Not that simple. I'm not saying smaller is more efficient overall. However, it is true that, if you have two similar engines (except for size) putting out the same power (pushing equal cars at the same speed), the smaller engine will be more efficient for the reasons stated before. And yes, if the 1.5l and 2.4l are otherwise similar, the 1.5l will get (perhaps only a little, but measurably) better milage under those conditions. Generators are different - when generating they're running under full load, so smaller isn't better. And yes, engines do run most efficiently on a work out per gallon at full throttle, assuming you're near/at your torque peak. But remember, we're talking cruising here, not full throttle operation.
My definition of efficiency is work done per gallon of gasoline. Start with two identical vehicles. Put a 1.5L rated at 80 hp in one of them and a 2.4L rated at 160 hp in the other. Now drive down the highway measuring the fuel flow at different speeds. As the speed increased the amount of horsepower to maintain that speed would also increase. Since these vehicles are identical this required amount of power would be the same for both of them. I contend that you would eventually reach a speed where the 2.4L had a lower fuel flow than the 1.5L.
Like I posted earlier. I've driven a Geo Metro with a 1.3L engine and couldn't even get 30 mpg while travelling 75 mph, which was basically full throttle, should have been efficient, right? I've also driven many other vehicles that were much larger with far more power and have had no trouble exceeding 30 mpg at this speed and it didn't require anywhere near full throttle, should have been less efficient. Now this Geo did get pretty decent mileage in city driving.
Ok, have it your way if you want. Do you have an answer?
Please post the dyno graphs if you have any. What torque maximum at 1900 rpm is that motor capable of making. Do you know?
(even though the maximum maximum torque maximum is at 4000 rpm, I want to know what the not really maximum maximum torque is at 1900 rpm, ok? Now does that look ridiculous, or what?)
And torque is always an instantaneous measure, regardless of whether the car is accelerating, decelerating or maintaining a constant speed. Same with the motor. It makes no difference if over some period of time the motor is increasing, decreasing or remaining at some constant rpm. Torque (unlike horsepower) is a static measurement with no time or speed component. It is measured at a particular rpm, that's all.
I stand corrected. I've never really looked into the Camry Hybrid (apperently not that many others have either since it's being dropped from the lineup due to poor sales).
What the heck are you talking about? Please.. Please.. do some - any - research before passing on gross misconceptions heard around a water cooler or over a bar.
It's the HONDA Accord hybrid which is being dropped due to poor sales and poor comparisons to the TOYOTA Camry hybrid.
BTW...
There is NO such thing as a payback period on these. Payback is an artificial construct created by those who DON'T want to buy a hybrid vehicle. It's simply a justification for not buying. You either like a vehicle and buy or don't like a vehicle and don't buy it.
If you like an ICE Civic that's what you'll buy. If you like an F150 then that's what you'll buy. If you like a used Focus then that's what you'll buy. If you like a hybrid Escape then that's what you'll buy.
If however you have a choice between buying a new ICE vehicle and it's hybrid twin the difference between the two is normally $3000 or less. You will pay this $3000 regardless of whether you think you do or not. It's either going to Mobil/Exxon/Saudi/Iran or Citgo/Venezuela or it's going to Ford or GM or Honda or Toyota. But you are going to spend this $3000. To think otherwise is to delude yourself.
It is interesting that the microscope of rational car buying is only, it seems, applied to hybrids, as if the rest of us are buying stripper Yaris 2-doors to minimize cost of ownership. No one is asked to justify the $2000 navi or stereo or whatever, but buy a hybrid? Bring on the accountants! :P
As in what is the payback period for... ..a Lexus IS250 vs a Corolla ( same vehicle ) ..a Lexus ES350 vs a Camry XLE V6 ( even more so ) ..a Lexus Rx350 vs an '08 Highlander Ltd ..a Lexus LX470 vs a LandCruiser?
There is no payback period! A buyer either likes one vehicle or the other.
Payback period is an idea that can be embraced by buyers and by non-buyers of hybrids. Both might use the term when trying to advance their points. If either is talking about the money savings or costs, then either might employ a payback period in the discussion.
Exactly. It seems hybrid buyers are sometimes characterized as either ignorant of the long payouts involved, or only interested in making a statement. I'm sure some are, but others might just be interested in a new technology that brings some involvement back to driving (what with the power readouts, etc.) and does it while saving some gas.
Payback period is an idea that can be embraced by buyers and by non-buyers of hybrids. Both might use the term when trying to advance their points. If either is talking about the money savings or costs, then either might employ a payback period in the discussion.
HUH?
There is no payback period. The vehicle is what it is. The Price is what it is. The ICE Camry and TCH : An XLE 4C Camry is $25000 MSRP A Hybrid Camry is $27900 MSRP
Both have the same equipment one has more power and better fuel economy. That's all that can be said. The buyer will choose which one best meets the need. There's no payback.
Payback period is only an artificial excuse created to explain why NOT to buy a hybrid.
