"Bernake ... raising the interest rate .... I have an HELOC, rather than a regular mortgage, so that would make my rates go up .... (but) when the Fed dropped its rates, that actually had no effect on real mortgages."
Funny how that works, isn't it? When the Fed Funds rate goes down, it has nothing to do with home loans. But when the Fed Funds rate goes up, the poor mortgage lenders are forced (FORCED!) to raise rates.
A suspicious person might see corruption there. Fortunately, our politicians aren't the suspicious type -- either in real estate or oil futures. .
"Wayne Gerdes gets a lot of press with his 60 mpg in a regular Honda Accord"
Again, this is simply a claim. The quote from the article says he "can get 60 mpg in a regular Honda Accord." Well, sure, I CAN get 150 mpg from my Civic Hybrid. I did it once on a 1.4 mile downhill trip from a gas station to my folks' house. But I'd never use that to exaggerate the ACTUAL mpg I get (48).
I promise you, anyone who "can" get 60 mpg from an Accord doesn't drive it like a normal person. Just as the guy who DOES get 64 mpg from his Civic Hybrid doesn't drive it like you or I would. He sacrifices convenience, time, and often safety to achieve that number. And that's fine -- it's his choice to do so. It's a free country.
yet every time drilling for oil now and 5 years into the future here "won't have any effect on the price of oil" is their mantra
That's not what I'm hearing. In the case of the US the argument is that by expanding our drilling to ANWR and the coastlines we may increase production by 2 million barrels per day but that would be around 2020 if we started today. These people are not saying this would have no effect they are saying it would have a minimal effect in a world that is probably using 100 million barrels per day by then. If we're looking 12 years down the road I consider that to be long range planning. Is more drilling really the best idea we can come up with?
The problem is that the speculators don't have to take delivery of their contracts; they can roll them into new future contracts.
The carrying charges on oil contracts is fairly high. A trader that is consistenly rolling over his contracts into the next month is losing money. Oil is not the only commodity that has gone up this much in the last few years. Some of these other commodities with similar price increases are sold primarily between producer and user. Can't blame the speculators there. Given that the demand for oil is relatively inelastic why should it not exhibit a comparable price run-up?
What if Saudi Arabia sold it's oil directly to the end users? No middle-men or speculators. What do you think they could sell it for given the fact the world cannot get by without this 9-10 million barrels per day? It's been established that the market will pay $140/barrel so they certainly shouldn't sell it for less than that. Why would they? Every $10 they took off this price would result in around $100 million in lost revenue per day. They're not exactly a rich country, especially compared to most of their oil customers. So we could whine that they need to cut the price on their primary source of revenue because it's hurting our lifestyle but exactly how compelling would that argument be to them?
But when the Fed Funds rate goes up, the poor mortgage lenders are forced (FORCED!) to raise rates.
Except that's not true. When Greenspan was raising the rate from 1% in 2003 to 5.25% in 2006 the 30 year mortgage rate hardly budged. But there's nothing better than a good conspiracy theory, even when it's unfounded.
Most of the people who are in danger of losing their homes right now are the ones that got into those 3/1 or 5/1 ARMs, or similar adjustable mortgages that get you in with an ultra-low teaser rate.
I actually think that even if you gave these people a very competitive fixed rate a lot of them would still be walking away from their homes. They don't want to make payments on something that's worth 25% less than what they owe. For people like this you can't blame the unscrupulous lenders. They gambled and lost with house money, or in this case the bank's money and soon to be the taxpayer's money.
That's because those are tied to longer-term rates, such as the T-bill rate, I believe
You're right, home mortgage rates are more tied to the T-bill rate, which fluctuates based upon the perception of future, long term inflation. Lowering the fed funds rate is a inflationary move and typically won't help long term loan rates.
So I believe his claims. And I do some of the techniques (I'm not switching to synthetic or buying a Scan Gauge or overinflating my tires). And it was 103 yesterday so I did run the AC on max for a while.
