sounds like the hah is right for you. this is my opinion, but i think shared by many others. hybrid technology is best served by fuel efficient, low emissions vehicles. i'm pretty happy my focus has a better pollution rating than a hah and a power moonroof. those are my idea of amenities.
really, i along with others are interested in people's actual experience with this vehicle, so please post how it is working out for you.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
doesn't the HAH have all the parts as the regular V-6 + the hybrid system. The hybrid system consists of an electric motor, but aren't there mechanical systems - the regenerative braking system - hoses, fluid, batteries? what else?
Regenerative braking is a largely misunderstood term. Simply put, it is reversing the role of the electric motor to now act as a generator. Instead of adding to the energy from the camshaft, the (now) generator derives the energy of the turning axle, and that’s it!
As for mechanical components, you’re correct. Everything else is conventional.
you: With hybrid power, the changes are substantial in terms of fuel economy and emissions.
you don't need a hybrid system that gives you 260hp. There are plenty of regular cars that can do that.
Sure. Honda has a few of them and more, but none of them can touch the emission levels of the hybrid, or get you 30 mpg in city driving.
And if you're using that engine power it is for a few seconds of your drive, unless you don't care about speed limits.
Accord Hybrid isn’t an industry first to be delivering 255 HP or more. How does it relate to this topic?
What there is a shortage of is high-mileage economical hybrids.
Then ask for it, or better yet, buy one. A typical issue with Civic Hybrid is often quoted as lack of performance. If you want high mileage with “okay” performance, you’ve an answer. Accord Hybrid offers a choice to people who want performance that belongs in the class it competes in, while also providing class leading fuel economy and emissions. Different strokes.
260hp for an Accord makes no sense, when hybrids should be focused on getting people turned on to getting good mpg.
I see a few issues here. One, stereo-typing hybrid technology as something that must give up performance to achieve high fuel economy (now that by itself is limitless, for many it appears 30 mpg in city isn’t good in a family sedan). Two, it might not make sense to you, but Accord Hybrid isn’t breaking any new grounds in terms of delivering (obscene amount of) horse power. And finally, it is getting good gas mileage.
And if you do these things, you'll find that the gas savings in $'s between an HAH and a hemi 300C would be very small.
After all your points, interesting that you would be justifying for a car with 340 HP against another with 255 HP. BUT, let us not stick to assumptions and shoot in the dark.
But to hear people on these forums talk, its the main consideration in fuel economy.
Compared to what?
I don't see the economic sense of buying the HAH; and as stated above I don't see where it is a big mpg/environmental improvement worth touting as "green".
As you suggested earlier, 300C Hemi would be a better choice. Did I get that right?
if you buy a hah because it's the latest and greatest, good. if you buy one because you want that extra 1/2 getting 0 to 60, good. if you buy one because honda makes fine vehicles, good. if you buy one because you just want to, good. if you buy one because it's a 'green' vehicle, then maybe that isn't the right reason. the epa doesn't really rate it any better, or even as good as many non hybrids.
If you buy a car for one or two reasons as your priority and everything else is a non-issue, then HAH isn’t for you because it isn’t trying to be the best in everything, just among the best in everything. Not everybody wants to limit oneself to one or two selection criteria.
this is my opinion, but i think shared by many others. hybrid technology is best served by fuel efficient, low emissions vehicles. i'm pretty happy my focus has a better pollution rating than a hah and a power moonroof.
Focus is a compact that happens to have worse fuel economy rating without having performance edge on the Accord Hybrid. I hope it isn’t the one that delivers 22 mpg in the city. Focus has poorer GHG emissions too!
Pollution rating isn’t known (to me) for HAH at this time since I don’t see it on the EPA website, but it will be interesting to find out how this powerful midsize stacks up against your Focus.
for many it appears 30 mpg in city isn’t good in a family sedan
It might be if the car could deliver that. So far it looks like 24 mpg is more the average combined. That is not even close to the competition. Many midsize and large vehicles are getting better mileage than the HAH to this point in time. You can buy a Honda mini-van that gives that good a mileage and not be cramped into a little car with a big price tag.
Hmmm, what about people who ARE getting something like 29-34 mpg? And those who are getting 21-24 mpg, what do they get on a non-hybrid Accord V6? You can't use "better" without having a baseline. Could you?
BTW, how many of them have substantial amount of miles (enough to be considered "past break-in")? From my personal experiences, a typical Honda improves in terms of smoothness and fuel economy around 5-7K miles.
From my personal experiences, a typical Honda improves in terms of smoothness and fuel economy around 5-7K miles.
I guess we will see when that happens. I was struck by the fact only one person was able to get over 30 mpg. His commute is longer than all the rest. His mileage was over 30 from the get go. So he should maybe be getting closer to the 36 mpg by now. I don't know what his mix of driving is. There is a big gap between the EPA 32 mpg combined and someone getting 21 mpg combined. Personally I think it is hard to keep from racing when a car is overpowered as the HAH is.
Bottomline: You cannot compare an absolute to nothing. To compare, you have to have a baseline, and the number you want to compare it against.
Another point you don't seem to get is that... if I drive 5 miles and average 20 mpg, and another person drives 5000 miles averaging 35 mpg... it would be ridiculous to assume that average mileage is 27.5 mpg. Blame the simplistic math here.
Short distance commuting (city or highway) is bad for mileage, in hybrid or non-hybrid especially if the car doesn't warm up long enough. This also comes from my personal experience.
Short distance commuting (city or highway) is bad for mileage, in hybrid or non-hybrid especially if the car doesn't warm up long enough.
That is a fact. However my Suburban is used mostly for trips to the Home Depot 3 miles away. Or long trips. My around town mileage never varies from tank to tank more than 5%. You are telling me that losing 33% of your fuel efficiency is normal on short trips. I would shove that car down the throat of the Honda dealer. Then join the class action suit that is sure to be on the horizon. I realize that it is the EPA that makes those grossly over optimistic mileage claims. Toyota, Ford and Honda could refute them if they were honest.
Whoa, fellas - let's not shove any cars anywhere....
OK here is the fact listing:
All cars lose efficiency when operating below optimum engine temps.
Fact 2:
Hybrid cars use the electric portion of the engine to enhance MPG, and a key part of that "electric assistance" is the AutoStop feature, which by design DOES NOT ACTIVATE until the engine reaches a certain optimum temp.
Fact 3:
Using the electric assist is in part what separates Hybrid cars MPG from a non-hybrid model.
Fact 4:
When electric assist is not used, Hybrids have no adavantage but neither do they have a disadvantage over their non-hybrid counterparts.