But this is a fact too: Over the next 5 years @ $3/Gal and 75000 miles, using the new EPA average values.. ..the XLE 4c driver will use 3125 gal spending $9375 ..the TCH driver will use 2205 gal spending $6620
Relax, I'm not trying to convert you. You are one who does not believe in payback. You think your head is not in the sand. I get it. No point missed. I just don't agree with you. I think payback exists, and I'll guess 90% of the other readers here do too. The purchase costs difference is realized when you buy the car. The fuel costs are in the future. Also uncertain are tax credits, maintenance, repairs, length of ownership, resale value, etc. Payback is such a simple idea. Time elapsed until additional cost is/isn't recovered due to savings. I'm surprised you don't see it.
We don't disagree that there is a premium being paid upfront for a TCH vs a 4c XLE ( equivalient equipment ).
Your contention is that this $2900 is never recovered over the expected ownership of the vehicle. Am I correct?
You bring up considerations - without any specificis - like tax credits ( variable so lets ignore them ), maintenance, repairs and resale. But you don't have any quantifiable data to support one position or another.
But the conclusion is that the $2900 is not recovered. Do I state that correctly. ********************************************************************************** As an aside, but related, is there a payback period for a Lexus ES350 over a Camry XLE V6? Just curious.
You will pay this $3000 regardless of whether you think you do or not. It's either going to Mobil/Exxon
For me I would rather it go to Exxon, Shell or BP than Toyota or Honda. The Oil stocks are what are making my 401K grow. That also keeps more of the money in the USA. So the payback is when I start to cash out my 401k. My gas bill driving a full sized GMC averaged $76 per month over the last two years. Same as my water bill.
The savings from driving a hybrid would be a BIG loss having two vehicles. I have crunched it every way I can. There is no way I can justify having another car for running errands. The insurance on a small car would be more than I spend on gas in the truck.
Honest and fair with a logical rationale so there's no disagreement on my part. I don't know about keeping more money in the USA part but that's for a separate discussion I think.
I agree with KDHSPYDER - As a recent/new owner of a 2007 Highlander Hybrid, I had no expectations of any payback on the premium I paid over a similar ICE Highlander. Heck, I never knew any car would pay me back for buying/driving it! I have yet to get into a vehicle I have owned (past or present) and find money just laying there. OK, maybe a quarter or some such coinage found under the front seat on occasion. I always understood a car to be an expense not an asset!
I chose a Hybrid because I am getting far better MPG (29+) overall than I could get with a similar sized vehicle. You can certainly debate the payback aspect of a vehicle based on many factors but as long as you are driving what meets your needs and it doesn’t burn a hole in your pocket – just roll on!
Your conclusion is not mine. You did not state mine correctly.
Maybe you can explain what kind of payback there might be for an ES350 over a Camry. I'm not sure what it could be. But I'm open to suggestion I suppose.
Nope, not missing any point here. But if you don't like the term payback, maybe you could substitute financial break-even point for it. Do you understand what I'm referring to? When (you guess that) the total money spent on each would equal each other, that would be the break-even point, ok? It's a time thing as much as a money thing.
OK then correct me, specifically, as it pertains to the XLE 4c and the TCH. I'm looking to understand your rationale.
ES 350 vs Camry V6 XLE There is no payback of course. One just costs more than the other although they're the same vehicle.
That's the point you can't calculate a payback even though they're the same, just priced differently. Some people prefer one, some prefer the other a payback period doesn't enter into the equation at any time..
Now you need to specifiy other criteria if you want to go into this kind of detail. These first three are key: Length of ownership... Distance driven for the length of ownership... A guesstimate or different scenarios on what fuel will cost.. These next three are nominal: Cost money or lost opportunity... An estimate of maintennance costs... Insurance costs...
Plug in your values and we'll run the numbers and see what comes up. $27900 TCH $25000 Camry 4c XLE
A payback or a break-even point could be calculated for the ES over the Camry if, for instance, the ES cost more initially but got 14 mpg better gas mileage and/or the ES was cheaper to maintain than the Camry. Are you enjoying pulling my leg while pretending you don't understand? I am not going to keep explaining the same thing to you over and over any longer.
Nope, I don't need to specify anything for you. You can play with whatever numbers you want. I don't think you understand the words I use or the definitions I offer to explain them, so its no use anyway. Have fun.
I understand breakeven point. Your refusal to discuss any details speaks volumes. You're just playing the gadfly to keep the thread going and to see your words in print. Cute but there's no substance. Intellectually dishonest is probably too strong..but not by much.
The real truth is that people don't like CHEAP manuals. When they have to chose from a stripped-down nothing of a car or truck to get it or suffer with an automatic...
But it'll never go away entirely because in the rest of the world they drive manuals. Like 90% manual and 10% automatic. And, some cars like the RX-8 and the BMWs and so on are closer to 30% manuals. I go look at a Mazda dealer and there are automatics rotting on the lot. The manuals are long gone.
Well there are defintely differences of opinion on why someone should/should not buy a hybrid...I've already made my choice so the topic doesn't interest me much now. But one other point I'd like to make is that by buying a hybrid (and, yes, giving extra $$ to ToMoCo or Honda or whoever) you are telling auto makers that using less gas is a big deal to you...."and could you please do some more research into developing more efficient vehicles like this one?...and by the way, good job!" The more people who vote with their hard-earned cash the more effort will be put into making them better...and they ARE better(more fuel efficient and lower emissions), do we agree?
