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 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Paying more than MSRP for (new) Hybrids, Depreciation/Value of used Hybrids
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Toyota promises you will attract a lot of chicks, like Leonardo De Caprio. HYPE and fear of high gas prices. Looks like you bought the most practical car on the road.
How about this: getting the best gas mileage and low emissions from a good car from a good company as being the REAL reason the Prius is popular. 250,000 of them have sold worldwide - that's not "faddish" in the least.
"Toyota promises you will attract a lot of chicks" - that is just Silly.
And "fear of high gas prices" should be a completely VALID reason for buying a more fuel efficient car.
You can "insulate yourself" against high prices without being "fearful" of them. I have spent $33 a month on gas in the five months I have owned my hybrid car.
I have yet to hear of any person anywhere saying "I'm worried gas is going up to $3 a gallon, so I'm going to go buy a Hybrid." That's just odd to think people really think like that.
I don't think the attributes were in question. I believe the poster asked why would anyone pay over MSRP for the Prius or any other car. There are no logical reasons, so I gave hypothetical reasons...:>)
PS
Isn't that why you shopped for your Hybrid? To avoid paying over MSRP.
Personally, I find nothing "offensive" or "irrational" about paying whatever price you want for this or any other product you want badly enough. I think the car is fairly priced at MSRP, and I also think comparisons to Civics and Corollas [I've owned multiple examples of both] miss the point - neither of these cars has the interior room or overall functionality of the Prius. It's the combination of size, utility, emissions, fuel use....not any one of these....that makes the car unique. I don't plan to use any bandwidth to try to convince the skeptics who hang out here and continue to beat the drum about so-called alternatives - this argument has been going on since the car came out, and won't be settled in this forum.
In any case, it looks like the market for the car may soon bear some likeness to "normal", which should be good news to anyone still interested in buying one of these days.
Once again, you are talking about that RAREST of person who tries to keep a car ten years or longer. That is about 2% of the populace.
If, after 10 years, when your car has 200K miles on it, and you paid it off about six years before, your STANDARD (non-hybrid) ENGINE needs replacing, then you either junk the car or replace it.
That decision will be NO DIFFERENT in a Hybrid. If, after 10 years, you have to junk a hybrid because a replacement part costs too much for you, then biGod, you got your money's worth out of the car.
That's no different than any other car you keep for ten yrs.
I believe that is a mandate from the EPA to get a higher emissions rating. In CA it is 10 years & 150k miles. If that covers the whole drive train, it is a big plus. I think the way the law reads to get PZEV the car has to be able to pass that rating for 8 yrs or 100k miles.
There is a poster on here that had to replace a sensor in her Prius for $600 & has a bad Catalytic convertor that the dealer wants $2100 to replace. This is for a Prius with less than 100k miles. I would think that Toyota should have replaced both under the PZEV mandate.
I had an Infiniti Q45 that had fuel injector problems, and one was fixed for $1200 under warranty. Then, after the warranty expired at 60K another one went out, and I did not have the $1200 to fix it, so I was forced to trade it in.
Hybrids are not alone in cars which have out of warranty repairs which cost a lot.
As far as resale values, the best data we have right now is on 2000 Priuses (because that was the first really viable family sedan that was Hybrid) and they are holding value really well.
No person I know with an intent of buying a car to DRIVE IT would EVER EVER EVER buy a car "sight unseen" without inspecting the car personally. That's just idiotic.
Edmunds TMV is based on "REAL WORLD CAR SALES AT REAL DEALERSHIPS." It's the best in the business at guiding prices, because it uses REAL DATA, not some trumped up "guess price" like E-Bay.
If you continue to tout E-Bay as a good option for determining resale value, good luck, but your data will be incorrect.
.
The 8 year/100K warranty is NOT mandated. Toyota could choose to have the standard 3 year/36K warranty apply to the battery. Or NO warranty. That's an internal company decision & not regulated by the government.
Honda carries an 8 year/80K warranty.
.
CALIFORNIA:
The only special status is in California. In order to carry the PZEV label, the Prius must pass emissions inspection up to 150,000 miles, and Toyota must fix whatever is wrong (typically a new catalyst).
troy
http://english.auto.vl.ru/auctions/search/?s=1&fid=9+223&- year_from=2003&year_to=2003&pg=2
Toyota Announces Price Increase – The price increase is effective on vehicles built in Japan arriving by vessel or built domestically on or after February 7th. Fleet orders placed on or before February 10th with a delivery window through 06/30/05 will be price protected. The following reflect the MSRP price increases that will be announced later this month.