You are right on all issues. I also think that a person with the will power to drive the HAH as some of you HCH drivers have learned to drive, will get close to the EPA mileage. I just don't believe human nature is such that many will have that will power. A car like the HCH is not going to slam you back in the seat, so the tendency is to try and get the most from the car that it was designed to accomplish. The result is the HCH is right at the EPA averages. The HAH was designed to prove you can have power and good mileage. Honda failed to take into consideration human nature. I don't know many people that have fast cars that do not drive fast.
Why is it Honda's responsibility to factor in that people like the "go" pedal? Every car companies will sell what people want. Do over 50% of the drivers on the road really need SUVs? No, but many people want them. So car companies make them. People have made claims that they will never look at hybrids because of "poor" performance. Honda is, among other things, filling in that gap with the Accord Hybrid.
People have made claims that they will never look at hybrids because of "poor" performance.
I just don't understand why someone that is looking for a high performance car would even think of a hybrid. You want to go fast get an EVO MR or even a V6 Accord is fairly fast. Save the money you spend for all the hybrid stuff and put it in your tank and race down the street. I don't know it just is not logical to me to try and get both from one car. And early mileage returns are favoring my viewpoint. The misleading Honda ads would have you to believe you can have it all. You can, but not at the same time. No free lunch!
5% is too little to even figure out in a low mileage vehicle like Suburban. That would be like less than an mpg. But, if you’re accurate in your observation while driving around greater distance that allows your vehicle to run at optimum temperature as opposed to not, it is possible that your vehicle is either delivering worse fuel economy on longer drives than it should or it is bending the norm.
You are telling me that losing 33% of your fuel efficiency is normal on short trips.
Never measured it as accurately, so never quoted a number. How did you arrive at these numbers, and involving MY driving?
Toyota, Ford and Honda could refute them if they were honest.
Prove that they are dishonest. If you can’t then your assumption is wrong (again).
I just don't believe human nature is such that many will have that will power.
Blame it on humans, not the car or the technology involved especially if latter is capable of delivering promised results.
“No free lunch” contradicts nearly all your posts. BTW, some people don’t want to drive a car like EVO. Are you having hard time figuring out why a variety exists in the first place?
"C&D mag tested a Honda Civic hybrid in one mountain range, and exhausted the battery pack after a mile's upward driving."
.
That is called "stupidity". It's obvious what they did: Drove the car without shifting to lower gears, until they emptied the battery. S-t-u-p-i-d
In contrast, I drove my Insight over the Colorado Rockies on U.S. 40 (steeeeeeep grades), in 3rd gear, and my battery was still near-full at the top! When you drive a hybrid, you have to use that thing in your head called a "brain". If you're climbing a mountain, and you're emptying the battery, shift to a lower gear.
ilooked up the numbers again, and i'm wrong about the pzev focus (2004)pollution ratings. it's 9 for smog and 7 for ghg. hah gets 9/8.
the greenhouses gas rating is dependent on miles, the better your gas mileage, the higher the rating. my focus is rated 25/33 for gas mileage.
i get 28-31.5 in the summer, 26.5 to 28 now in winter. most of the driving has been 5 to 15 miles one way. the farthest i have gone with it is was 80 miles round trip with 2 passengers. i thank that pretty much validates that the focus is going to meet/exceed epa mileage ratings. if the hah can do the same it, will have a better rating(in the real world).
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Re: METRO. I WOULD rather do that. I did it for a year however I still would have had to replace the car. I am still a long drive to the METRO. In addition, I had to drive out of the city at least once a week. In the last 4 months the nature of the job has changed, including parking provided, and a lot more getting around town.
you: I don't know it just is not logical to me to try and get both from one car.
me: I agree. No matter if you have just an ICE or an ICE/hybrid, if you go for power, your trading away mpg. And if you go for mpg you give up power.
Now since there are many powerful cars already to choose from that won't be too far from the HAH if you're driving with performance in mind, why would I choose to pay many thousands more? If I wanted economy I would get a 4-cyl. Camry or Accord and save even more.
And if you want real performance, and decent mileage, you could try something like my 5.7L Firebird which is an automatic, and gets 25mpg mostly rural highway, and 28mpg highway. That's not far from what these HAH drivers are reporting real-world mpg. I'll give them 5-10% mpg when broke in.
And I used to have a 3.8L 5-sp '98 Camaro and could get 35mpg hwy with that. I'm just trying to point out this HAH is not that great a leap forward.
i've got it. use the parking space or lose it. you probably worked hard to get it. i've recently started working in an urban area, and i can see why parking can be a precious commodity.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
I am able to obtain EPA mileage only on flat-straight roads w/o stopping. City mileage is in the low-20's and in my hilly home area, I'm averaging a combined 23-24. I have about 1200 mi on the car to date. My range on a tank of gas is more like 300 miles. Beyond the disappointing mileage, which Honda North America says will improve up to the 7500-mile mark, the car is excellent. Some plusses and minuses:
Plusses:
1. Power. This car has 316 lb/ft of torque and you can feel it. It's faster than the Lexus IS300 it's replacing, and bigger.
2. Nav. system. This is the easiest and most logical nav system I've seen. Combined with the voice-activation features, the entire vehicle control system is a treat. It does take some getting used to so that your commands will be properly understood, otherwise "Display Route Home" will be interpreted as "Disk 3 track 10."
3. A/C. We've had some days in the 80's lately, and the a/c got the car very cool very quickly, even working well during auto stop. There is a noticeable dropoff in a/c performance during auto stop, but it'll keep you cool enough unless you've just started rolling in the bottom of Death Valley.
4. Space. This is a very large, family car.
5. Ergonomics. Everything is within reach, easy to figure out, and very comfortable and easy on the eyes. Except for the following exceptions.
Minuses:
1. Bad mileage. I hope this continues to improve with extended break-in, as Honda N.A. claims, but as is, there is really no point in getting a hybrid over a regular V6 Accord except for the gizmo factor, or if you're an eco-snob (I'm into gizmos).\
2. Lack of some luxury items. This is an expensive car, would it be too much to ask for an auto-dimming rearview mirror? How about a passenger power seat? Driver seat memory? Auto-on headlamps.
3. No spare. Come on, you're joking right? No spare? Even the parts man at Honda didn't believe me when I went in to try to purchase a spare tire aftermarket. Honda N.A. promises an accessory kit to fill this need in the next few weeks, and hopefully a memo will be sent to the local parts dept.