So with the price of gas Wayne has hit the Big Time. Good for him. I don't have the patience or incentive. If memory serves me, he has a rather long commute. He perfected his style of driving with an Insight that he had close to 100 MPG lifetime average. He mentions something that annoys me and we have no alternative in [non-permissible content removed] land California. Ethanol laced regular.
Fuels vary in energy content, and some fuels contain less energy than others. Using oxygenated fuels or reformulated gasoline (RFG) can cause a small decrease (one-to-three percent) in fuel economy.
Will easy oil drop in price and shut down the shale oil projects as they did in the 1980s? I don't think it will become practical until we have a real shortage of oil.
I am fortunate enough to work in the environment industry in China. While we can definitely say China is late in this respect, there is a momentun buidling up that suggest they will catch up fast. True, this is a matter of survival.
we can say for now that the most advanced environment protection techniques still co-exist with the ugliest polluting sources, the latter being overhelmingly numerous.
Still, the Chinese pursue the american dream of having a car and commuting this way. Beijing's four peripheral highways are being clogged by cars with an average speed of 5 mph in 2007 (30 mph in 1994) but this is still progress for so many.
Although everybody will say otherwise, America is still influencing many other countries, including its competitors. A strong move of US towards alternative fuels and transport means would clearly send a positive signal , even to China. I happen to hope that there is more to the US dream than just guzzling gas like there is no tomorrow.
Yeesh! The range is bigger than I thought! I looked it up and it says that model years 1995 through 2004 are affected!
My dad had a 2000 Park Ave that had all the above problems. Intake failure and blown head gaskets well before 100k miles. Not to mention about everything electrical had a nasty gremlin by 80k miles. You couldn't give me one of those cars.
BTW, finally got rid of my POS 2000 Suburban. I couldn't take all the rattles, substandard build quality. I looked at the latest model Suburban's and Yukon's and wasn't impressed.
So I may regret this but I picked up a loaded 2007 Ford Expedition. It has much better towing power vs GMs 5.3 4speed combo. Hopefully it will be better than my last Ford. We'll see. I want to buy American (at least my Expedition was made here instead of Mexico like my Suburban was). Just seems every domestic I've owned has been garbage for various reasons, not all had to do with reliability.
Gas prices started going crazy after Hurricane Katrina. Went up to $2 due to damaged refineries etc, dropped back down after a couple months.... then helter skelter ever since. Has world oil demand tripled since then? The price of gasoline sure has. It doesn't seem logical that if the demand goes up, say 25%... the price goes up 300%??
Also, I wonder how much of this increase is supply and demand and how much is just greed, panic and "speculation". Does anyone know if gas prices in Europe and the rest of the world has risen in price the same as in the U.S?
i have a '99 Gmc Sonoma for sale.. its great on gas..it has 150,000+ miles on it but runs great. no rust or major scratches. just got new starter in it and new brakes..no leaks or slips..email me at alanboytwo@yahoo.com to talk pricing..no bad comments if you are not interested just dont reply..
I too have a Mexican Suburban, and though in very good shape, the brakes are just a joke for towing, and need replacement ever 17,000 miles. Has no power either. The doors don't open well. Admittedly, she's old, a 1997, but my experience with Ford trucks is that you'll be much happier with your Expedition than you were with your Suburban. It is about 10 years ahead in technology than the GM trucks, and is very well made. That's been my experience anyway. I'd trade this Burb for an Expedition or Excursion anytime I could make the appropriate deal.
As for gas expense - this is the first month it has choked me. My Shell bill was $700, and my Chevron bill was $250. That's a lot of wampum for fuel, with no vacation driving in there either. And that's without using the Suburban much at all.
Talking about junk, GM made plenty of them since 70s right here in America.
I will attest to that. GM quality started downhill about 71. Had a number of GM 60s and 70s cars. Some 60s and 70's had at same time and clearly to me the 70s' were inferior to the 60's.