Whether its the Atkinson cycle or the Otto cycle they are both hugely ineffecient. It's like looking at Elizabeth Taylor and Oprah Winfrey. What would be the more relevant question? Who is thinner or who is fatter? So maybe the Atkinson cycle is less inefficient but when ICE's are only capable of about 30% efficiency its really a joke to even talk about their merits in this regard.
Different driving patterns are part, less driving overall so the 5 minute commute is a higher % of weekly driving (runs more engine to heat up pollution control, ie cat converter, and heat cabin) and if they're like other batteries they are less efficient in the cold. Plus winter gas gets lower mileage.
You mentioned ECON 101: If 60 million cars are retired each year, that's a lot of R134a being released. Another 30 million need a pound every year or two. Bad for the ozone.
What will come first? 700 million cars or 1 million hybrids?
The guy who spends $76 a month on gas can drive anything he wants. I drive 21,500 miles a year just to get to work and back. I can barely keep my gas bill, for just me driving to work, under $200 a month. The recent run up to $3.09 a gallon because we almost had a hurricane is a joke.
I keep my cars running right. That's my plan so far. I did add up the monthly costs of swapping for a new 4 cyl, figuring $17490 out the door with sales tax, 300 a year in excise tax, and maybe 150 more per year for insurance than a 9 year old car that I'd get rid of. I used 34 mpg for the new car. Problem started with the $534 per month payment for the first 3 years for the new car. The gas savings for all my driving was only $61 a month measured against my 24.8 mpg GMC V6 Sonoma truck. Half of that $61 is swallowed by the excise tax and insurance increases. The rest of the gas savings doesn't even get the monthly payment under $500 a month. So adding up the costs will never get to a break even point. And I drive a lot.
I have to include the payment for the car because I have to buy the more efficient car in order to do something about my monthly gas bill. The new $500 monthly car payment bill kills the idea. Even after 3 years when the payment goes away, the break even point is achieved by knocking off those monthly $61 savings against the continuing excise tax, insurance and then stack of 36 times $500 in payments not yet recouped. Answer is almost 250 months to break even point. Double gas to $6.30 a gallon and get there in 125 months.
I know there is satisfaction and convenience in switching from a '99 to a new car. That is a form of payback. My total family gas bill this summer has averaged $700 a month. New car payments may not help deal with that. Adding a $534 payment to a reduced $639 gas bill and another $250 a month for insurance makes transportation further from a comfort zone.
Hybrid payback, the topic of this discussion, starts with better than 34 mpg but over $24k instead of $17k to get started. Figure more interest, more insurance, and more excise tax than the $17490 4 cyl. The hybrid won't double the 34 mpg so it won't double the $61 a month in gas savings. Now the monthly payment is $500 for 5 years and the gas saved is maybe $100 a month. Quick and dirty break even point is 240 months again.
So much tech gagetry making it's way into cars. 6 speed transmissions. Navigation, electronic stability control. On and On. Now I'm supposed to put down my phone and drink and sandwich and manually shift my car to be like 80% of the Europeans to save a little gas when I finally get to cruising speed? Kinda going the opposite way technologically isn't it? Dump a thousand for nav so I don't have to hold the map but then tie up my hands and feet to avoid a machine that does the shifting for me? Can the Europeans afford the cost of the auto trans, are they against techno improvements, or is the inconvenience of shifting and replacing clutches fun for them?
J.D. Power and Associates Alternative Powertrain Study found that only 50% of new-vehicle shoppers are currently considering a hybrid--down from 57% the year before.
Mike Marshall, director of automotive emerging technologies at J.D. Power. "The decrease in consideration of hybrids in 2007 may be a result of their more realistic understanding of the actual fuel-economy capabilities."
Problematic Pumpbusters
In fact, the fuel economy of many new hybrids is almost indistinguishable from that of their conventionally powered counterparts.
And though 50% consider one. That is 50% of what specific group of buyers? on my way to work, semi's outnumber hybrids 20:1. In the world hybrids are outnumbered at least 1000:1. A hundai elantra gets 37 mpg, that's 2.5 gallons a day to work round trip for me, if I had one. My Sonoma takes 3.7 gallons a day. Excise taxes on a new car take .4 gallons a day of any savings. An elantra could save me 3.7-2.9=.8 gallons a day for the 229 days a year of work. if a gas miser 37 mpg elantra saves .8 gallons a day, a hybrid could save 1.3 gallons a day.
Other than folks that thought they could beat the odds with the tax credit or did not like riding with someone else in the HOV lanes. They will become a blip in automotive history. Toyota may bring the cost of hybrids down. The consumer will never see that savings. Honda is all but out of the hybrid business. Even with the tax credit the HCH is a poor seller. October will tell the tale on Prius sales without an incentive. It is still a car for that oddball driver or long distance commuter.
There is no such thing as a 'hybrid premium' or a 'payback period'!!!! I'm ready for the onslaught of questions...begin firing.