4. Miscellaneous faults. The nav. display doesn't dim enough for night-time driving, you have to dim it manually. The headlights are not the strongest. The voice activation system is not perfect, and requires manually changing modes (from say a/c display to map display) for some commands to be understood. There is noticeable torque-steer with all that power going to the front wheels. The torque curve flattens out drastically around 4000 rpm. Auto-stop sometimes doesn't work if the defrost is engaged.
Time will tell if this was a wise investment over the regular Accord. I'll post periodically with mileage updates as the car breaks in.
___Thank you for the +/- list. You are the first consumer that has reported on A/C use during Auto-stop and it sounds like it performed well indeed!
___As a tip, your NAVI contains an FCD (Fuel Consumption Display). In the FCD screen(s), you have an Instantaneous consumption graph that shows you in real time what a given speed, acceleration, road grade, road type, differing temperatures, etc. is actually costing you in terms of Fuel consumed. I highly recommend that you begin to use this information to learn new skills to improve your AH’s FE.
I just drove our new Accord Hybrid about 100 miles with most of the trip on cruise control at 60 or 65 (freeway driving). The mileage got up to 23. We have about 500 miles on the car. Short commute driving gets well under 20. We work hard to drive smoothly, and slowly.
This is so far below EPA estimates that something is amiss. And, yes, we paid a premium.
Well under 20, you're not kidding something is amiss, sticky brake caliper, thermostat stuck open, transmission trouble ? Most importantly can you convince a Honda dealer something is wrong ?
You probably already thought of this, but new car dealers are notorious for not setting tire pressures correctly. Is the tire pressure set as recommended?
Not to be picky, but the Accord Hybrid only has 232 ft lbs @ 5000rpm with the IMA in motion.
"Plusses:
1. Power. This car has 316 lb/ft of torque and you can feel it. It's faster than the Lexus IS300 it's replacing, and bigger. "
I agree with your lack of luxery items. One would think since it's the third year, they would add some things. HID's are nice. I added them aftermarket. Actually use less power than Halogens. Toyota knew that.
Sunroof...well, they couldn't add the lbs, so they opted out for the first year until they figure out how to trim the wieght. Same with the passenger power seat.
Good luck with the car. I can't justify the cost delta but enjoy the regular V6 a lot.
I drive the heck out of my standard AV6 Sedan and average 21-23mpg overall. On the highway at a cruising speed of 72-75mph where I normally stay, I get essentially the same.
I've only driven 55-65 mph and tracked the mpg one time for about an hour and noticed that the trip computer average for that run went to about 26mpg.
In the end, it's just my opinion, but if they could get the HAH to hit mid 30's mpg in the city and mid 40's on the highway, they have me interested. Otherwise, the cost of my gas is basically irrelevant.
IMO, it's the that Honda didn't consider human nature, it's that mpg ratings are derived from an outdated and misunderstood testing method.
The city test 11 miles long and is a stop go with an average speed of 20 mph). The trip lasts 31 minutes and has 23 stops. About 18 percent of the time is spent idling to similuate waiting for traffic lights. A short freeway driving segment is included in the test. The engine is initially started after being parked overnight.
The highway test is a 10 mile run with an average speed of 48 mph. The vehicle is started "hot" and there is very little idling and no stops.
In addition, a vehicle's mileage is based on measurements of the vehicle's emission output instead of directly measuring the actual fuel consumed by the vehicle. IMO, this is likely why hybrids and other LEV's are even further off what the real world presents when comparing the mpg "average" that is on the window sticker and specs given by Honda.
"I also think that a person with the will power to drive the HAH as some of you HCH drivers have learned to drive, will get close to the EPA mileage..... The result is the HCH is right at the EPA averages......Honda failed to take into consideration human nature.
The item of note in regards to the EPA testing is that if said driver drove the City simulation with his or her AH at the same speeds, same accelerations and decelerations (stops), same ambient temperatures, no load accessories, and the highway simulation with the speed ups and slow downs, as well as ambient temps, etc. they would achieve EPA estimates in a brand new automobile as that of the FTP75 tests. The Road and Aero drag numbers are handled by a compensation factor of 22% for the highway test and 10% for the city test. Unfortunately, today’s road speeds, traffic congestion, city/highway %’s, ambient temps, and accessory use/load is far from ideal by comparison to the lab produced FTP cycles.
In regards to the CO2 Bag measurement, it does correlate to the amount of fuel consumed very closely. Today’s Emission control technologies cannot change the ~ 19.x #’s of CO2 emitted/gallon of fuel consumed so measuring it in this fashion across all automobiles is not flawed as some may think.
The auto manufacturers are not skewing the tests, they are reporting on the new car window sticker exactly what the car achieved in the test(s) as they were performed. The EPA does not test all cars but relies on the manufacturers to report the actuals as they were achieved. Do you think the Prius II or HCH was designed specifically around the FTP test cycles? I would guess that because of the large shortfall to real world that the Prius II in particular was but it still achieved its estimates on the FTP test cycles as stated or there would be some severe consequences in terms of certification. In other words, this isn’t Toyota, Honda, Ford, or GM misstating the numbers, it is the tests themselves overstating what the average consumer believes he or she will be receiving in the real world.
Finally, ones driving habits are definitely the key to whether you will achieve close to EPA estimates, fall short, or exceed them. Most are falling short by ~ 20%. There are also those that can absolutely cream the EPA estimates in both the city and highway tests using the tools and techniques of a hypermiler. If you were to run the AH at 58 mph down the highway here in Illinois for example, it will quite easily achieve > 40 mpg. How much greater has yet to be discovered
Although nothing to do with this topic or thread, I want to thank you for the info you provided on the STB’s, HPF kit, and rear bar on your Accord. Your EX V6 sounds like a wolf in sheep’s clothing waiting in the wings for the average TL/TSX to pull into its gun sights. It must be neat to see the faces of the TL/TSX drivers at the Auto-Cross events you participate in when the lowly but still very powerful Accord cleans their clock ;-)
"The item of note in regards to the EPA testing is that if said driver drove the City simulation with his or her AH at the same speeds, same accelerations and decelerations (stops), same ambient temperatures, no load accessories, and the highway simulation with the speed ups and slow downs, as well as ambient temps, etc. they would achieve EPA estimates in a brand new automobile as that of the FTP75 tests. "
REPLY:
The above is true and not what's in debate...not entirely. The MPG's stated by the manufactures are estimates, not actuals. The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers states that the numbers on the stickers are generally reliable estimates of what a consumer’s mileage may be. It’s just like the sticker says, ‘Actual mileage may vary.’ I personally have exceeded the mileage on the sticker too, but not in real world driving. That's what the point of all the complaints I've seen on mpgs is relating to -- Real world results. Since the EPA last adjusted the formula for estimating vehicle fuel economy in 1984, highway speed limits have been raised and urban sprawl has created longer, more congested commutes, thus the results today are not being seen by many.