Then, had an 86 Suburban, 84 Honda and 86 Honda at same time for 14 years. While I appreciated and liked the utility value of the Suburban, the Hondas were superior in all attributes of quality/reliability such as fit/finish, paint, interior, instruments and controls, suspension sophistication, engine, etc. The Suburban always had some rattles while the Hondas were tight till they were sold. There was always something falling off the Suburban such as trim pieces. Gas gauge always gave problems as did 77 Chevy Caprice. Suburban paint was awful after 14 years while Hondas still shiny and gleaming. All were garaged. Suburban had rust problems in doors, rear tailgate, quarter panels. Hondas did not.
On topic, IIRC, think I got 16-17 mpg driving at 60 on interstate without a load or passengers. Did not save any records. It had a 350 and was 1500 model,
After hearing all sorts of wacky numbers coming from hypermilers from even wackier techniques (coasting with car off, over inflation of tires, unusual gear selection, etc.), I can't help but wonder a little bit. What I wonder about most is if the money they save on gas is going to be worth it. Here's a very, very rough equation to make a point.
Let's say an individual drives their car 5,000 miles a year and gets about 30 miles per gallon on average. That would equate to about 167 gallons consumed yearly at a cost of $4.00/gallon coming to $666 (ironic number, eh?).
For sake of argument, let's take the same guy and say he uses hypermiling techniques. So at the same amount of 5,000 miles per year he gets 60 miles per gallon on average (big stretch). This will, of course be roughly half the previous consumption at about 83 gallons consumed yearly at a cost of $4.00/gallon coming to about $333.
So this person, by employing techniques, potentially dangerous for himself and others, is saving $333 annually. Even at 10,000 miles a year, it's only $666 he'd be saving. How much is a worn ignition worth? How much is a new set of tires from premature wear by over inflation? How much would it be to have the wiring system inspected for premature wear, etc, etc. You can see where I'm going with this.
There is clearly no monetary pay off for this when considering the issue of safety and vehicle maintenance/repair. As a result, I honestly believe that a majority of this hypermiling movement is for ego and who can post the highest numbers in a certain segment. If these people want to post big numbers next to their initials, they should stop playing the arcade in their Prius and go put .50 into a machine at the mall.
And, no, doing all of this crapola under the guise of "saving" folks from the grip of the terrorists just doesn't fly IMO.
Well since this is the gas cost thread, the Expedition seems to get similar fuel economy around town. With the 6 speed trans, I can get 19-20 on the hwy which is comparable to the new DOD 5.3 Tahoe/Suburban. Towing, I get better fuel economy with the Expedition. On my route to the lake we go to on the weekends towing our boat, the Suburban would get 12.5 basically every trip. Now, I've only made this trip twice with the Expedition and I've gotten 13.5 on the first trip and 13.7 on the second trip.
I can't even describe the difference in towing performance with the 5.4's extra torque at lower rpm and the advantage of 2 extra gears, which the first 4 gears in the Ford are all lower than the first 3 with the GM 4 speed. The Expe is effortless with how it tows where the Burb always felt strained. I guess that's why the Expe is rated to tow quite a bit more than a 1/2 ton Suburban, yet doesn't ride like craps like the 3/4 ton Suburbans.
Last month I spent $500 on gas, which includes several out of town trips. My wife's gas is paid for with her company car, so the gas bill in my earth destroying SUV isn't that bad. Not to mention, with gas prices I got a $6 - 8k discount on the Expedition vs. if gas was still $2/gal, so that purchase price savings will buy quite a bit of gas
A reporter from a large newspaper is looking to speak to consumers who filled up their tank for the first time and had to pay $100. If you’re interested in speaking to the reporter, please contact Chintan Talati at ctalati@edmunds.com with your daytime contact information no later than July 3 2008.
"When Greenspan was raising the rate from 1% in 2003 to 5.25% in 2006 the 30 year mortgage rate hardly budged."
It budged plenty -- it went from 4% in 2003 to 6.5% in 2006.
How about when Greenspan CUT the rate from 5% to 1% between 2001 and 2003? Mortgage rates dropped from 7% to 4% -- hardly proportional.