* Scion (xA/xB/tC) - $50
* Echo, Corolla, Matrix, Solara, Sequoia, Tundra - $100
* Camry - $150
* Sienna, Rav4, Highlander - $200
* 4Runner, Land Cruiser - $300
Anyone know what it is for Prius?
Thanks
Not much of a premium there, eh?
Seems pretty decent, considering that in new 2005 models these cars are $19874 for the EX and $20415 for the Hybrid, only $541 apart if you build one "new" with the above options on honda's website....
Sorry to only give part of the story the first time.....
My old Avalanche payment: $880 per month until March 2008
880 x 35 = $30,800
My current HCH payment: $429 per month until June 2010
429 x 62 = $26,598
Insurance = $18 cheaper per month
35 x $18 = $630
Fuel: I spent $2200 between July 2003 and July 2004 on the Avalanche. The Civic will cost me about $600-$700 a year, so worst case is $58 per month for the HCH versus $183 per month for the Avalanche:
35 months x $125 = $4375
So in the next 35 months, I'm saving:
$15,785 in car payments
$630 in insurance
$4375 in fuel
Total 35 month savings:
$20,790
or, an average of
$594 per month or about $6900 per year.....
I think the "hybrid premium" is paying off for me.....
Not trying to be contrary here, but my mind starts to "cipher" when numbers start getting thrown around. I think when folks are talking about paying off the "hybrid premium", they're really talking about within the same class of vehicle.
If we're going to make the case based on switching class of vehicle, I can save you a BUNCH if you feel like buying a 96 Sentra that gets about 38 mpg, will have VERY low payments, if you want to finance it for 5 years, and will cost you a LOT less to insure
BTW, I think it's GREAT that you're thrilled with your hybrid AND that you're saving yourself a bundle of money over the next 5 years. The trade off was losing the capabilities of the Avalanche. There may not be a set dollar value that you can assign to that, but that capability certainly has a value, even if it's just what it's going to cost you to have something delivered rather than picking it up yourself with the Avalanche.
(Note: I used the HAH in my numbers because we originally were in the Accord topic even though you're dealing with a Civic!)
PF Flyer
Host
News & Views, Wagons, & Hybrid Vehicles
The Mazda Mania Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
.
- NEW avalanche + used train-in value - New Hybrid Civic + $1600/year fuel savings + $216/year insurance savings
= - $30,800 + $27,000 - $26,600 + $1600/year + $216/year
= - $30,400 + $1816/year
YEARS TO BREAK-EVEN (via fuel savings) = 17 years
.
Sorry Lars, still don't see how you're "saving". You're $30,000 in the hole, and it will take 17 years to dig yourself out.
I didn't buy my insight to save money. I recognized that the car would *die* before I recovered the $14,000 I spent for it, from fuel savings...... and future buyers deserve to know that upfront *before* they trade-in a perfectly good car for a hybrid.
troy
My explanation is pretty simple - I added up what the Avalanche would cost me to drive until it was paid off and compared that to what it would cost me to drive the HCH until it was paid off *INSTEAD of the Avalanche* and it showed $6900 per year savings....
What part of that is unclear? Anyone?
In contrast to what some people are saying, if you have an SUV with a long term loan and a pretty high payment, and find that you can get along without an SUV, as I did, then it's a NO BRAINER to go trade that vehicle in on a Hybrid.
You too might save $6900 a year, or close to that....
:
Lars Cost to Buy Civic Hybrid + $1600/year fuel savings + $216/year insurance savings
= -$26,600 + $1600/year + $216/year
= -$26,600 + $1816/year
YEARS TO BREAK-EVEN (via fuel savings) = 14 years
.
Sorry Lars, still don't see how you're "saving". You're $26,000 in the hole, and it will take 14 years to dig yourself out.
I didn't buy my insight to save money. I recognized that the car would *die* before I recovered the $14,000 I spent for it, from fuel savings...... and future buyers deserve to know that upfront *before* they trade-in a perfectly good car for a hybrid.
troy
See my previous numbers, nothing is incorrect.
Host pf_flyer said:"True enough, all those numbers work out."
Just seems to me that the way this has been approached since the introduction of hybrid versions of cars has been this...
Man, I really would like to get a new Civic!
{logon to Edmunds.com to check out Civics}
Whoa! They have a hybrid version! VERY cool!!
Whoa!! They cost a lot more. I wonder if it's worth it???
{Calculate how much I'll be saving on gas to see if it offsets the increased price of the hybrid version of the car}
THAT is the "hybrid premium" as I see it.
That's a far different scenario from:
Gas is killing me! I gotta get into a better mileage vehicle.
or
I really don't need this truck. I bet I can save some money if I get a car instead.
