Chevy Silverado mild hybrid truck will tow that weight.
me: and how many hundreds of thousands are there on the lots this year to buy? and if the price is +2K or more and you get 1-2 more mpg why would i pay that much? Why wouldn't someone buy the diesel version instead.?
In general the challenge is for hybrids to pay for the fuel they save in 3-4 years. And 2nd they can't sell for MSRP while the regular gas version sells for many thousands less than MSRP. For instance if the Silverado costs $30K MSRP but is discounted to $23K and the hybrid Silverado is priced at $32K but there is no discount, that's what makes it so hard to go buy the hybrid.
If you want a real example take a look at what the Escape hybrid is selling for - about $28K right? Now I know the Mazda Tribute which is the same as the Escape sells for $26.5K sticker with V-6, 4WD, moonroof, full power, but is discounted to $20K. There's an $8K difference, and the cheaper V-6 model has more power, more towing, and is less complex (reduced future failure potential).
kernick, You make some good points and I hope prices will come down. I've never really looked at the Escape before but just visited fordvehicles.com and looked at the hybrid vs non-hybrid. I think the best comparison is the hybrid vs non-hybrid model and not to compare with a completely different manufacturer.
Most of the options are standard on the hybrid Escape which goes for $27-28K, and you'd have to go with the Limited version to get about the same options, about 27K, so there's about $1K difference.
I've just looked around the web and it seems that most Escapes are getting low 20's MPG, while most hybrid versions get almost 30, and quite a few in the mid 30's.
I think the options vs cost vs MPG pretty much even itself out in the long run, especially if one does alot of driving and/or keeps their vehicles a long time. But I can't see the justification for someone who buys new cars every 3-5 years, as some do.
About my HCH purchase: Car reviews, magazine reviews, many forums, friends etc suggested the technology isn't "quite there yet" and will never get back the hybrid premium vs the regular version. Still the same, I watched the Insight capabilities and since my car is built around the same technology with no "issues" I went for it and glad I did.
The premium I paid for my hybrid will evaporate in year two. Can you imagine the look on people's face when I tell them I did almost 64MPG today, and my Civic will go for almost 700 miles on 11 gallons of gas?
You are the Mileage Man 64 MPG = 25 km/l. Civic is the average man's hybrid. I expect the 2006 model to come in 5 & 3 door versions as they will compete with Prius in the passenger/cargo space.
In the matter of "diesels sneaking in and stealing the thunder from hybrids," let's not get too hasty.....:)
(Let's just imagine that there is not 50+ years of data indicating diesel exhaust is a murderer.)
First of all, "clean diesel" in the USA means that the low sulfur blend is going to have to be completely embedded into the distribution chain in the whole country. Meaning that no matter WHERE you stop to fill up your 2007 Honda Accord i-CTDi, you can get the low sulfur blend.
I'm thinking this distribution system saturation might take more than a couple of years to complete.
That means "complete availability of clean diesel fuel" in the USA will be a major hurdle for the "clean diesel" pushers.
In the meantime, hundreds of thousands of Hybrids will keep rolling along, with more models coming out year by year, and more and more people realizing their awesome capabilities, etc.
I think "clean diesels" and hybrids will co-exist just fine, but not for a few more years.....
That Airstream product will put you back by 71K. What stuff you have that weighs 5000 lbs. Is it something like a electrical turbine or a steel roll.
An average household does not have anything thats so heavy. Only when they move from one house to another, they have such a heavy stuff and a person with house will not move just like that.
"I'm thinking this distribution system saturation might take more than a couple of years to complete."
Just out of curiousity.....why?
How is the changeover from the current diesel blend to a low sulfer blend any more complicated than the current changeoever from winter blend gas to a summer blend gas? Refineries changeover the blend, it goes out in the tankers and into the storage tanks at your neighborhood service station. As the 'old' blend is consumed, the new low-sulfer blend goes in it's place? For what possible reason would it take 'more than a couple of years'? Are you thinking that, for some reason, service stations would be installing additional tanks/pumps so they could pump two different blends of diesel?
From what I read a few months ago, "clean diesel" took a few years to get fairly embedded into the European fuel system....It is still not even complete over there....Seems only reasonable based on that data that it might take time here too...
I guess the first thing would be to convince ALL the major refineries and distributors that the clean diesel is necessary and is the right thing to do. Many times, it becomes difficult to get a lot of separate entities to agree on ANYTHING....
you'd have to go with the Limited version to get about the same options, about 27K, so there's about $1K difference.
me: that's sticker. If you want I'll give you a Boston area dealer's website and you can go see that the Mazda Tribute 4x4 V-6 power everything sells for $19,999. The reality is an $8K diference.
What does a HCH sell for anyone - I see sticker $19,900. I heard a radio ad this morning where Civic DX's are $9,700. It's hard to make up that sort of difference.
I think the only way you'll get the low-sulfer diesel blends going AT ALL is through legislation; the same way we get winter blends and summer blends of gasoline. The hard part I'll agree is getting the changeover started in the first place. But once it is begun, I don't see any reason for it to take more than a few months.