YOU WROTE:
<snipped>
The auto manufacturers are not skewing the tests,......... In other words, this isn’t Toyota, Honda, Ford, or GM misstating the numbers, it is the tests themselves overstating what the average consumer believes he or she will be receiving in the real world.
REPLY:
Correct, and let me say that I didn't mean the manufactures are skewing results, but they aren't reporting what is considered real world accurate numbers. Automakers generate a large percentage of their revenues and profits from the sale of SUVs and pickup trucks, and a change in the way the EPA calculates fuel economy ratings could impact sales. Thus the lobbiests are very strong in preventing any look-see into proposed changes.
I seriously doubt these lab tests for The CAFE will change simply because the CAFE program establishes fuel efficiency standards for major automakers. That program, is administered by the Department of Transportation using EPA figures, penalizes automakers who do not achieve minimum average fuel economy targets across their car and truck lineup. In 2004, individual automakers’ cars must average 27.5 mpg, and light trucks must average 20.7 mpg. The lab procedure was put into law back in 1975 and can only be changed by Congress. Good luck at getting that to happen...especially with Bush at the throne.
Besides, the automakers contend the current EPA ratings provide consumers with an effective, objective tool to choose between competing models. Perhaps it does, but as we are seeing all over, especially in these forums, consumers don't like it and are confused. Federal law requires that auto manufacturers use only EPA estimates when promoting their vehicles.
Interestingly enough, John DiPietro, road-test editor here at Edmunds.com has been quoted as saying "most drivers will get between 75 to 87 percent of the rated mileage, with individual variations based on driving habits and traffic route. "If a new car gets less than 75 percent of its EPA rating, then it should be retested." So even the testers here know that the real world results aren't in line with window stickers.
I'm not a huge fan of them, but even consumer reports indicates that hybrid cars get less than 60 percent of EPA estimates on city streets. In Consumer Reports' real-world driving test, the Civic Hybrid averaged 26 mpg in the city, while the Toyota Prius averaged 35 mpg. That's far less than their respective EPA estimates of 47 and 60 mpg. They did however see that Hybrid cars performed much closer to EPA estimates in Consumer Reports' highway tests.
In conclusion, I just plain thing manufacturers need to come to reality and set clear expectations for consumers. Otherwise, the complaints and questions will continue on.
You may or may not have seen the links below in the past. If you haven’t, they are worth 5 minutes of your time to see what CR’s actually received with a number of automobiles.
If you look closely, I have already added one Accord Hybrid pilot to the second links list and it is only a matter of time before more follow. They won’t be making it by driving at 80 + mph or accelerating with the capabilities that the AH allows but those that are a bit more careful do stand a good chance ;-)
If it were up to the manufacturers, who is first? Should Toyota volunteer that the Toyota Prius II is really a 35/50 mpg car vs. the HCH’s 45/51 according to the EPA? That is going to hurt. Should Ford offer up that the Expedition actually only receives 11 mpg in the city or the Chevrolet Trailblazer is good for just 9 mpg when Toyota can advertise that the Sequoia is good for 15 mpg per the EPA?
Thanks for the good reads. The Bluewater artical is one I've read before too.
Now on the Trailblazer comment though, I have to say that I owned one of the first back in spring of 2001 and averaged 21mpg overall without a hitch. I was very active here at Edmunds back then. It was actually very good on gas...the I6 4200 motor that is. Not sure where the 9mpg note came from. Pehaps the V8 ?
the only reason mpg numbers are posted is because they are required by the government. in that case, if is to the advantage on the manufacturer, they advertise them. if it's wrong, blame the government.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Thanks for the plus/minus list and overview of mileage issue. I test drove the Hybrid and found somewhat, although not tremendously more power than my 2002 Accord V6. Basically, the difference must be the 16 hp electric motor assist, which also appears to smooth the otherwise jerky Accord auto transmission during rapid acceleration. It drives real nice compared to the Toyota hybrid that I drove a year ago.
The 16hp electric motor is too small. I'd like to see more electrical power, and less dependence upon the V6 during in town driving. The cylinder use reduction on the freeway is a great idea, but imagine the fuel savings if a beefier electric motor were activated on the freeway?
One minus not included is the smaller trunk space, due to the battery. 10cf is not a large roomy luggage space even for two people. I also was annoyed at the lack of "luxury features" such as a self-dimming rear view mirror. The options in audio were also limited. Why can't I plug in my iPod and trash the 6CD changer? The huge MP3 player Honda offers is no substitute for the portability and quality of my iPod.
It wasn't in the Bluewater article and I can't quote where I heard this but another factor dealing with hybrids and EPA estimate differences deals with the regenerative braking on hybrids. Since the EPA uses a dyno on the driven wheels (front), the full effect of regenerative braking is utilized. However, in realworld driving, some braking is done by the rear wheels so the regenerative gain is less than on a dyno. Hence, the City mode where regenerative braking is much more prevalent, will yield bigger discrepancies than Highway mode, as noted previously.
But, to reiterate a point made before, this is not deception by the automaker but rather a fault in the EPA test simulation.
Because the 16hp motor spins around the driveshaft, there's a limit to how large it can be. You don't want to waste energy spinning a large weight.
Also, remember that "tiny" motor is generating ~30 foot-pounds at idle, when the engine is barely making 15. So Most of your stop-n-go city acceleration comes from the *Electric*.
The electric motor is tiny in size, NOT torque. :-) troy
The leading consumers magazine (CU) in their april auto issue has apparently classifed the HAC as the top rated car in the family sedan class, and surpassed the other Accords.
Will Honda Dealers now apply even bigger MVA (market value adjustments) as a result?
Will Honda Dealers now apply even bigger MVA (market value adjustments) as a result?
They are starting out with real poor sales figures. It may be the $3000 some dealers are tacking on to the already high MSRP. Some posters are seeing them below MSRP. If you want one shop around. It would be best to get on the Auto trader and see if any are listed below MSRP. It may be a short flight away.
Now that the AH is available for $1,000 under invoice
The credit has to go to the car buying public. They would not allow Honda to rob them. It further proves that a car has to be able to make economical sense for the mainstream public to buy them. In the case of the Prius there are still some DeCaprio wannabes willing to pay a premium. Even the Prius is losing some of that over priced glitter.
The premium for a V6 Accord EX with leather is about $2250 compared to a I4 Accord EX automatic with leather. For that premium, you get a quicker car, lower fuel economy, and higher emissions.