After all, I bet I'm "saving money" if I switch from a Hummer to an Avalanche! But if there was a hybrid Hummer that gave me double the mileage (imagine THOSE batteries...LOL) but the MSRP is 36% higher (as the Accord hybrid is vs the regular Accord) I have to decide if switching to the hybrid Hummer is going to save me anything while letting me keep a Hummer!
A good non-automotive analogy is windows in my home. When I built the house 19 years ago, the windows used were nowhere near as efficient as current windows are. If I decide to replace the old windows in my house with new, more energy-efficient windows, my heating costs WILL go down. But I'm not going to be saving any money since I had to pay to buy and install the new windows. If I make the calculation to find the break even point, I see that *I* am not going to get there.
Clear as mud??
PF Flyer
Host
News & Views, Wagons, & Hybrid Vehicles
The Mazda Mania Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
You "can" get another, lower quality, lower resale, lower on the totem pole "small economy car" if you want. But if you do, here's what you lose:
You are CERTAINLY not going to get 48 MPG (unless you get an Insight.)
You are PROBABLY not going to be driving cleaner.
You are not going to get a car which turns ITSELF OFF at red lights.
You are not getting a basically fully loaded Civic, which Edmunds and others rate as the prime small car on the market.
You are not getting some of the best retained value of any small car.
You are not doing the best you can to insulate your family from the pain of ever-escalating fuel prices.
You will not be driving a car which gives the driver all the instrumentation tools to achieve AMAZING miles per gallon numbers in certain circumstances.
So, yes, all is a trade off. But if you buy "less of a car" than a Hybrid, you will have "less of a car."
That's not less of a car in my book. Now I'm looking at the car and saying, GREAT... it's going to get me higher mileage!! I'm VERY excitied about that. But it's costing me significantly more to buy a car that will ride the same, look the same, etc... that's where my decision would have to be made on whether it's worth it. As distasteful as it sounds, money is going to be a determining factor for a lot of folks. If I have to sacrifice some other item in my budget because I'm going to spend more over the time period I'm likely to keep the car, then the increased price may not be worth it.
What IS clear is that the phrase "you mileage may vary" is certainly going to be true with how we each answer this question.
Original Cost = $30,000
Trade-In = $17,000
NET LOSS = - $13,000
Insurance Savings = $120 a year
Fuel Savings (20Kmiles) = $1100 a year
MATH:
= - $30,000 new + $17,000 used sale + $1100/year fuel + $120/year insurance savings
= - $13,000 + $1100/year + $120/year
.
Notice how my "trade-in" has put me $13,000 into debt. The fuel + insurance savings from the accord would pay off that debt in 11 years & 220,000 miles!!!
So did I save money? No. I put myself $13,000 in debt. IMHO it would make more sense for me to keep the Avalanche and avoid that debt.
troy
$6900 a year savings for me. Sorry if others get less....
I left nothing out. It's all there. And it shows:
= - $13,000 DEBT + $1220/year savings from the accord
= 11 years/220,000 miles
..... to pay off that $13,000 debt. Therefore it makes more sense to keep the Avalanche.
.
"To thine own self, be true." - Shakespeare
troy
I'm saving $451 PER MONTH on the car payment (880 vs 429) and $125 on gas (183 vs 58) and $18 per month on insurance. $594 per month savings.
The "debt" does not come into play if you figure in paying off both the cars, which my previous calculations showed. After only 9 payments, my payoff on the HCH is less than the payoff on the Avalanche was after 32 months of payments.. 12.25 percent on the truck loan ($210 per month was INTEREST), and only 6.00 percent on the HCH loan. Complete no brainer.....
Sorry that you cannot see it.....it's clear as the money in my bank account to me....
I'm discussing me and the Accord:
= - $13,000 DEBT + $1220/year savings from the accord
= 11 years/220,000 miles
..... to pay off that $13,000 debt. Therefore it makes more sense to keep the Avalanche in my backyard.
troy
The topic is about the "hybrid premium" and everyone seems to have a different view of what that is.Now this is not a scientific poll at all, but I asked peoiple who attened last night's chat session what they thought the "hybrid premium" was. Everyone agreed that it was the increased cost of the hybrid version vs non-hybrid version of the same car, the hybrid Accord vs Accord, for example. The "extra cost" refers to the fact that the hybrid version of the car cost more than the regular version.
So everyone posting their numbers is correct (assuming they performed all their calculations correctly:)), but they seem to be asking different questions.
You "pay more" for a "higher end car" with more options, more resale value, and a lower cost of ownership.
You get what you pay for - no one is getting "hosed" by paying "extra" for things that actually have a monetary or safety value.