Invoice for the STRIPPEST Civic DX is about $12,126 - so if you want a stripped down Civic DX, and can get one for $9700, then go for it. Just remember:
The Civic Hybrid is WAY WAY more car than a stripped DX.....:)
The lowest print ad I have seen for a New 2005 Civic Hybrid manual tranny is $18,398.
If someone's looking to buy a Civic DX thinking it's the same car as an HCH then they are wasting their money.
A stripped, basic Echo with roll up windows and no A/C goes for about $10,000. I'd bet you could get a discount and save even more. It gets about the same MPG as a DX and will save them money. This might be a logical choice for someone who can't tell the difference between a DX vs HCH.
Is there a difference between an Echo and an HCH? A DX to HCH? I'd say so.
The best comparison is the EX, its closest sister. Last week while at the dealer for an oil change I looked around the lot and found many nicely equipped EX's in the 19-$21K, right there in the hybrid $ range. The only advantage I could see from the sticker is a radio upgrade, but still the EX doesn't have many things that come Std. on the HCH.
If you don't want to compare an Escape Hybrid to it's non-hybrid sister, and instead compare it to the Mazda Tribute that's fine.
But aren't you really comparing a loaded Escape in general to the Tribute? I haven't researched the two but I'd bet there are massive differences. They even look different.
If you don't want to compare an Escape Hybrid to it's non-hybrid sister, and instead compare it to the Mazda Tribute that's fine.
me: Ford owns Mazda. And the Tribute and the Escape are the same basic vehicle mechanically, just as a Matrix and Vibe are the same vehicle. Same engine, same transmission, brakes ... slightly different style. From cars.com: "The Tribute was developed by Mazda in Japan, with manufacturing cooperation from Ford, which uses the same platform and unibody construction for its Escape SUV. Ford will build the left-hand-drive Tribute in Kansas City, Mo."
you: If someone's looking to buy a Civic DX thinking it's the same car as an HCH then they are wasting their money.
me: The point of buying a hybrid as many have pointed out is to save money - the hybrid does this by saving money on gas. But if your aim is to save money, then the much lower cost DX is the way to go. If the main objective in my car purchase is saving money, I would care about lowest overall cost, regardless of the differences in options. Yes the HCH is better optioned, but that goes against the goal of saving money. An HCH might save you $40/month in gas, but your car payment (48 months) will be $150-$200/month higher. Again, if you care about saving $40, why do you then ignore $150-200? It makes no sense.
Conversion to low sulfur gasoline took a long time primarily due to cost. Conversion to low sulfur diesel will take another few years due to cost. To remove sulfur from refinery streams, a process called hydrodesulfurization is used (basically add hydrogen, pressure and a catalyst to the gasoline or diesel cut). This results in the formation of hydrogen sulfide, which is then usually neutralized with base and then oxidized (hydrogen sulfide is extremely toxic in addition to foul smelling so it must be converted to something else). No refinery wants to absorb the cost of reducing the sulfur because it will cut into the bottom line. There are still many complications in getting to very low sulfur diesel (read for example, Babich IV; Moulijn, JA Fuel 82 (2003) 607-631).
Saving money is only part of the equation. Reducing fuel consumption while also dramatically reducing my contribution to global air pollution also plays into it.
I mean, if Saving Money was really the only issue, take the bus or walk. It's cheaper than owning any car could ever be.
However if you want to stay fixated on dollars, after the federal and state tax incentives ($2K fed deduction, $1.5K state _credit_) the payoff period in fuel savings (plus reduced maintenance costs due to the longer service interval for the hybrid) becomes even more reasonable. Insurance for the Escape versus the Volvo wagon it replaced was basically a wash.
Many folks are going to turn to FE cars as the gas prices rise.
I would say the Civic GX and Phill in your garage would be the ideal commuter setup. You never go to the gas station. As long as your commute is less than 200 miles round trip. One owner is reporting the price is half that of unleaded regular.
Saving money is only part of the equation. Reducing fuel consumption while also dramatically reducing my contribution to global air pollution also plays into it.
you: yes, you can reduce YOUR contribution of fuel consumption, but you really aren't going to reduce global consumption or global pollution. The way the energy markets are today, with every barrel being bought that can be produced, your not using the oil, only means someone else will. If somehow by magic we all had hybrids tomorrow in the U.S. and saved oil, within a year the amount of oil being used would be back to the same point, as industry and people in China and developing Asia used it - and with much less stringent environmental controls then we do.
All fossil fuels in the world will eventually be used. Hybrids only change that date by a few years. It's little difference in the grand scheme of things, relative to the history of mankind.
Are you saying that the overall value of a stripped basic DX (or Echo) is the same as an HCH?
me: no, I said the cost of ownership was much less for a Civic DX than a HCH. That is a fact. You can measure the dollars, adding and subtracting them.
The value of a item is based on personal preferences, not facts. In a value decision you are stating your personal opinion of what power options are worth to you, the good-feeling of using less gas, minus the fact of having less engine power, or whatever else you include. That is subjective.
Cost is objective. And so is calculating the cost of gasoline / any time period or miles driven. So when people are talking about what they are saving at the pump, I figure they are talking Cost, not Value.
I ask people did you primarily buy a vehicle to save money (cost), and if not - you bought it for value, why then do you focus on the cost; mentioning how much you're saving at the pump.