Now to this specific article 'Dance With Me'. The viewpoint is not so surprising considering the one expressing it. "Electric motors and batteries involve extra cost," said Simon Godwin, the lead author of a WEC report on transport scenarios through 2050 presented here last week. "You should get down to the point where that extra cost can be covered by fuel savings." Godwin also works as manager for automobile issues at Daimler AG's external affairs office in Brussels.
This is antithetical to Daimler's strategy of promoting diesel. Strike One.
He has not done the math for every vehicle and every market because in the US anyway there is no 'premium' . Strike Two.
But of even greater importance is that he completely ignores the major benefit of all the competing hybrid technologies. Everyone of them reduces the usage of petroleum-based fuels by 25-40%, instantaneously!!! This is far more important for our society than most because we use 25% of the world's output of petroleum products. Our demand will increase by 60% over the near term and there aren't enough easily developed supplies for us to tap into.
Now factor in China and India and our increased demand may have to be 'rationed'. Now there's a scary thought. Strike Three.
Right now if it was mandated that every personal vehicle on the road must be a hybrid of some technology our annual transportation usage would fall by at least 25%, 40% in some cases. In one stroke this can be done.
Oh btw the drivers will also save some money as well. I'm not kidding. Even the Toyota buyers who would have to do without any tax breaks would breakeven or save a little. This minor detail in this market was also ignored by the Daimler rep. That's not really surprising.
Other than folks that thought they could beat the odds with the tax credit or did not like riding with someone else in the HOV lanes. They will become a blip in automotive history. Toyota may bring the cost of hybrids down. The consumer will never see that savings. Honda is all but out of the hybrid business. Even with the tax credit the HCH is a poor seller. October will tell the tale on Prius sales without an incentive. It is still a car for that oddball driver or long distance commuter.
Where to begin..... :surprise: Quoth Gary... 'They will become a blip in automotive history' The two largest vehicle makers in the world, plus Ford and recently VW, have announced a wider and wider range of hybrid products for this market.
Quoth Gary... 'The consumer will never see that savings.' You do of course know that the sticker prices were reduced $600 -$2000 across the board this past May. As you also know the base model now lists for under $21K
Quoth Gary... 'Honda is all but out of the hybrid business.' Except for the new smaller-than-Civic hybrid that will be built outside of Indianapolis.. and the new sports car they just unveiled in Japan... for there and here.
The key reason is that 'hybrid technology' conceivably can be migrated to any fuel system. It's only an electro-mechanical 'multiplier' for whatever the base fuel system is....except EVs of course.
As you also know the base model now lists for under $21K
That is a $1000 more than the loaded Prius first offered in the USA.
I still say batteries are the key to hybrids and EVs ever becoming mainstream transportation. I see hybrids on a regular basis. The only person I know that owns one is the fellow that bought my GMC hybrid PU truck. None in my neighborhood. Most of my neighbors buy SUVs and a few, not many CUVs. SUVs & PU trucks still rule the suburbs of So CA.
Do you think Toyota will keep adding hybrids with several poor sellers on the lot?
This and the original are entirely different vehicles .. night and day different. They originally were between $21 and $22K...I sold one of the first in NA in July 2000.
Well since there are only 3, 'several' must encompass all of them, aye? The Prius is a 'Duh' they probably will add two or three new Prius models when the Next Gen arrives. The TCH is doing just fine at a rate of about 100,000 units annually. The HH ? I don't know what they have in store here. We're waiting for the first one and I've got 3 couples wanting one. Next according to reports should be the Sienna hybrid in Spring 2008 but I haven't heard a peep about it.
In Japan they just announced a new Lexus-type RX350 hybrid.
I always include Lexus in the mix as they are just Toyota's with fancy bling bling. Maybe the RX400h is doing ok. I know the GS450h is a flop. I doubt the LS600h will penetrate more than a few high rollers with nothing better to do with a 100 grand. 2 or 3 good sellers out of 6 is not impressive for the hybrids.
I guess the real question should be is there a real payback for ToyLex with hybrids?
I too am hoping for a hybrid,if nothing else to be free of the oil politics. What has turned me off from the civic and prius is handling and lux. Although edmunds rated the civic better I am not satisfied. For me there will need to be another iteration.
Although I hate that "hybrid payback" discussion, at least it's finally on my side of the argument now !!!!
Rising fuel prices and competition among a proliferation of gasoline-electric hybrids have sliced the payback period for hybrids to two or three years in some cases, instead of five years or more that made hybrids harder to justify at lower fuel prices.
At the same time, increasing interest in hybrids is driving their prices up and eroding their fuel cost-saving benefits.
An analysis for USA TODAY by auto-price consultant Edmunds.com shows that the difference between a Toyota (TM) Camry hybrid and a similarly equipped gasoline Camry was $889 Friday, up from $850 a week ago. Assuming 15,000 miles a year, Edmunds figures just 1.7 years for the Camry hybrid's fuel savings to offset the car's higher price — slightly longer than 1.6 years when the price difference was less a week earlier.
The government rates the Camry hybrid at 34 miles per gallon and the four-cylinder gasoline Camry at 25 mpg in combined city-highway driving.
"Most consumers who bought hybrids initially were the ones who bought them for non-financial reasons, because they were the environmentally friendly focused consumer, or for fashion reasons," says Jesse Toprak, Edmunds.com pricing director.