I checked a loaded 2004 EX versus a basic 2004 MT HCH earlier this week, and the HCH was blue booking $900 higher, when the "build a Honda" website showed the 2005 versions being only $541 apart. That indicates that the hybrid is holding it's value well versus the car in the Honda line which it most resembles, the loaded EX.
To you it may be bull hockey, to the guy putting down his money it is just that much more to be justified for what you get. Unless being the first is your number one priority. I'll give you examples. You know that the MSRP for an Accord EX is always discounted. So whatever you can beat the dealer down to is the REAL price not what is listed somewhere. It is more difficult to get an HAH discounted. Whatever the difference between what the dealer will sell you either of those vehicles IS the premium for the hybrid. You can justify it with fast 0-60 times. It is still more expensive. I just bought a new Passat Wagon TDI, paid $26,589 out the door. It has leather, 17" wheels, Michelin high performance tires, stability control, about everything you can get on the car. I just put 1271 miles on it in 3 days wandering down the CA coastline. The tank with Oregon # 2 diesel got me 33.96 MPG. I filled up with ULSD in CA at the ARCO station and the second tank got me 37.53 MPG. Name me a car with that much room, equal handling & braking that is hybrid for that price. The closest is the HAH and this car will run all day at 80 miles and hour and give me an honest 37 MPG. Try that with a hybrid in that size class. Oh and the last two tanks of diesel were 2 cents per gallon cheaper than regular unleaded. ULSD is widely available in CA and soon the rest of the country. Unless the automakers come up with more than they have so far in hybrids the diesels will run them out of business. That Passat outhandles any Japanese car I have ever driven, including the Lexus. I had a hard time getting my wife to let me drive it.
What is this obsession about "handling?" Are you a wannabe NASCAR driver? Do you want to drive the Baja? Braking? Do you do a lot of 60-0 emergency braking manuevers? I have about a million and a half miles under my belt, and the only "emergency braking" I EVER did was to test the ABS on the first car I owned which had ABS.
I got over the "thrill" of taking a corner too fast when I was about 25 years old, and I have never cared about "braking." A car stops when you push the brake pedal - period....that's it's job, and every car on the road does that.....
I have owned a lot of cars, mostly Japanese, and "handling" has never ever ever ever been a problem or an issue or anything else for me.
Anyone else have a "handling" obsession? If so, can you explain to me why "handling" is even a semi-important issue when selecting a car? And what in the name of all that is oily does "braking" have to do with the quality or enjoyment of a car?
BACK ON TOPIC:
Like I said in my post, when you "pay more" for a Hybrid car, you "get more" than the non-hybrid version of that car, if their is one. You just DO, and that's a FACT.
So yeah, it's a fact that you get more on a hybrid. IMHO, however, you don't get enough to justify the price.
Right now my HCH is blue booking at $900 more than a comparable EX Civic, and I paid only $1524 more than a comparable used EX on the lot when I bought my 2004 HCH "slightly used" with 4823 miles on it.
So each case can be different. If you pay a straight $4K to $6K more for a hybrid, you are not only losing money in the long term but are making a dubious financial decision. In fuel savings and adding in the tax break, I will break even in less than 4 years time for the "premium" I paid.
So please don't dismiss hybrids because of the mythical "premium" because you don't ALWAYS have to pay a ton extra for one.....
For me, hybrid tech is an option on a vehicle and not something that in and of itself would point me to a specific car.
You obviously drive a lot more than I do. If you averaged the normal 15,000 miles per year you would be driving 100 years. Let's say you have been driving 25 years that wouls be 60,000 miles a years even driving 50 years would average over 30,000 miles a year. WOW! a lot of miles pers year and a lot of years of driving!
While VWs have good to very-good handling I don't think the blanket statement that a Passat outhnldes and Japanes car I have ever driven... tells the whole stroy ..unless you have only drive a selct few Japanese cars. Hondas and Acuras handle normal or better. Mazdas handel very well, expecially the 8. I have two Lexus that handle good the IS300 handling better than my Accord, which handles very good with 17 inch tires.
I think handling and braking are important to avoid accidents. ABS brakes contribute significantly to accident avoidance by allow steering control to remain during hard braking.
Traction control doesn't really add much becuse acceleration is not really a factor in most handling and emrgency situations.
I alos think vehicle stability control is being over played especially with front wheel drive cars. It is not meant to be an end all and allow you to drive fast in slick conditions. The only condition where it comes into play more and more seems to be roll-over prevention in SUVs. But then again SUVs are being driven outside of their intent and limits a lot of the time.