The premium for the HAH over the V6 Accord EX with leather is now about $3000, as you stated. After deducting the Federal tax deduction, it's about $2500. For that premium, you get a quicker car, higher fuel economy, and lower emissions compared to the V6. IMO, you get more for your "premium" with the HAH than you get with the V6. And lots of people buy the V6 vs. the I4 Accord.
Gary, you're so kind to bless "US" with hollywood mentors in this our world of "smart cars". You indicate, so delicatly, that "WE" are just are a bunch of "wanna bes". Not too kind Gary! We, on the other hand, direct our remarks to the vehicles that you "non-wanna bes" drive. Of course the problem is two fold. Big gas guzzlers and uninformed owners of "those other cars" that are devouring our limited fossil fuels. Looking to the future I think we can agreeon one thing. The future is not going to include "old thinking" and we must acclimate to these times of "cleaner air" and "fuel efficiency". Why else would we be having these discussions? Culliganman( a better day ahead))
The premium for a V6 Accord EX with leather is about $2250 compared to a I4 Accord EX automatic with leather. For that premium, you get a quicker car, lower fuel economy, and higher emissions.
Here in the Chicago area, the premium is even less. The rest of what you stated above is obvious unless you were to purchase the LEV-II versions of both trims.
IMO, you get more for your "premium" with the HAH than you get with the V6. And lots of people buy the V6 vs. the I4 Accord.
Far more Accord’s are sold with I4’s then V6’s let alone how much cleaner a PZEV equipped I4 is by comparison. In terms of the premium, do we really have to reiterate what is lost with the AH for that premium?
culli... gary can be somewhat abrasive in his presentation, but for the most part, i agree with his perspective. hybrids are new technology, and people are trying to figure out if it works. that can mean a different things to different people. at this point, there probably isn't an economic benefit over buying a non hybrid. the fuel efficiency/emissions benefit isn't a slam dunk either. it seems to work for some people, but not for others. i follow these boards because i wonder why that is. if you are buying one because it is the latest and greatest or it has a bit more performance, then i have no question of that.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
In terms of the premium, do we really have to reiterate what is lost with the AH for that premium?
You can if you want to, but that ground has been covered many times before, so it is as you say, obvious. As is the fact that more I4 Accords are sold than V6s. As is the cleanliness of a PZEV I4 Accord vs. a V6. But that's not what I was talking about. If you want to spiral off into that tangent again, be my guest.
Comments
really, i along with others are interested in people's actual experience with this vehicle, so please post how it is working out for you.
Regenerative braking is a largely misunderstood term. Simply put, it is reversing the role of the electric motor to now act as a generator. Instead of adding to the energy from the camshaft, the (now) generator derives the energy of the turning axle, and that’s it!
As for mechanical components, you’re correct. Everything else is conventional.
you: With hybrid power, the changes are substantial in terms of fuel economy and emissions.
you don't need a hybrid system that gives you 260hp. There are plenty of regular cars that can do that.
Sure. Honda has a few of them and more, but none of them can touch the emission levels of the hybrid, or get you 30 mpg in city driving.
And if you're using that engine power it is for a few seconds of your drive, unless you don't care about speed limits.
Accord Hybrid isn’t an industry first to be delivering 255 HP or more. How does it relate to this topic?
What there is a shortage of is high-mileage economical hybrids.
Then ask for it, or better yet, buy one. A typical issue with Civic Hybrid is often quoted as lack of performance. If you want high mileage with “okay” performance, you’ve an answer. Accord Hybrid offers a choice to people who want performance that belongs in the class it competes in, while also providing class leading fuel economy and emissions. Different strokes.
260hp for an Accord makes no sense, when hybrids should be focused on getting people turned on to getting good mpg.
I see a few issues here. One, stereo-typing hybrid technology as something that must give up performance to achieve high fuel economy (now that by itself is limitless, for many it appears 30 mpg in city isn’t good in a family sedan). Two, it might not make sense to you, but Accord Hybrid isn’t breaking any new grounds in terms of delivering (obscene amount of) horse power. And finally, it is getting good gas mileage.
And if you do these things, you'll find that the gas savings in $'s between an HAH and a hemi 300C would be very small.
After all your points, interesting that you would be justifying for a car with 340 HP against another with 255 HP. BUT, let us not stick to assumptions and shoot in the dark.
But to hear people on these forums talk, its the main consideration in fuel economy.
Compared to what?
I don't see the economic sense of buying the HAH; and as stated above I don't see where it is a big mpg/environmental improvement worth touting as "green".
As you suggested earlier, 300C Hemi would be a better choice. Did I get that right?
If you buy a car for one or two reasons as your priority and everything else is a non-issue, then HAH isn’t for you because it isn’t trying to be the best in everything, just among the best in everything. Not everybody wants to limit oneself to one or two selection criteria.
1. Would I have bought a V6 Accord two months ago?
2. Do I want to get the best MPG available in a 255 HP car in the USA?
3. Do I want to pollute ZERO when I am stopped in traffic or at a red light?
4. Do I need a high performance, near luxury, five passenger sedan in the $32K-$35K price range?
5. Do I want to promote the continued production of Hybrid cars?
If you answer yes to one or more of those questions, then the HAH is a good fit for you.
Focus is a compact that happens to have worse fuel economy rating without having performance edge on the Accord Hybrid. I hope it isn’t the one that delivers 22 mpg in the city. Focus has poorer GHG emissions too!
Pollution rating isn’t known (to me) for HAH at this time since I don’t see it on the EPA website, but it will be interesting to find out how this powerful midsize stacks up against your Focus.
It might be if the car could deliver that. So far it looks like 24 mpg is more the average combined. That is not even close to the competition. Many midsize and large vehicles are getting better mileage than the HAH to this point in time. You can buy a Honda mini-van that gives that good a mileage and not be cramped into a little car with a big price tag.
BTW, how many of them have substantial amount of miles (enough to be considered "past break-in")? From my personal experiences, a typical Honda improves in terms of smoothness and fuel economy around 5-7K miles.
I guess we will see when that happens. I was struck by the fact only one person was able to get over 30 mpg. His commute is longer than all the rest. His mileage was over 30 from the get go. So he should maybe be getting closer to the 36 mpg by now. I don't know what his mix of driving is. There is a big gap between the EPA 32 mpg combined and someone getting 21 mpg combined. Personally I think it is hard to keep from racing when a car is overpowered as the HAH is.
Another point you don't seem to get is that... if I drive 5 miles and average 20 mpg, and another person drives 5000 miles averaging 35 mpg... it would be ridiculous to assume that average mileage is 27.5 mpg. Blame the simplistic math here.