These gasoline-electric hybrids are fastest at repaying their higher prices through fuel-cost savings. Vehicle Type Payback1 Toyota Camry hybrid Sedan 1.7 years Toyota Prius hybrid Hatchback 2.6 years Nissan Altima hybrid Sedan 3.4 years Mercury Mariner hybrid SUV 4.4 years GMC Yukon hybrid SUV 4.9 years 1 assumes 15,000 miles per year, $3.67 per gallon for gasoline, and federal tax benefits, which vary among hybrids. Source: Edmunds.com
So depending on which hybrid you buy it can take from 1.7 to 102 years to recoup the LOSS of the hybrid drive train. Making the average somewhere in the 50 year range, according to USA Today.... :shades:
This article proves again you can make statistics say whatever you would like them to say... :sick:
The real problem is that other than the hybrid system, the Prius is essentially a Corolla with different sheet metal on it.
Compare it to a Corolla, which gets what - 35mpg highway - and it jumps to never breaking even, since you have to replace the batteries every decade or so for 5-6 thousand dollars, putting you behind the curve again for another 150-200K miles.
Edmunds data is basing it off of what the same car would cost with a normal engine instead - ie - cost of Corolla engine stuffed into a Prius. This is bad math no matter how you look at it, since there's no such thing as a Prius with a Corolla engine in it. (can't pay back anything based upon fictional vehicles)
A reporter is hoping to talk with hybrid owners who have had to replace the hybrid's battery. Please respond to ctalati@edmunds.com before Friday, May 16, 2008 with your daytime contact information and a few words about your experience.
AND
A reporter is hoping to talk with anyone who bought a used hybrid with over (or near) 100,000 miles on it. Please respond to ctalati@edmunds.com before Friday, May 16, 2008 with your daytime contact information and a few words about your experience. Thanks, Jeannine Fallon Corporate Communications Edmunds.com
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
That certainly isn't a weighted average since the 102 year payback time refers to the Lexus hybrid. Without the benefit of actual stats I'm going to assume sales of the Lexus are considerably lower than the Prius, Camry or Civic hybrids. Regardless, people don't buy an average vehicle. They buy a specific vehicle.
Where I live unleaded gas is currently selling for $3.69/gallon. Diesel is selling for $4.39 or a 19% markup. Let's say that Honda decides to offer a turbo-diesel 4 cyl Accord that get's 25% better mileage than the standard 4 cyl Accord or 30 mpg as opposed to 24 mpg. Drive both these vehicles for a year (15,000 miles). With the diesel you'll have spent $2,195 in fuel. The gasoline version would be $2,306 for a $111 savings with the diesel. How much more is this diesel version going to cost? I'm guessing at least $1,000. Which means a payback time of 9 years. I know that you like diesels. If/when they become more available are you planning on applying this same payback rational.
a few days ago there were some news items on tv and radio listing the number of years it takes for a hybrid car to "payback" doeas anyone have a link to the original news items? i remember that the Lexus hybrid required something like 24 years!
Comments
Like I posted earlier. I've driven a Geo Metro with a 1.3L engine and couldn't even get 30 mpg while travelling 75 mph, which was basically full throttle, should have been efficient, right? I've also driven many other vehicles that were much larger with far more power and have had no trouble exceeding 30 mpg at this speed and it didn't require anywhere near full throttle, should have been less efficient. Now this Geo did get pretty decent mileage in city driving.
Please post the dyno graphs if you have any.
What torque maximum at 1900 rpm is that motor capable of making. Do you know?
(even though the maximum maximum torque maximum is at 4000 rpm, I want to know what the not really maximum maximum torque is at 1900 rpm, ok? Now does that look ridiculous, or what?)
And torque is always an instantaneous measure, regardless of whether the car is accelerating, decelerating or maintaining a constant speed. Same with the motor. It makes no difference if over some period of time the motor is increasing, decreasing or remaining at some constant rpm. Torque (unlike horsepower) is a static measurement with no time or speed component. It is measured at a particular rpm, that's all.
What the heck are you talking about? Please.. Please.. do some - any - research before passing on gross misconceptions heard around a water cooler or over a bar.
It's the HONDA Accord hybrid which is being dropped due to poor sales and poor comparisons to the TOYOTA Camry hybrid.
BTW...
There is NO such thing as a payback period on these. Payback is an artificial construct created by those who DON'T want to buy a hybrid vehicle. It's simply a justification for not buying. You either like a vehicle and buy or don't like a vehicle and don't buy it.
If you like an ICE Civic that's what you'll buy.
If you like an F150 then that's what you'll buy.
If you like a used Focus then that's what you'll buy.
If you like a hybrid Escape then that's what you'll buy.
If however you have a choice between buying a new ICE vehicle and it's hybrid twin the difference between the two is normally $3000 or less. You will pay this $3000 regardless of whether you think you do or not. It's either going to Mobil/Exxon/Saudi/Iran or Citgo/Venezuela or it's going to Ford or GM or Honda or Toyota. But you are going to spend this $3000. To think otherwise is to delude yourself.
Just what did you expect to find in here?