I haven't driven a million and a half miles but I drive a lot and have been driving for a long, long time. I have encountered conditions where handling was important. A cars handling and the ability to avoid potential emergency situations is important
On topic, other areas that I disagree with you besides number of miles driven and handling are paying more for a HAH or other Hybrid doe not necessaruily mean you get more than a non-Hybrid version. I have a 6-speed Accord Coupe with NAV and I have just about everything you have in the HAH. I think there are some slight different minor finish items and a fuel computer ( NAV also has trip computer). In addition , I have a full sized trunk, sunroof, spare tire and folding rear seats. I think both the HAH and the 6-speed Coupe are excellent cars with lots of features and I do not see a big difference?
Cruis'n in 6th :shades: ,
MidCow
You have mentioned this a few times. I think it makes it very clear that the hybrids do not hold their resale value as well as the non-hybrid. Those two were probably at least $3000 apart when they originally sold. After less than a year the hybrid lost half of that price premium. So buying a hybrid used is a good plan unless you are dealing with some dealer that is trying to rip you off. I don't think anyone has made a good case for the hybrids having a great resale record.
PS
Twice driving highway 96 that follows the Klamath River for 190 miles we had to swerve to avoid fallen rocks in the road. I was very glad I was not in an Accord or Camry. I will take good handling & braking over a cushy ride any day of the week.
Go right now to honda website and "build a honda". Get the auto tranny Civic EX, add a 6-disc changer to it, and a sunroof, and no other options. write down the price.
No "build" a Civic Hybrid manual tranny, no options. Write down that price.
The difference is $541.
Now go to the famous blue book website and enter the same cars as 2004 cars with 16,000 miles on them.
They will blue book $900 apart, with the Hybrid being HIGHER. so although the Hybrid only costs $541 more when new, after 16000 miles it has "gained" almost $400 on the EX......
So no, actually, maybe in July 2004 when I bought my HCH the resale was shaky, but RIGHT NOW today, they are doing as well or better than comparable non-hybrid versions for resale.
Look at the last 4 days news for stories about "Used Prius cars selling for more than new cars" also.
Things change, month to month, year to year, but RIGHT NOW TODAY 4-14-2005, hybrid resales are without a doubt "holding their own" against all comers.....
"The sticker price on a 2005 Prius sold by Fort Wayne Toyota & Lexus is $20,875. But the retail price for a used 2004 Prius with 18,000 miles on it recommended by the Kelley Blue Book Web site is $22,070."
That is a "moment in time" situation that is unusual and will not continue for long, but in the RIGHT NOW, used hybrids are demanding a premium.
From this story:
http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/11394795.htm
Now you know as well as anyone on this forum that is pure "Bull Hockey" NO one is going to pay MSRP for a Civic EX today in this buyers market. The dealers are getting the premium for the hybrids based on the fear and ignorance of the buying public, clear and simple. Even though the non hybrid Civic EX is a better buy they will have to sell it for invoice or lower to get it off the lot. You can make the numbers say what you want, it is not what is happening on the car lots of America.
"Price Premiums"
Prius demand exceeded supply for most of 2004, allowing dealers to charge customers thousands of dollars more than the sticker price of between $22,000 and $26,000, depending on options. Increased supply this year cut the premium to $425, according to Kelley Blue Book, which tracks vehicle prices.
The gas-electric Civic is selling for an average of $20,918, $647 less than the $21,565 sticker price, according to Kelley Blue Book. The Accord hybrid has the highest current premium, at $1,000 over its list price, and the low-volume Insight sells for the $22,045 retail price, Kelley said.
Ford's Escape hybrid is selling at its list prices of $27,445 for the two-wheel-drive version and $29,070 for the four- wheel-drive model, according to Kelley.
See entire story:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000101&sid=aRcRjOFqg7uw&refer=japan
As one example, why compare an automatic Civic to a manual Civic Hybrid? This is a "double hit" since it increases the cost of the non-hybrid while also increasing its fuel consumption (and decreasing it's desirability, IMO).
Further, the Civic EX is hardly comparable to to the HCH in terms of performance (yeah, I know, you don't care but some of us do). Even the least expensive Civic has a superior power/mass ratio and represents savings of more than $7000! You'd be hard pressed to make up THAT premium in the life of the car even with $3/gal fuel. But that's not an "apples to apples" comparison either, although for my purposes it is much closer than yours.
The point is: different people value the same things differently. Handling is not inportant to you, but to me, it is the MOST important attribute of a vehicle. But none of us should expect that the rest of society adopt our values as a universal truth! Enjoy your car for whatever reason turns you on; the rest of us will do the same.
Handling is not a part of this topic, nor are power/mass ratios.