When it comes to "value" it is entirely relative and subjective.
When it comes to "how many creature comforts" a person wants or expects from a car, it is again entirely relative and subjective.
So if person "A" who is 41 years old and has owned his share of "beaters" and is solidly middle class and who wants to achieve 45 to 50 MPG and still have a few "semi-luxury" appointments in his car decides he wants to spend $19,324 on a "clean emissions 5 passenger car," then a VERY GOOD choice for that person is the Honda Civic Hybrid.
It's cost per mile of ownership is low, the reliability of the model is unquestionably high, and his fuel bill will be very low.
That's subjective for that person (who is me) and each person can choose the Hybrid which meets their own needs and budget.
If you want "sheer bottom dollar" ownership, buy a 5 year old small car and pay for upkeep. But you get what you pay for in ALL cases.....
I think that EVERY person who is at least relatively "solid middle class" or higher should shop all the available Hybrids first, then other cars second if no hybrids meet their needs.
You make a very valid point. The only Prius expansion that is for sure will be the plant they are building in China. The more China manufactures the more energy they will consume. So our buying Chinese Prius to save on our use of OPEC oil is just going to be transferred to China. I say we should force Toyota to build cars they sell to us in this country. Or put the huge tariffs that they impose on their imports. That does not mean just assembly plants. It should include parts manufacturing as well. If we taxed a Prius from Japan like they tax a PU truck from the USA the Prius would cost a fortune.
And I also wonder how many cargo ships it takes to bring those hybrids into the country each year. I know the owners of hybrids are very concerned with air pollution. I wonder how many realize cargo ships like those are the main source of air pollution in the L.A. area? They tend to sit there with the diesel engines running until they're off-loaded. Do those diesel engines have any sort of emissions system /scrubber? - I don't think so. Doesn't that pollution go inland for hundreds of miles? I think I remember a park ranger mentioning that at the Grand Canyon.
Counting the manufacture of the vehicle and especially the batteries, there sure sounds like a lot of pollution before the 1st mile is even run.
I agree that people should buy what they want and can afford; it is not necessary to buy the lowest cost. I don't suggest people buy $2 shirts with rips or stains, to save money. But that would be the most practical.
Those posts probably weren't directed to you. They're directed to those who want to talk about how they're saving so much at the pump, but ignore that they've paid more in the purchase. Cost is about total cost, not simply saving gas cost. I get tired of hearing from people who think they are smart because they bought a $25K hybrid, and then are so concerned with saving $10/week.
I could at least see the value if someone said they bought a vehicle for $25K with a structure 2X as strong as their old one, to protect their life and families in an accident - that's invaluable. Safety is infinitely more valuable (IMO) than any sort of economy.
"First of all, "clean diesel" in the USA means that the low sulfur blend is going to have to be completely embedded into the distribution chain in the whole country. I'm thinking this distribution system saturation might take more than a couple of years to complete. "
.
Don't think. Research. The EPA has mandated no sulfur diesel on Jan 1, 2006. Most areas already are converted.
Telling me to not think is like telling Kirstie Alley to lose a few pounds - aint happnin......:)
Like I said, getting all or even a large portion the existing on the road diesel vehicles converted for use with and using clean diesel will take a few years. Looks like 2007 for the engine part of the mandate, anyway....
"To curb these harmful effects, the U.S. EPA has issued additional regulations during the past decade that place more stringent requirements on the nation's diesel fleet, said John Millett, agency spokesman. In 2007, the first engines compliant with the new regulations will roll off the assembly line.
In the same year, low-sulfur diesel fuel will become available nationally, allowing older fleets to fit highway vehicles with catalytic converters and reduce particle emissions by about 90 percent. Fleet owners can purchase catalytic converters, particle filters and other retrofits through the EPA's Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program, Millett said. Retrofit technologies add parts such as filters to decrease an engine's emissions. The report estimates retrofits for a typical bus can cost anywhere between $5,000 and $7,000."
I don't think every diesel fleet in the country is going to have all their diesels converted over by Jan 1 2007.
And I will bet also that not "every single diesel pump station in the USA" will be converted to using LSD by 1-1-2006. Even if they ARE, the older engines still need retrofits to take full advantage.
"The particulate filter, which is made by Cummins subsidiary Fleetguard, will reduce particulate matter emissions by 90 percent from current levels – provided petroleum refiners can deliver low-sulfur fuel to the market by 2007. Petroleum manufacturers now say low-sulfur fuel may have more parts per million of sulfur when it reaches the market than the 15 ppm they agreed to produce by 2006. Cummins expects the government to hold the oil industry to its promises, said Joe Loughrey, president of Cummins engine business."
So none of this is set in stone and assured....
What IS assured is that you can buy a clean HYBRID right now today...
"It's all about sulfur, and spring 2006 will see the removal of most sulfur molecules from on-road diesel. The new ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD) blend will officially be the standard made by most refiners on June 1, 2006; with distribution systems required to have the new fuel by July 15 and retailers scheduled for a September 1 roll-out. It could be the most challenging clean fuel to hit the U.S. markets since the introduction of reformulated gasoline a decade ago, and there are considerable questions about whether there's adequate production capacity, enough bulk storage, and an ability to keep the new ULSD properly segregated from higher sulfur products."