..a Lexus IS250 vs a Corolla ( same vehicle )
..a Lexus ES350 vs a Camry XLE V6 ( even more so )
..a Lexus Rx350 vs an '08 Highlander Ltd
..a Lexus LX470 vs a LandCruiser?
There is no payback period! A buyer either likes one vehicle or the other.
HUH?
There is no payback period. The vehicle is what it is. The Price is what it is. The ICE Camry and TCH :
An XLE 4C Camry is $25000 MSRP
A Hybrid Camry is $27900 MSRP
Both have the same equipment one has more power and better fuel economy. That's all that can be said. The buyer will choose which one best meets the need. There's no payback.
Payback period is only an artificial excuse created to explain why NOT to buy a hybrid.
But this is a fact too:
Over the next 5 years @ $3/Gal and 75000 miles, using the new EPA average values..
..the XLE 4c driver will use 3125 gal spending $9375
..the TCH driver will use 2205 gal spending $6620
I can pay Toyota an extra $2900 up front and get a TCH
OR
I can save that $2900 and pay some oil company $2700 ( probable ) over the next 5 years.
The total money spent is the same. The only question is 'Who do I want to give it to?' To look at this any other way is to hide your head in the sand.
Ditto Honda Civic or Ford Escape or GM Yukon or Nissan Altima buyers.
You are one who does not believe in payback. You think your head is not in the sand. I get it.
No point missed. I just don't agree with you.
I think payback exists, and I'll guess 90% of the other readers here do too. The purchase costs difference is realized when you buy the car. The fuel costs are in the future. Also uncertain are tax credits, maintenance, repairs, length of ownership, resale value, etc.
Payback is such a simple idea. Time elapsed until additional cost is/isn't recovered due to savings. I'm surprised you don't see it.
Your contention is that this $2900 is never recovered over the expected ownership of the vehicle. Am I correct?
You bring up considerations - without any specificis - like tax credits ( variable so lets ignore them ), maintenance, repairs and resale. But you don't have any quantifiable data to support one position or another.
But the conclusion is that the $2900 is not recovered. Do I state that correctly.
**********************************************************************************
As an aside, but related, is there a payback period for a Lexus ES350 over a Camry XLE V6? Just curious.
For me I would rather it go to Exxon, Shell or BP than Toyota or Honda. The Oil stocks are what are making my 401K grow. That also keeps more of the money in the USA. So the payback is when I start to cash out my 401k. My gas bill driving a full sized GMC averaged $76 per month over the last two years. Same as my water bill.
The savings from driving a hybrid would be a BIG loss having two vehicles. I have crunched it every way I can. There is no way I can justify having another car for running errands. The insurance on a small car would be more than I spend on gas in the truck.
I chose a Hybrid because I am getting far better MPG (29+) overall than I could get with a similar sized vehicle. You can certainly debate the payback aspect of a vehicle based on many factors but as long as you are driving what meets your needs and it doesn’t burn a hole in your pocket – just roll on!
Happy motoring to all – ICE and/or Hybrid
M. J. McCloskey
Your conclusion is not mine. You did not state mine correctly.
Maybe you can explain what kind of payback there might be for an ES350 over a Camry. I'm not sure what it could be. But I'm open to suggestion I suppose.
But if you don't like the term payback, maybe you could substitute financial break-even point for it. Do you understand what I'm referring to? When (you guess that) the total money spent on each would equal each other, that would be the break-even point, ok? It's a time thing as much as a money thing.
ES 350 vs Camry V6 XLE
There is no payback of course. One just costs more than the other although they're the same vehicle.
That's the point you can't calculate a payback even though they're the same, just priced differently. Some people prefer one, some prefer the other a payback period doesn't enter into the equation at any time..
These first three are key:
Length of ownership...
Distance driven for the length of ownership...
A guesstimate or different scenarios on what fuel will cost..
These next three are nominal:
Cost money or lost opportunity...
An estimate of maintennance costs...
Insurance costs...
Plug in your values and we'll run the numbers and see what comes up.
$27900 TCH
$25000 Camry 4c XLE
Are you enjoying pulling my leg while pretending you don't understand?
I am not going to keep explaining the same thing to you over and over any longer.
I don't think you understand the words I use or the definitions I offer to explain them, so its no use anyway.
Have fun.
Enjoy...[vaporized]
But it'll never go away entirely because in the rest of the world they drive manuals. Like 90% manual and 10% automatic. And, some cars like the RX-8 and the BMWs and so on are closer to 30% manuals. I go look at a Mazda dealer and there are automatics rotting on the lot. The manuals are long gone.
What will come first? 700 million cars or 1 million hybrids?
The guy who spends $76 a month on gas can drive anything he wants. I drive 21,500 miles a year just to get to work and back. I can barely keep my gas bill, for just me driving to work, under $200 a month. The recent run up to $3.09 a gallon because we almost had a hurricane is a joke.