Short distance commuting (city or highway) is bad for mileage, in hybrid or non-hybrid especially if the car doesn't warm up long enough. This also comes from my personal experience.
That is a fact. However my Suburban is used mostly for trips to the Home Depot 3 miles away. Or long trips. My around town mileage never varies from tank to tank more than 5%. You are telling me that losing 33% of your fuel efficiency is normal on short trips. I would shove that car down the throat of the Honda dealer. Then join the class action suit that is sure to be on the horizon. I realize that it is the EPA that makes those grossly over optimistic mileage claims. Toyota, Ford and Honda could refute them if they were honest.
OK here is the fact listing:
All cars lose efficiency when operating below optimum engine temps.
Fact 2:
Hybrid cars use the electric portion of the engine to enhance MPG, and a key part of that "electric assistance" is the AutoStop feature, which by design DOES NOT ACTIVATE until the engine reaches a certain optimum temp.
Fact 3:
Using the electric assist is in part what separates Hybrid cars MPG from a non-hybrid model.
Fact 4:
When electric assist is not used, Hybrids have no adavantage but neither do they have a disadvantage over their non-hybrid counterparts.
I just don't understand why someone that is looking for a high performance car would even think of a hybrid. You want to go fast get an EVO MR or even a V6 Accord is fairly fast. Save the money you spend for all the hybrid stuff and put it in your tank and race down the street. I don't know it just is not logical to me to try and get both from one car. And early mileage returns are favoring my viewpoint. The misleading Honda ads would have you to believe you can have it all. You can, but not at the same time. No free lunch!
You are telling me that losing 33% of your fuel efficiency is normal on short trips.
Never measured it as accurately, so never quoted a number. How did you arrive at these numbers, and involving MY driving?
Toyota, Ford and Honda could refute them if they were honest.
Prove that they are dishonest. If you can’t then your assumption is wrong (again).
I just don't believe human nature is such that many will have that will power.
Blame it on humans, not the car or the technology involved especially if latter is capable of delivering promised results.
OK guys - we are off into parsing each other's post word by word. Let's stay in the big picture here and not have personal attacks.
The HAH seems to be going for a premium - is it worth it to YOU and if so WHY. If it ISN't - WHY NOT?
Let's keep that the focus of the discussion.
Thanks!
.
That is called "stupidity". It's obvious what they did: Drove the car without shifting to lower gears, until they emptied the battery. S-t-u-p-i-d
In contrast, I drove my Insight over the Colorado Rockies on U.S. 40 (steeeeeeep grades), in 3rd gear, and my battery was still near-full at the top! When you drive a hybrid, you have to use that thing in your head called a "brain". If you're climbing a mountain, and you're emptying the battery, shift to a lower gear.
To Car & Driver - DUH.
troy
the greenhouses gas rating is dependent on miles, the better your gas mileage, the higher the rating. my focus is rated 25/33 for gas mileage.
i get 28-31.5 in the summer, 26.5 to 28 now in winter. most of the driving has been 5 to 15 miles one way. the farthest i have gone with it is was 80 miles round trip with 2 passengers. i thank that pretty much validates that the focus is going to meet/exceed epa mileage ratings. if the hah can do the same it, will have a better rating(in the real world).
Re: METRO. I WOULD rather do that. I did it for a year however I still would have had to replace the car. I am still a long drive to the METRO. In addition, I had to drive out of the city at least once a week. In the last 4 months the nature of the job has changed, including parking provided, and a lot more getting around town.
Driving is 15 min faster than METRO.
me: I agree. No matter if you have just an ICE or an ICE/hybrid, if you go for power, your trading away mpg. And if you go for mpg you give up power.
Now since there are many powerful cars already to choose from that won't be too far from the HAH if you're driving with performance in mind, why would I choose to pay many thousands more? If I wanted economy I would get a 4-cyl. Camry or Accord and save even more.
And if you want real performance, and decent mileage, you could try something like my 5.7L Firebird which is an automatic, and gets 25mpg mostly rural highway, and 28mpg highway. That's not far from what these HAH drivers are reporting real-world mpg. I'll give them 5-10% mpg when broke in.
And I used to have a 3.8L 5-sp '98 Camaro and could get 35mpg hwy with that. I'm just trying to point out this HAH is not that great a leap forward.
Plusses:
1. Power. This car has 316 lb/ft of torque and you can feel it. It's faster than the Lexus IS300 it's replacing, and bigger.
2. Nav. system. This is the easiest and most logical nav system I've seen. Combined with the voice-activation features, the entire vehicle control system is a treat. It does take some getting used to so that your commands will be properly understood, otherwise "Display Route Home" will be interpreted as "Disk 3 track 10."
3. A/C. We've had some days in the 80's lately, and the a/c got the car very cool very quickly, even working well during auto stop. There is a noticeable dropoff in a/c performance during auto stop, but it'll keep you cool enough unless you've just started rolling in the bottom of Death Valley.
4. Space. This is a very large, family car.
5. Ergonomics. Everything is within reach, easy to figure out, and very comfortable and easy on the eyes. Except for the following exceptions.
Minuses:
1. Bad mileage. I hope this continues to improve with extended break-in, as Honda N.A. claims, but as is, there is really no point in getting a hybrid over a regular V6 Accord except for the gizmo factor, or if you're an eco-snob (I'm into gizmos).\
2. Lack of some luxury items. This is an expensive car, would it be too much to ask for an auto-dimming rearview mirror? How about a passenger power seat? Driver seat memory? Auto-on headlamps.
3. No spare. Come on, you're joking right? No spare? Even the parts man at Honda didn't believe me when I went in to try to purchase a spare tire aftermarket. Honda N.A. promises an accessory kit to fill this need in the next few weeks, and hopefully a memo will be sent to the local parts dept.
4. Miscellaneous faults. The nav. display doesn't dim enough for night-time driving, you have to dim it manually. The headlights are not the strongest. The voice activation system is not perfect, and requires manually changing modes (from say a/c display to map display) for some commands to be understood. There is noticeable torque-steer with all that power going to the front wheels. The torque curve flattens out drastically around 4000 rpm. Auto-stop sometimes doesn't work if the defrost is engaged.
Time will tell if this was a wise investment over the regular Accord. I'll post periodically with mileage updates as the car breaks in.
___Thank you for the +/- list. You are the first consumer that has reported on A/C use during Auto-stop and it sounds like it performed well indeed!