So the RETAILERS have until 9-1-2006 to start rolling out the clean fuel. How about that......
provided petroleum refiners can deliver low-sulfur fuel to the market by 2007.
My understanding is that all the diesel from BP refineries is already ULSD. I know ECD-1 is available at the SOCO station near me. All the VW TDI cars built in the last couple years run better on ULSD. It is much cleaner burning with less additives required.
"I said the cost of ownership was much less for a Civic DX than a HCH. That is a fact. You can measure the dollars, adding and subtracting them."
In that we have to agree. However.... As Larsb pointed out a new DX off the lot will cost several $ more than a nice 2-3 year old one purchased from the paper.
Referring to the rest of your post I bought the HCH because I wanted the most advanced, and arguably the nicest Civic and highest MPG they make.
You mentioned having less engine power. What additional engine power do I need when I'm consistently getting 58-59MPG, almost 700 miles to the tank? How often would you suppose I'd use that extra 2 seconds 0-60 in a DX?
Yes, cost and value is subjective. If I'm driving a very nice Civic and getting my FE should I be quiet about it, or should I use it to encourage others to do better?
I also mention the cost because up-front I paid about $1K premium, I got the CVT for about $18.5K. The fact remains that last year alone I saved about $600 in fuel and got a $500 cash hybrid deduction. I expect the premium to be dissolved sometime this year.
"What IS assured is that you can buy a clean HYBRID right now today..."
This statement set ME to thinking: are hybrids 'cleaner' because they generate less pollutants per gallon of gas burned, or are they cleaner because they burn less gas?
For a village guy or a tribesman who has never seen a flying object, both Aeroplane and a Space Shuttle will look the same.
In the same way, for some people there is no difference between Toyota Echo and Civic Hybrid. Anyway, those who know the product and the hybrid technology and especially those who know to extract 55, 60 ,65 MPG, its just a great machine.
And they know how to reduce the consumption of fuel and also pollution.
ANSWER..........BOTH!! Many times I've found myself the victim of the traffic jams of downtown Chicago and one of the blessings of the Prius is the ability of the hybrid to go into "stealth mode" (electric only) a good 65-70% of the time gaining me the great "hi milage" levels that made me smile (61-62 mpg's) again using only gas engine marginally. Railroadjames(less polution more mpg's)
Yes, I think we are all aware that they get better mileage. That's been established. I'm simply trying to get a better understanding of the real reason hybrids generate less pollution.
I want to know for this reason:
1. If they generate less pollution per gallon burned, then this is due to advances in the pollution controls on the ICE side of the hybrid equation. Yes? And if this is so, then couldn't (shouldn't?) these same controls be implemented on the ICE's used in non-hybrids? In other words, is there any reason why non-hybrids couldn't achieve the same low pollution generating rate per gallon of fuel consumed as a hybrid?
2. If they generate less pollution BECAUSE they consume less fuel then I put it to you that one could convert every vehicle in the US to hybrids and not reduce global emissions ONE IOTA. Why? If demand is decreased here in the US, that demand will be replaced in other parts of the world. The world will consume x amount of oil. That amount, x, is determined by the price of oil. The cheaper the oil is, the more that will be consumed. The less the demand in the US, the MORE it is burned elsewhere. One could argue that we have a global RESPONSIBILITY to consume as much oil as we can and burn it 'relatively cleanly' rather than have that same oil consumed under less stingent pollution control conditions overseas. Kinda the Kyoto treaty in reverse.
Reducing pollution by "saving" fuel? You think if you don't burn it, it just stays in the ground?
Hybrids consume less fuel, and the fuel they do consume is burned more cleanly. When Prius was introduced in 2000, the PR folks liked to point out that on a smoggy day in LA, the exhaust coming out of a Prius was actually cleaner than the air going into the engine.
I strongly DISAGREE with the contention that we should do nothing because "someone else will use it if we don't." This is a classic "head in the sand" attitude that doesn't recognize several factors:
1. The developing countries demand growth will occur regardless of our actions.
2. If cleaner, more efficient technology is fostered by US demand it will become more cost-effective due to volume production. That means it'll be made available in developing nations, too.
3. Oil will not be getting any cheaper. Why would it if we're willing to pay at today's prices?
The fact is, I can reduce the pollution I create. Since people in the US consume more energy per capita than any other nation, reducing consumption by Americans will have a larger overall impact on energy savings than it would anywhere else.
"I don't think every diesel fleet in the country is going to have all their diesels converted over by Jan 1 2007."
.
Just as not every American is driving a hybrid, even though they've been here since 2000. People are still driving old 1990s Toyotas & Hondas, that if sold today, would not pass minimum requirements (TLEV).
The point is not "will every diesel car in the nation be instantly clean" but "will 2007 diesels be as clean as 2007 gasoline cars"?
Comments
Sometimes it seems that in your desperation to critisize hybrids you grab at anything that can be contrived to dispell their popularity. Hybrids are here to stay just like SUV's are questionably fading fast. You have often contended that hybrids have yet to prove themselves. Well, I'm here to tell you that the proof is on the table. Those that want to know about hybrids are on the increase and the knowledge is on the rise at an ever fast pace.