I keep my cars running right. That's my plan so far. I did add up the monthly costs of swapping for a new 4 cyl, figuring $17490 out the door with sales tax, 300 a year in excise tax, and maybe 150 more per year for insurance than a 9 year old car that I'd get rid of. I used 34 mpg for the new car. Problem started with the $534 per month payment for the first 3 years for the new car. The gas savings for all my driving was only $61 a month measured against my 24.8 mpg GMC V6 Sonoma truck. Half of that $61 is swallowed by the excise tax and insurance increases. The rest of the gas savings doesn't even get the monthly payment under $500 a month. So adding up the costs will never get to a break even point. And I drive a lot.
I have to include the payment for the car because I have to buy the more efficient car in order to do something about my monthly gas bill. The new $500 monthly car payment bill kills the idea. Even after 3 years when the payment goes away, the break even point is achieved by knocking off those monthly $61 savings against the continuing excise tax, insurance and then stack of 36 times $500 in payments not yet recouped. Answer is almost 250 months to break even point. Double gas to $6.30 a gallon and get there in 125 months.
I know there is satisfaction and convenience in switching from a '99 to a new car. That is a form of payback. My total family gas bill this summer has averaged $700 a month. New car payments may not help deal with that. Adding a $534 payment to a reduced $639 gas bill and another $250 a month for insurance makes transportation further from a comfort zone.
Hybrid payback, the topic of this discussion, starts with better than 34 mpg but over $24k instead of $17k to get started. Figure more interest, more insurance, and more excise tax than the $17490 4 cyl. The hybrid won't double the 34 mpg so it won't double the $61 a month in gas savings. Now the monthly payment is $500 for 5 years and the gas saved is maybe $100 a month. Quick and dirty break even point is 240 months again.
J.D. Power and Associates Alternative Powertrain Study found that only 50% of new-vehicle shoppers are currently considering a hybrid--down from 57% the year before.
Mike Marshall, director of automotive emerging technologies at J.D. Power. "The decrease in consideration of hybrids in 2007 may be a result of their more realistic understanding of the actual fuel-economy capabilities."
Problematic Pumpbusters
In fact, the fuel economy of many new hybrids is almost indistinguishable from that of their conventionally powered counterparts.
Enter the latest hybrid from Toyota, LS600h.
A hundai elantra gets 37 mpg, that's 2.5 gallons a day to work round trip for me, if I had one. My Sonoma takes 3.7 gallons a day. Excise taxes on a new car take .4 gallons a day of any savings. An elantra could save me 3.7-2.9=.8 gallons a day for the 229 days a year of work. if a gas miser 37 mpg elantra saves .8 gallons a day, a hybrid could save 1.3 gallons a day.
Dance With Me?
Other than folks that thought they could beat the odds with the tax credit or did not like riding with someone else in the HOV lanes. They will become a blip in automotive history. Toyota may bring the cost of hybrids down. The consumer will never see that savings. Honda is all but out of the hybrid business. Even with the tax credit the HCH is a poor seller. October will tell the tale on Prius sales without an incentive. It is still a car for that oddball driver or long distance commuter.
There is no such thing as a 'hybrid premium' or a 'payback period'!!!! I'm ready for the onslaught of questions...begin firing.
Now to this specific article 'Dance With Me'.
The viewpoint is not so surprising considering the one expressing it.
"Electric motors and batteries involve extra cost," said Simon Godwin, the lead author of a WEC report on transport scenarios through 2050 presented here last week. "You should get down to the point where that extra cost can be covered by fuel savings."
Godwin also works as manager for automobile issues at Daimler AG's external affairs office in Brussels.
This is antithetical to Daimler's strategy of promoting diesel. Strike One.
He has not done the math for every vehicle and every market because in the US anyway there is no 'premium'
But of even greater importance is that he completely ignores the major benefit of all the competing hybrid technologies. Everyone of them reduces the usage of petroleum-based fuels by 25-40%, instantaneously!!! This is far more important for our society than most because we use 25% of the world's output of petroleum products. Our demand will increase by 60% over the near term and there aren't enough easily developed supplies for us to tap into.
Now factor in China and India and our increased demand may have to be 'rationed'. Now there's a scary thought. Strike Three.
Right now if it was mandated that every personal vehicle on the road must be a hybrid of some technology our annual transportation usage would fall by at least 25%, 40% in some cases. In one stroke this can be done.
Oh btw the drivers will also save some money as well. I'm not kidding. Even the Toyota buyers who would have to do without any tax breaks would breakeven or save a little. This minor detail in this market was also ignored by the Daimler rep. That's not really surprising.
Strike Four!! Wait he's already been called out.
Where to begin..... :surprise:
Quoth Gary... 'They will become a blip in automotive history'
The two largest vehicle makers in the world, plus Ford and recently VW, have announced a wider and wider range of hybrid products for this market.
Quoth Gary... 'The consumer will never see that savings.' You do of course know that the sticker prices were reduced $600 -$2000 across the board this past May. As you also know the base model now lists for under $21K
Quoth Gary... 'Honda is all but out of the hybrid business.'
Except for the new smaller-than-Civic hybrid that will be built outside of Indianapolis.. and the new sports car they just unveiled in Japan... for there and here.
The key reason is that 'hybrid technology' conceivably can be migrated to any fuel system. It's only an electro-mechanical 'multiplier' for whatever the base fuel system is....except EVs of course.
That is a $1000 more than the loaded Prius first offered in the USA.