___As a tip, your NAVI contains an FCD (Fuel Consumption Display). In the FCD screen(s), you have an Instantaneous consumption graph that shows you in real time what a given speed, acceleration, road grade, road type, differing temperatures, etc. is actually costing you in terms of Fuel consumed. I highly recommend that you begin to use this information to learn new skills to improve your AH’s FE.
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
This is so far below EPA estimates that something is amiss. And, yes, we paid a premium.
"Plusses:
1. Power. This car has 316 lb/ft of torque and you can feel it. It's faster than the Lexus IS300 it's replacing, and bigger. "
I agree with your lack of luxery items. One would think since it's the third year, they would add some things. HID's are nice. I added them aftermarket. Actually use less power than Halogens. Toyota knew that.
Sunroof...well, they couldn't add the lbs, so they opted out for the first year until they figure out how to trim the wieght. Same with the passenger power seat.
Good luck with the car. I can't justify the cost delta but enjoy the regular V6 a lot.
I've only driven 55-65 mph and tracked the mpg one time for about an hour and noticed that the trip computer average for that run went to about 26mpg.
In the end, it's just my opinion, but if they could get the HAH to hit mid 30's mpg in the city and mid 40's on the highway, they have me interested. Otherwise, the cost of my gas is basically irrelevant.
The city test 11 miles long and is a stop go with an average speed of 20 mph). The trip lasts 31 minutes and has 23 stops. About 18 percent of the time is spent idling to similuate waiting for traffic lights. A short freeway driving segment is included in the test. The engine is initially started after being parked overnight.
The highway test is a 10 mile run with an average speed of 48 mph. The vehicle is started "hot" and there is very little idling and no stops.
In addition, a vehicle's mileage is based on measurements of the vehicle's emission output instead of directly measuring the actual fuel consumed by the vehicle. IMO, this is likely why hybrids and other LEV's are even further off what the real world presents when comparing the mpg "average" that is on the window sticker and specs given by Honda.
Feel free to review the testing here: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cert/factshts/fefact01.pdf
"I also think that a person with the will power to drive the HAH as some of you HCH drivers have learned to drive, will get close to the EPA mileage..... The result is the HCH is right at the EPA averages......Honda failed to take into consideration human nature.
The item of note in regards to the EPA testing is that if said driver drove the City simulation with his or her AH at the same speeds, same accelerations and decelerations (stops), same ambient temperatures, no load accessories, and the highway simulation with the speed ups and slow downs, as well as ambient temps, etc. they would achieve EPA estimates in a brand new automobile as that of the FTP75 tests. The Road and Aero drag numbers are handled by a compensation factor of 22% for the highway test and 10% for the city test. Unfortunately, today’s road speeds, traffic congestion, city/highway %’s, ambient temps, and accessory use/load is far from ideal by comparison to the lab produced FTP cycles.
In regards to the CO2 Bag measurement, it does correlate to the amount of fuel consumed very closely. Today’s Emission control technologies cannot change the ~ 19.x #’s of CO2 emitted/gallon of fuel consumed so measuring it in this fashion across all automobiles is not flawed as some may think.
The auto manufacturers are not skewing the tests, they are reporting on the new car window sticker exactly what the car achieved in the test(s) as they were performed. The EPA does not test all cars but relies on the manufacturers to report the actuals as they were achieved. Do you think the Prius II or HCH was designed specifically around the FTP test cycles? I would guess that because of the large shortfall to real world that the Prius II in particular was but it still achieved its estimates on the FTP test cycles as stated or there would be some severe consequences in terms of certification. In other words, this isn’t Toyota, Honda, Ford, or GM misstating the numbers, it is the tests themselves overstating what the average consumer believes he or she will be receiving in the real world.
Finally, ones driving habits are definitely the key to whether you will achieve close to EPA estimates, fall short, or exceed them. Most are falling short by ~ 20%. There are also those that can absolutely cream the EPA estimates in both the city and highway tests using the tools and techniques of a hypermiler. If you were to run the AH at 58 mph down the highway here in Illinois for example, it will quite easily achieve > 40 mpg. How much greater has yet to be discovered
Although nothing to do with this topic or thread, I want to thank you for the info you provided on the STB’s, HPF kit, and rear bar on your Accord. Your EX V6 sounds like a wolf in sheep’s clothing waiting in the wings for the average TL/TSX to pull into its gun sights. It must be neat to see the faces of the TL/TSX drivers at the Auto-Cross events you participate in when the lowly but still very powerful Accord cleans their clock ;-)
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
YOU WROTE:
"The item of note in regards to the EPA testing is that if said driver drove the City simulation with his or her AH at the same speeds, same accelerations and decelerations (stops), same ambient temperatures, no load accessories, and the highway simulation with the speed ups and slow downs, as well as ambient temps, etc. they would achieve EPA estimates in a brand new automobile as that of the FTP75 tests. "
REPLY:
The above is true and not what's in debate...not entirely. The MPG's stated by the manufactures are estimates, not actuals. The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers states that the numbers on the stickers are generally reliable estimates of what a consumer’s mileage may be. It’s just like the sticker says, ‘Actual mileage may vary.’ I personally have exceeded the mileage on the sticker too, but not in real world driving. That's what the point of all the complaints I've seen on mpgs is relating to -- Real world results. Since the EPA last adjusted the formula for estimating vehicle fuel economy in 1984, highway speed limits have been raised and urban sprawl has created longer, more congested commutes, thus the results today are not being seen by many.
YOU WROTE:
<snipped>
The auto manufacturers are not skewing the tests,......... In other words, this isn’t Toyota, Honda, Ford, or GM misstating the numbers, it is the tests themselves overstating what the average consumer believes he or she will be receiving in the real world.
REPLY:
Correct, and let me say that I didn't mean the manufactures are skewing results, but they aren't reporting what is considered real world accurate numbers. Automakers generate a large percentage of their revenues and profits from the sale of SUVs and pickup trucks, and a change in the way the EPA calculates fuel economy ratings could impact sales. Thus the lobbiests are very strong in preventing any look-see into proposed changes.
I seriously doubt these lab tests for The CAFE will change simply because the CAFE program establishes fuel efficiency standards for major automakers. That program, is administered by the Department of Transportation using EPA figures, penalizes automakers who do not achieve minimum average fuel economy targets across their car and truck lineup. In 2004, individual automakers’ cars must average 27.5 mpg, and light trucks must average 20.7 mpg. The lab procedure was put into law back in 1975 and can only be changed by Congress. Good luck at getting that to happen...especially with Bush at the throne.
Besides, the automakers contend the current EPA ratings provide consumers with an effective, objective tool to choose between competing models. Perhaps it does, but as we are seeing all over, especially in these forums, consumers don't like it and are confused. Federal law requires that auto manufacturers use only EPA estimates when promoting their vehicles.