Is there reason to not by a hybrid? Only the speculation of "what ifs" & erronious info that simply lacks foundation.
If you were right then why all the attention toward hybrids that have jammed the car world these last 3 yrs?
railroadjames(here they come)
As for the current model, this past Friday I drove my 2004 manual tranny Civic Hybrid from Phoenix AZ to Tucson AZ, speed limit mostly 75 MPH on the way there, and I drove anywhere from 60-75 mph, mostly around 68 mph. Then once at Tucson, I drove in and around the city for a few more miles over a two day span.
When I got ready to drive back to Phoenix, I filled up at Sam's Club for the $2.019 price, 3.482 gallons for 195 miles. That comes to 56.00 miles per gallon for that 195 miles.
So even "long in the tooth" Civic Hybrids are capable of amazing numbers !!!!
Crossovers accounted for 41 percent of total SUV sales last year, Pipas says, up from virtually zero in 1995.
Escape is one of the best selling CUV's. And Escape Hybrid also has some share. After all Hybrid CUV's make some sense as they offer lot of space and also mileage.
CUV's share may exceed 50 % this year.
It's sort of like having someone see you walk down the street with your 20 year old beauty queen, and then having them tell you, repeatedly, "You aren't having any fun. You aren't having any fun."
They hope!!
I wonder why some people have no passion, or are afraid of having any? I imagine it has to do with a fear of loss of control. Or to putting dead cold money over human emotions and excitement.
PF Flyer
Host
News & Views, Wagons, & Hybrid Vehicles
The Mazda Mania Chat is on tonight. Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
When you actually drive one every day and see just how well it works, and how in many ways it's just so much smarter a design than conventional cars, it becomes easy to turn into an evangelist.
I think the answer is simple they are too expensive to manufacture. I don't see how anyone that drives less than 15k miles a year could justify the extra cost.
Then for me it is easier. They do not build a hybrid that is capable of anything but hauling people. If you need a PU or the ability to tow a trailer, your out of luck. If you need to get to your cabin through deep snow or mud too bad. I am taking a wait and see attitude. If a practical diesel or hybrid comes along with the capabilities I expect. I would be inclined to buy it. I really could car less if gas goes to $10 a gallon. I am not going to buy a vehicle that will only do some of what I need just to be part of the "Green" crowd. I think the diesels are going to sneak in and steal the thunder out of the hybrids. Here is our next vehicle purchase for this summer's vacation. It gets 22 mpg and has a kitchen, toilet, shower & bed. Plus it will tow 5000 lbs. What hybrid will do that?
http://www.airstream.com/product_line/motorhomes/interstate_home.html
Chevy Silverado mild hybrid truck will tow that weight.
As far as the shower and kitchen and toilet, you are indeed out of luck.
But 10 yrs from now you might get a motor home diesel electric hybrid that gets 20 MPG....
========================================
Yeah... the light comes in through the fiber optics... and the heat goes out through the same path (glass conducts heat).
Since *most* of our energy is spent on either heating and cooling, it would be wiser to build windowless buildings, so the energy can not escape through the glass.
troy
"With a more capable battery pack extending EV operation of the car, the Valence/EnergyCS prototype delivers up to 180 mpg for an average commute of 50–60 miles per day. The vehicle will also be part of the Monte-Carlo Fuel Cell & Hybrid Rallye on April 2."
Entire Story:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/03/new_plugin_hybr.html
Here's hoping these guys succeed and get cars available to the USA SOON !!!
me: and how many hundreds of thousands are there on the lots this year to buy? and if the price is +2K or more and you get 1-2 more mpg why would i pay that much? Why wouldn't someone buy the diesel version instead.?
In general the challenge is for hybrids to pay for the fuel they save in 3-4 years. And 2nd they can't sell for MSRP while the regular gas version sells for many thousands less than MSRP. For instance if the Silverado costs $30K MSRP but is discounted to $23K and the hybrid Silverado is priced at $32K but there is no discount, that's what makes it so hard to go buy the hybrid.
If you want a real example take a look at what the Escape hybrid is selling for - about $28K right? Now I know the Mazda Tribute which is the same as the Escape sells for $26.5K sticker with V-6, 4WD, moonroof, full power, but is discounted to $20K. There's an $8K difference, and the cheaper V-6 model has more power, more towing, and is less complex (reduced future failure potential).
You make some good points and I hope prices will come down.
I've never really looked at the Escape before but just visited fordvehicles.com and looked at the hybrid vs non-hybrid.
I think the best comparison is the hybrid vs non-hybrid model and not to compare with a completely different manufacturer.
Most of the options are standard on the hybrid Escape which goes for $27-28K, and you'd have to go with the Limited version to get about the same options, about 27K, so there's about $1K difference.
I've just looked around the web and it seems that most Escapes are getting low 20's MPG, while most hybrid versions get almost 30, and quite a few in the mid 30's.
I think the options vs cost vs MPG pretty much even itself out in the long run, especially if one does alot of driving and/or keeps their vehicles a long time. But I can't see the justification for someone who buys new cars every 3-5 years, as some do.
About my HCH purchase: Car reviews, magazine reviews, many forums, friends etc suggested the technology isn't "quite there yet" and will never get back the hybrid premium vs the regular version.