I still say batteries are the key to hybrids and EVs ever becoming mainstream transportation. I see hybrids on a regular basis. The only person I know that owns one is the fellow that bought my GMC hybrid PU truck. None in my neighborhood. Most of my neighbors buy SUVs and a few, not many CUVs. SUVs & PU trucks still rule the suburbs of So CA.
Do you think Toyota will keep adding hybrids with several poor sellers on the lot?
Well since there are only 3, 'several' must encompass all of them, aye? The Prius is a 'Duh' they probably will add two or three new Prius models when the Next Gen arrives. The TCH is doing just fine at a rate of about 100,000 units annually. The HH ? I don't know what they have in store here. We're waiting for the first one and I've got 3 couples wanting one. Next according to reports should be the Sienna hybrid in Spring 2008 but I haven't heard a peep about it.
In Japan they just announced a new Lexus-type RX350 hybrid.
I always include Lexus in the mix as they are just Toyota's with fancy bling bling. Maybe the RX400h is doing ok. I know the GS450h is a flop. I doubt the LS600h will penetrate more than a few high rollers with nothing better to do with a 100 grand. 2 or 3 good sellers out of 6 is not impressive for the hybrids.
I guess the real question should be is there a real payback for ToyLex with hybrids?
I too am hoping for a hybrid,if nothing else to be free of the oil politics. What has turned me off from the civic and prius is handling and lux. Although edmunds rated the civic better I am not satisfied. For me there will need to be another iteration.
What are the dates for the lithium baterries?
Although I hate that "hybrid payback" discussion, at least it's finally on my side of the argument now !!!!
Rising fuel prices and competition among a proliferation of gasoline-electric hybrids have sliced the payback period for hybrids to two or three years in some cases, instead of five years or more that made hybrids harder to justify at lower fuel prices.
At the same time, increasing interest in hybrids is driving their prices up and eroding their fuel cost-saving benefits.
An analysis for USA TODAY by auto-price consultant Edmunds.com shows that the difference between a Toyota (TM) Camry hybrid and a similarly equipped gasoline Camry was $889 Friday, up from $850 a week ago. Assuming 15,000 miles a year, Edmunds figures just 1.7 years for the Camry hybrid's fuel savings to offset the car's higher price — slightly longer than 1.6 years when the price difference was less a week earlier.
The government rates the Camry hybrid at 34 miles per gallon and the four-cylinder gasoline Camry at 25 mpg in combined city-highway driving.
"Most consumers who bought hybrids initially were the ones who bought them for non-financial reasons, because they were the environmentally friendly focused consumer, or for fashion reasons," says Jesse Toprak, Edmunds.com pricing director.
These gasoline-electric hybrids are fastest at repaying their higher prices through fuel-cost savings.
Vehicle Type Payback1
Toyota Camry hybrid Sedan 1.7 years
Toyota Prius hybrid Hatchback 2.6 years
Nissan Altima hybrid Sedan 3.4 years
Mercury Mariner hybrid SUV 4.4 years
GMC Yukon hybrid SUV 4.9 years
1 assumes 15,000 miles per year, $3.67 per gallon for gasoline, and federal tax benefits, which vary among hybrids. Source: Edmunds.com
This article proves again you can make statistics say whatever you would like them to say... :sick:
The analysis was done by Edmunds.com.
You don't TRUST them?
You WISH !!! The 102 year payback vehicle cannot be considered into the "average" because none of those buyers give a hoot about payback !!
Compare it to a Corolla, which gets what - 35mpg highway - and it jumps to never breaking even, since you have to replace the batteries every decade or so for 5-6 thousand dollars, putting you behind the curve again for another 150-200K miles.
Edmunds data is basing it off of what the same car would cost with a normal engine instead - ie - cost of Corolla engine stuffed into a Prius. This is bad math no matter how you look at it, since there's no such thing as a Prius with a Corolla engine in it.
(can't pay back anything based upon fictional vehicles)
AND
A reporter is hoping to talk with anyone who bought a used hybrid with over (or near) 100,000 miles on it. Please respond to ctalati@edmunds.com before Friday, May 16, 2008 with your daytime contact information and a few words about your experience.
Thanks,
Jeannine Fallon
Corporate Communications
Edmunds.com
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
That certainly isn't a weighted average since the 102 year payback time refers to the Lexus hybrid. Without the benefit of actual stats I'm going to assume sales of the Lexus are considerably lower than the Prius, Camry or Civic hybrids. Regardless, people don't buy an average vehicle. They buy a specific vehicle.
Where I live unleaded gas is currently selling for $3.69/gallon. Diesel is selling for $4.39 or a 19% markup. Let's say that Honda decides to offer a turbo-diesel 4 cyl Accord that get's 25% better mileage than the standard 4 cyl Accord or 30 mpg as opposed to 24 mpg. Drive both these vehicles for a year (15,000 miles). With the diesel you'll have spent $2,195 in fuel. The gasoline version would be $2,306 for a $111 savings with the diesel. How much more is this diesel version going to cost? I'm guessing at least $1,000. Which means a payback time of 9 years. I know that you like diesels. If/when they become more available are you planning on applying this same payback rational.
thanks