Interestingly enough, John DiPietro, road-test editor here at Edmunds.com has been quoted as saying "most drivers will get between 75 to 87 percent of the rated mileage, with individual variations based on driving habits and traffic route. "If a new car gets less than 75 percent of its EPA rating, then it should be retested." So even the testers here know that the real world results aren't in line with window stickers.
I'm not a huge fan of them, but even consumer reports indicates that hybrid cars get less than 60 percent of EPA estimates on city streets. In Consumer Reports' real-world driving test, the Civic Hybrid averaged 26 mpg in the city, while the Toyota Prius averaged 35 mpg. That's far less than their respective EPA estimates of 47 and 60 mpg. They did however see that Hybrid cars performed much closer to EPA estimates in Consumer Reports' highway tests.
In conclusion, I just plain thing manufacturers need to come to reality and set clear expectations for consumers. Otherwise, the complaints and questions will continue on.
PS....thanks for the kind words on my car.
You may or may not have seen the links below in the past. If you haven’t, they are worth 5 minutes of your time to see what CR’s actually received with a number of automobiles.
03: http://autos.yahoo.com/consumerreports/article/fuel_efficient_car- s_category.html
04: http://www.consumerreports.org/main/detailv4.jsp?CONTENT%3C%3Ecnt- _id=303375&FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=113261
In regards to the EPA vs. real world Delta’s, the best written article I have seen to date is the following although some of their sources are a bit suspect: http://www.bluewaternetwork.org/reports/rep_gw_EPAdocket.pdf
And finally, there are those that do achieve far higher then EPA estimates in the real world no matter the conditions for example:
http://www.greenhybrid.com/compare/mileage/ and http://www.greenhybrid.com/discuss/showthread.php?t=679
If you look closely, I have already added one Accord Hybrid pilot to the second links list and it is only a matter of time before more follow. They won’t be making it by driving at 80 + mph or accelerating with the capabilities that the AH allows but those that are a bit more careful do stand a good chance ;-)
If it were up to the manufacturers, who is first? Should Toyota volunteer that the Toyota Prius II is really a 35/50 mpg car vs. the HCH’s 45/51 according to the EPA? That is going to hurt. Should Ford offer up that the Expedition actually only receives 11 mpg in the city or the Chevrolet Trailblazer is good for just 9 mpg when Toyota can advertise that the Sequoia is good for 15 mpg per the EPA?
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
Thanks for the good reads. The Bluewater artical is one I've read before too.
Now on the Trailblazer comment though, I have to say that I owned one of the first back in spring of 2001 and averaged 21mpg overall without a hitch. I was very active here at Edmunds back then. It was actually very good on gas...the I6 4200 motor that is. Not sure where the 9mpg note came from. Pehaps the V8 ?
The 16hp electric motor is too small. I'd like to see more electrical power, and less dependence upon the V6 during in town driving. The cylinder use reduction on the freeway is a great idea, but imagine the fuel savings if a beefier electric motor were activated on the freeway?
One minus not included is the smaller trunk space, due to the battery. 10cf is not a large roomy luggage space even for two people. I also was annoyed at the lack of "luxury features" such as a self-dimming rear view mirror. The options in audio were also limited. Why can't I plug in my iPod and trash the 6CD changer? The huge MP3 player Honda offers is no substitute for the portability and quality of my iPod.
But, to reiterate a point made before, this is not deception by the automaker but rather a fault in the EPA test simulation.
Also, remember that "tiny" motor is generating ~30 foot-pounds at idle, when the engine is barely making 15. So Most of your stop-n-go city acceleration comes from the *Electric*.
The electric motor is tiny in size, NOT torque.
:-)
troy
Will be interesting to see how the mileage changes as the vehicle breaks in.
Though is it true that folks here would rather take advantage of the extra horsepower rather than the MPH?
Will Honda Dealers now apply even bigger MVA (market value adjustments) as a result?
They are starting out with real poor sales figures. It may be the $3000 some dealers are tacking on to the already high MSRP. Some posters are seeing them below MSRP. If you want one shop around. It would be best to get on the Auto trader and see if any are listed below MSRP. It may be a short flight away.
Now that the AH is available for $1,000 under invoice, it is at least in the ball park but a $3K premium over the non-Hybrid is still excessive imho.
Grand Honda - Chicago:
05 Accord Hybrid (non-NAVI): $26,895
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
The credit has to go to the car buying public. They would not allow Honda to rob them. It further proves that a car has to be able to make economical sense for the mainstream public to buy them. In the case of the Prius there are still some DeCaprio wannabes willing to pay a premium. Even the Prius is losing some of that over priced glitter.
The premium for the HAH over the V6 Accord EX with leather is now about $3000, as you stated. After deducting the Federal tax deduction, it's about $2500. For that premium, you get a quicker car, higher fuel economy, and lower emissions compared to the V6. IMO, you get more for your "premium" with the HAH than you get with the V6. And lots of people buy the V6 vs. the I4 Accord.
Culliganman( a better day ahead))
The premium for a V6 Accord EX with leather is about $2250 compared to a I4 Accord EX automatic with leather. For that premium, you get a quicker car, lower fuel economy, and higher emissions.
Grand Honda
05 Accord EX-L 4-door I4 w/ Auto: $21,975
05 Accord 4-door EX V6 w/ Auto: $23,921
Here in the Chicago area, the premium is even less. The rest of what you stated above is obvious unless you were to purchase the LEV-II versions of both trims.
IMO, you get more for your "premium" with the HAH than you get with the V6. And lots of people buy the V6 vs. the I4 Accord.
Far more Accord’s are sold with I4’s then V6’s let alone how much cleaner a PZEV equipped I4 is by comparison. In terms of the premium, do we really have to reiterate what is lost with the AH for that premium?
Good Luck
Wayne R. Gerdes
gary can be somewhat abrasive in his presentation, but for the most part, i agree with his perspective.
hybrids are new technology, and people are trying to figure out if it works. that can mean a different things to different people.
at this point, there probably isn't an economic benefit over buying a non hybrid.
the fuel efficiency/emissions benefit isn't a slam dunk either. it seems to work for some people, but not for others. i follow these boards because i wonder why that is.
if you are buying one because it is the latest and greatest or it has a bit more performance, then i have no question of that.
You can if you want to, but that ground has been covered many times before, so it is as you say, obvious. As is the fact that more I4 Accords are sold than V6s. As is the cleanliness of a PZEV I4 Accord vs. a V6. But that's not what I was talking about. If you want to spiral off into that tangent again, be my guest.