If you don't think the mortgage industry engages in conspiracies, then please explain how they all wrote mortgages based on phony qualifications, then packaged them into fraudulent bundles, and sold those bundles to investment banks who, when the scheme imploded, received a bailout from (guess who?) the Federal Reserve Bank. .
It budged plenty -- it went from 4% in 2003 to 6.5% in 2006.
How about when Greenspan CUT the rate from 5% to 1% between 2001 and 2003? Mortgage rates dropped from 7% to 4% -- hardly proportional.
What did the T-bill rate do around that same time, though? It's possible that their rates changed at the same time, and that affected the mortgages.
Did 30 year fixed mortgages really drop down to 4% in 2003? I refinanced my condo in early 2003, going from a 30 year to a 15, and got 5.5%. I took the option with fewer points, though, so I might have been able to get a cheaper rate if I'd ponied up some cash up front. Considering I sold the place about a year and a half later though, I guess I made the right decision.
Auto sales numbers came out today. No surprise -- Honda up 1%, GM down 18%, Ford down 23%.
However, those figures are misleading because they only count the NUMBER of cars sold. They leave out the prices paid for them. Here's a quote from the news article:
"GM credited a six-day sale featuring zero-percent financing offers with driving traffic to showrooms at the end of the month."
GM, Ford, and Chrysler are selling their cars for thousands below MSRP, and carrying the notes on them interest-free for 6 years. Toyotas and Hondas are selling at or above MSRP, and buyers pay interest on any factory financing.
US automakers may be "selling" their cars, but they're not making any money by doing so. The japanese companies are making loads of profit on theirs.
Detroit is in worse trouble than anyone will admit. .
GM, Ford, and Chrysler are selling their cars for thousands below MSRP, and carrying the notes on them interest-free for 6 years. Toyotas and Hondas are selling at or above MSRP, and buyers pay interest on any
No mass market cars are selling anywhere near MSRP right now. Did you mean invoice?
"What did the T-bill rate do around that same time, though?"
I know -- I've heard that fixed rates are based on the Treasury Bill (not the T-note, T-bond, or any other U.S. Treasury issue). And I've also heard that adjustable rates are based on the LIBOR -- London Inter-Bank Overnight Rate.
But this is precisely my point -- lenders keep playing the shell game with rates, so no one ever really "knows" what they're based on, and therefore can never make an apples-to-apples comparison.
The 10-year Treasury Bill has dropped from 5.1% a year ago to 4.1% as of last week. Yet 30-year mortgage rates average 6.2% today -- the same as they did a year ago. During the same period, the Fed Funds rate has dropped from above 3% down to 2%.
I defy anyone to draw a link between mortgages and any financial instrument issued by the Federal Reserve Bank or the U.S. Treasury when those rates are going DOWN. But when they go UP ..... you know the deal.
"No mass market cars are selling anywhere near MSRP right now. Did you mean invoice?"
Toyota Corolla, Honda Civic and Honda Fit are all selling out across the country, and dealers are getting full sticker for them.
Toyota Prius and Honda Civic Hybrid have 1-2 month back-orders, and are selling for $2,000 to $5,000 over sticker.
This is a big holiday weekend coming up. Count how many ads you see from Toyota, Honda and Nissan offering cash back and cheap financing. Then count the number from GM, Ford and Chrysler.
You can start with GM's ad right on this web page for "0% apr for 72 months."
I said mass market cars and Hybrids still aren't really mass market vehicles yet.
The fit has been hot ever since it came out so that isn't anything new.
I am sure some people are paying sticker for Civics and Corollas but plenty of people aren't. I helped my sister by a Corolla for a couple of hundred bucks over invoice.
GM, Ford, and Chrysler are selling their cars for thousands below MSRP, and carrying the notes on them interest-free for 6 years. Toyotas and Hondas are selling at or above MSRP, and buyers pay interest on any factory financing.