Still the same, I watched the Insight capabilities and since my car is built around the same technology with no "issues" I went for it and glad I did.
The premium I paid for my hybrid will evaporate in year two. Can you imagine the look on people's face when I tell them I did almost 64MPG today, and my Civic will go for almost 700 miles on 11 gallons of gas?
Priceless.
RX400h and Highlander Hybrid will apparently tow 3000 lbs.
It's a question of what your requirements are.
You are the Mileage Man
64 MPG = 25 km/l.
Civic is the average man's hybrid. I expect the 2006 model to come in 5 & 3 door versions as they will compete with Prius in the passenger/cargo space.
Keep it up.
Yes, Diesels would sneak in,
No, they will not steal the thunder out of hybrids.
Instead they will take a pie from Gasoline engines.
And Diesel-Electric hybrid will steal from Diesel vehicles.
(Let's just imagine that there is not 50+ years of data indicating diesel exhaust is a murderer.)
First of all, "clean diesel" in the USA means that the low sulfur blend is going to have to be completely embedded into the distribution chain in the whole country. Meaning that no matter WHERE you stop to fill up your 2007 Honda Accord i-CTDi, you can get the low sulfur blend.
I'm thinking this distribution system saturation might take more than a couple of years to complete.
That means "complete availability of clean diesel fuel" in the USA will be a major hurdle for the "clean diesel" pushers.
In the meantime, hundreds of thousands of Hybrids will keep rolling along, with more models coming out year by year, and more and more people realizing their awesome capabilities, etc.
I think "clean diesels" and hybrids will co-exist just fine, but not for a few more years.....
What stuff you have that weighs 5000 lbs. Is it something like a electrical turbine or a steel roll.
An average household does not have anything thats so heavy. Only when they move from one house to another, they have such a heavy stuff and a person with house will not move just like that.
Its just to brag about, there is no real usage.
Just out of curiousity.....why?
How is the changeover from the current diesel blend to a low sulfer blend any more complicated than the current changeoever from winter blend gas to a summer blend gas? Refineries changeover the blend, it goes out in the tankers and into the storage tanks at your neighborhood service station. As the 'old' blend is consumed, the new low-sulfer blend goes in it's place? For what possible reason would it take 'more than a couple of years'? Are you thinking that, for some reason, service stations would be installing additional tanks/pumps so they could pump two different blends of diesel?
I guess the first thing would be to convince ALL the major refineries and distributors that the clean diesel is necessary and is the right thing to do. Many times, it becomes difficult to get a lot of separate entities to agree on ANYTHING....
me: that's sticker. If you want I'll give you a Boston area dealer's website and you can go see that the Mazda Tribute 4x4 V-6 power everything sells for $19,999. The reality is an $8K diference.
What does a HCH sell for anyone - I see sticker $19,900. I heard a radio ad this morning where Civic DX's are $9,700. It's hard to make up that sort of difference.
Just IMO.
The Civic Hybrid is WAY WAY more car than a stripped DX.....:)
The lowest print ad I have seen for a New 2005 Civic Hybrid manual tranny is $18,398.
A stripped, basic Echo with roll up windows and no A/C goes for about $10,000. I'd bet you could get a discount and save even more. It gets about the same MPG as a DX and will save them money.
This might be a logical choice for someone who can't tell the difference between a DX vs HCH.
Is there a difference between an Echo and an HCH?
A DX to HCH?
I'd say so.
The best comparison is the EX, its closest sister. Last week while at the dealer for an oil change I looked around the lot and found many nicely equipped EX's in the 19-$21K, right there in the hybrid $ range. The only advantage I could see from the sticker is a radio upgrade, but still the EX doesn't have many things that come Std. on the HCH.
If you don't want to compare an Escape Hybrid to it's non-hybrid sister, and instead compare it to the Mazda Tribute that's fine.
But aren't you really comparing a loaded Escape in general to the Tribute? I haven't researched the two but I'd bet there are massive differences.
They even look different.
No idea as what %age of Civic Hybrids are manual. Any idea as how much it costs more than EX Manual.
me: Ford owns Mazda. And the Tribute and the Escape are the same basic vehicle mechanically, just as a Matrix and Vibe are the same vehicle. Same engine, same transmission, brakes ... slightly different style. From cars.com: "The Tribute was developed by Mazda in Japan, with manufacturing cooperation from Ford, which uses the same platform and unibody construction for its Escape SUV. Ford will build the left-hand-drive Tribute in Kansas City, Mo."
you: If someone's looking to buy a Civic DX thinking it's the same car as an HCH then they are wasting their money.
me: The point of buying a hybrid as many have pointed out is to save money - the hybrid does this by saving money on gas. But if your aim is to save money, then the much lower cost DX is the way to go.
If the main objective in my car purchase is saving money, I would care about lowest overall cost, regardless of the differences in options. Yes the HCH is better optioned, but that goes against the goal of saving money.
An HCH might save you $40/month in gas, but your car payment (48 months) will be $150-$200/month higher. Again, if you care about saving $40, why do you then ignore $150-200? It makes no sense.
me: and I can buy a Nissan Sentra 1.8S auto (manual $500 less) for $10,999, and have $7,000 of gas money.
Maybe Kia or the Chinese in the next few years will start building an affordable hybrid. After all the point is to save money.
I mean, if Saving Money was really the only issue, take the bus or walk. It's cheaper than owning any car could ever be.
However if you want to stay fixated on dollars, after the federal and state tax incentives ($2K fed deduction, $1.5K state _credit_) the payoff period in fuel savings (plus reduced maintenance costs due to the longer service interval for the hybrid) becomes even more reasonable. Insurance for the Escape versus the Volvo wagon it replaced was basically a wash.
Would you visit a Toyota message board and inform the Avalon Limited buyers that they wasted $10K because there is no difference between the LX?
Stevewa has some very good points.
Try to go 700 miles in a single DX tank?
I can't do it in a DX but I do in my HCH.
Many folks are going to turn to FE cars as the gas prices rise.
I would say the Civic GX and Phill in your garage would be the ideal commuter setup. You never go to the gas station. As long as your commute is less than 200 miles round trip. One owner is reporting the price is half that of unleaded regular.
you: yes, you can reduce YOUR contribution of fuel consumption, but you really aren't going to reduce global consumption or global pollution. The way the energy markets are today, with every barrel being bought that can be produced, your not using the oil, only means someone else will. If somehow by magic we all had hybrids tomorrow in the U.S. and saved oil, within a year the amount of oil being used would be back to the same point, as industry and people in China and developing Asia used it - and with much less stringent environmental controls then we do.
All fossil fuels in the world will eventually be used. Hybrids only change that date by a few years. It's little difference in the grand scheme of things, relative to the history of mankind.
me: no, I said the cost of ownership was much less for a Civic DX than a HCH. That is a fact. You can measure the dollars, adding and subtracting them.
The value of a item is based on personal preferences, not facts. In a value decision you are stating your personal opinion of what power options are worth to you, the good-feeling of using less gas, minus the fact of having less engine power, or whatever else you include. That is subjective.
Cost is objective. And so is calculating the cost of gasoline / any time period or miles driven. So when people are talking about what they are saving at the pump, I figure they are talking Cost, not Value.
I ask people did you primarily buy a vehicle to save money (cost), and if not - you bought it for value, why then do you focus on the cost; mentioning how much you're saving at the pump.
When it comes to "how many creature comforts" a person wants or expects from a car, it is again entirely relative and subjective.
So if person "A" who is 41 years old and has owned his share of "beaters" and is solidly middle class and who wants to achieve 45 to 50 MPG and still have a few "semi-luxury" appointments in his car decides he wants to spend $19,324 on a "clean emissions 5 passenger car," then a VERY GOOD choice for that person is the Honda Civic Hybrid.
It's cost per mile of ownership is low, the reliability of the model is unquestionably high, and his fuel bill will be very low.
That's subjective for that person (who is me) and each person can choose the Hybrid which meets their own needs and budget.
If you want "sheer bottom dollar" ownership, buy a 5 year old small car and pay for upkeep. But you get what you pay for in ALL cases.....
I think that EVERY person who is at least relatively "solid middle class" or higher should shop all the available Hybrids first, then other cars second if no hybrids meet their needs.
You make a very valid point. The only Prius expansion that is for sure will be the plant they are building in China. The more China manufactures the more energy they will consume. So our buying Chinese Prius to save on our use of OPEC oil is just going to be transferred to China. I say we should force Toyota to build cars they sell to us in this country. Or put the huge tariffs that they impose on their imports. That does not mean just assembly plants. It should include parts manufacturing as well. If we taxed a Prius from Japan like they tax a PU truck from the USA the Prius would cost a fortune.
Counting the manufacture of the vehicle and especially the batteries, there sure sounds like a lot of pollution before the 1st mile is even run.
Those posts probably weren't directed to you. They're directed to those who want to talk about how they're saving so much at the pump, but ignore that they've paid more in the purchase. Cost is about total cost, not simply saving gas cost. I get tired of hearing from people who think they are smart because they bought a $25K hybrid, and then are so concerned with saving $10/week.
I could at least see the value if someone said they bought a vehicle for $25K with a structure 2X as strong as their old one, to protect their life and families in an accident - that's invaluable. Safety is infinitely more valuable (IMO) than any sort of economy.
.
Don't think. Research. The EPA has mandated no sulfur diesel on Jan 1, 2006. Most areas already are converted.
troy
Like I said, getting all or even a large portion the existing on the road diesel vehicles converted for use with and using clean diesel will take a few years. Looks like 2007 for the engine part of the mandate, anyway....
"To curb these harmful effects, the U.S. EPA has issued additional regulations during the past decade that place more stringent requirements on the nation's diesel fleet, said John Millett, agency spokesman. In 2007, the first engines compliant with the new regulations will roll off the assembly line.
In the same year, low-sulfur diesel fuel will become available nationally, allowing older fleets to fit highway vehicles with catalytic converters and reduce particle emissions by about 90 percent. Fleet owners can purchase catalytic converters, particle filters and other retrofits through the EPA's Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program, Millett said. Retrofit technologies add parts such as filters to decrease an engine's emissions. The report estimates retrofits for a typical bus can cost anywhere between $5,000 and $7,000."
I don't think every diesel fleet in the country is going to have all their diesels converted over by Jan 1 2007.
And I will bet also that not "every single diesel pump station in the USA" will be converted to using LSD by 1-1-2006. Even if they ARE, the older engines still need retrofits to take full advantage.
"The particulate filter, which is made by Cummins subsidiary Fleetguard, will reduce particulate matter emissions by 90 percent from current levels – provided petroleum refiners can deliver low-sulfur fuel to the market by 2007. Petroleum manufacturers now say low-sulfur fuel may have more parts per million of sulfur when it reaches the market than the 15 ppm they agreed to produce by 2006. Cummins expects the government to hold the oil industry to its promises, said Joe Loughrey, president of Cummins engine business."
So none of this is set in stone and assured....
What IS assured is that you can buy a clean HYBRID right now today...
So the RETAILERS have until 9-1-2006 to start rolling out the clean fuel. How about that......
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20050- - 317005424&newsLang=en
My understanding is that all the diesel from BP refineries is already ULSD. I know ECD-1 is available at the SOCO station near me. All the VW TDI cars built in the last couple years run better on ULSD. It is much cleaner burning with less additives required.
http://www.ecdiesel.com/about/index.asp
In that we have to agree.
However....
As Larsb pointed out a new DX off the lot will cost several $ more than a nice 2-3 year old one purchased from the paper.
Referring to the rest of your post I bought the HCH because I wanted the most advanced, and arguably the nicest Civic and highest MPG they make.
You mentioned having less engine power. What additional engine power do I need when I'm consistently getting 58-59MPG, almost 700 miles to the tank?
How often would you suppose I'd use that extra 2 seconds 0-60 in a DX?
Yes, cost and value is subjective.
If I'm driving a very nice Civic and getting my FE should I be quiet about it, or should I use it to encourage others to do better?
I also mention the cost because up-front I paid about $1K premium, I got the CVT for about $18.5K.
The fact remains that last year alone I saved about $600 in fuel and got a $500 cash hybrid deduction. I expect the premium to be dissolved sometime this year.
This statement set ME to thinking: are hybrids 'cleaner' because they generate less pollutants per gallon of gas burned, or are they cleaner because they burn less gas?
In the same way, for some people there is no difference between Toyota Echo and Civic Hybrid. Anyway, those who know the product and the hybrid technology and especially those who know to extract 55, 60 ,65 MPG, its just a great machine.
And they know how to reduce the consumption of fuel and also pollution.
Okay, I'll ask you: to they reduce pollution per gallon of gas used, OR do they reduce pollution by burning less gas?
Many times I've found myself the victim of the traffic jams of downtown Chicago and one of the blessings of the Prius is the ability of the hybrid to go into "stealth mode" (electric only) a good 65-70% of the time gaining me the great "hi milage" levels that made me smile (61-62 mpg's) again using only gas engine marginally.
Railroadjames(less polution more mpg's)
I want to know for this reason:
1. If they generate less pollution per gallon burned, then this is due to advances in the pollution controls on the ICE side of the hybrid equation. Yes? And if this is so, then couldn't (shouldn't?) these same controls be implemented on the ICE's used in non-hybrids? In other words, is there any reason why non-hybrids couldn't achieve the same low pollution generating rate per gallon of fuel consumed as a hybrid?
2. If they generate less pollution BECAUSE they consume less fuel then I put it to you that one could convert every vehicle in the US to hybrids and not reduce global emissions ONE IOTA. Why? If demand is decreased here in the US, that demand will be replaced in other parts of the world. The world will consume x amount of oil. That amount, x, is determined by the price of oil. The cheaper the oil is, the more that will be consumed. The less the demand in the US, the MORE it is burned elsewhere. One could argue that we have a global RESPONSIBILITY to consume as much oil as we can and burn it 'relatively cleanly' rather than have that same oil consumed under less stingent pollution control conditions overseas. Kinda the Kyoto treaty in reverse.
Reducing pollution by "saving" fuel? You think if you don't burn it, it just stays in the ground?
Hybrids consume less fuel, and the fuel they do consume is burned more cleanly. When Prius was introduced in 2000, the PR folks liked to point out that on a smoggy day in LA, the exhaust coming out of a Prius was actually cleaner than the air going into the engine.
I strongly DISAGREE with the contention that we should do nothing because "someone else will use it if we don't." This is a classic "head in the sand" attitude that doesn't recognize several factors:
1. The developing countries demand growth will occur regardless of our actions.
2. If cleaner, more efficient technology is fostered by US demand it will become more cost-effective due to volume production. That means it'll be made available in developing nations, too.
3. Oil will not be getting any cheaper. Why would it if we're willing to pay at today's prices?
The fact is, I can reduce the pollution I create. Since people in the US consume more energy per capita than any other nation, reducing consumption by Americans will have a larger overall impact on energy savings than it would anywhere else.
.
Just as not every American is driving a hybrid, even though they've been here since 2000. People are still driving old 1990s Toyotas & Hondas, that if sold today, would not pass minimum requirements (TLEV).
The point is not "will every diesel car in the nation be instantly clean" but "will 2007 diesels be as clean as 2007 gasoline cars"?
The answer is YES.
troy