I thought that the days that people would pay invoice or higher for a Honda or Toyota were long since past? Now I could see if it was a hybrid...that's going to bring a premium, most likely. And they're not going to discount a small, fuel-efficient car like a Civic, Yaris, Fit, or Corolla all that much. I imagine there's more wiggle room in a Corolla or Civic, though. But larger cars, like the Accord, are probably going out the door with incentives. Remember, Honda sort of shot themselves in the foot with the larger 2008 model...even if it's still a fuel efficient car. And I have a feeling that one reason the Camry is so popular is simply BECAUSE people are getting them at a good price.
As for bigger stuff, like the Ridgeline, Tundra, Sequoia, etc...I'm sure they're discounting them just as deeply as any Ram, F-series, or Chevy C/K.
"Now I could see if it was a hybrid...that's going to bring a premium, most likely"
You'd think so, but a couple of folks over on the Camry Hybrid board describe (accurately, I'm sure ) getting TCH's for only a bit over invoice. Seem's like the Prius is the 'golden boy'.
mass market The Oxford Pocket Dictionary of Current English | Date: 2008 mass mar·ket • n. the market for goods that are produced in large quantities. • v. (mass-mar·ket) [tr.] market (a product) on a large scale.
How large is "large scale" when it comes to cars?
According to this story, hybrids are right now "on the FRINGE" of mass market status:
Hybrid and pure Electric Vehicles (EVs) continue to be on the fringe of the mass market due to costs and range, and these disadvantages are not going away, even with $4 gas. The recent introduction of a new type of electric motor/drive from the aerospace industry is posed to move Series Hybrids into the mass market category. This breakthrough provides more power, better stamina, and increases simplicity which drives down costs.
Until now, there have only been two options for the electric motor for Hybrids, either a Permanent Magnet Motor (used in Toyota and Honda’s drive trains) or a 3-Phase AC Induction Motor (used by GM and Tesla).
Can the hybrids ever become "Mass Market"? Toyota cannot get enough batteries according to their own news release. Have they peaked at their current sales levels? The conundrum as I see it will be the fact that the automakers want to move toward Li-Ion. They do not want to waste money increasing NiMH manufacturing capacity. So in the mean time you have shortages of cars for the buyers looking for high mileage cars.
Auto sales numbers came out today. No surprise -- Honda up 1%, GM down 18%, Ford down 23%.
I think you left out some numbers that are significant. Honda was down 20% on SUV and Truck sales. Toyota was down 38% on SUV and truck sales. GM still sold about 70,000 more vehicles than Toyota last month. No matter what they did to get them off the lots. They did sell them. How long will those Ridgelines, Pilots, Tundras & Sequoias sit before being sold? I know even last year when I bought my 2007 Sequoia for $10k under MSRP and $5k below Invoice it had been on the lot a LONG time. So yes Honda was able to break even on the sales percentage by the fact that they sold a lot of CIvics. Edmund's is showing the V6 Accords selling right at Invoice in San Diego. So they are not cutting a fat hog. Everyone knows there is no real money made on a Civic. They cannot stay in business just selling Civics and Fits. The WHOLE auto industry is in for lean times. I would say Toyota made some real blunders that will cost them over the next couple years. They got into the full sized truck business at a POOR time.
By no means an analysis, but it's been a few weeks since the fluctuating price of crude oil (almost non-stop up) has seemed to affect prices at the pump in my area.
In the stock market, one of the signs that the market is about to change direction is that the news no longer has much of an effect. Sort of like you can only beat on a dead horse so long. From the consumer perspective, we've been looking at a "bear market" of rising prices at the pump, and for a while there the price would jump up on ANY news of an increase in the price of the underlying crude. But on May 27, the price at the pump here was $3.99 and that's where it sits today even though crude has gone up over 25% since then. So why is increasing oil suddenly not affecting prices at the pump? The market sentiment has certainly affected automotive stock prices and the AR Index
A curious situation. If you feel like chatting about it, feel free to stop in to our weekly chats.
Tuesday means Mazda chat night! The chat opens at 8:45 pm ET and runs until 10 pm ET. I hope you're able to join us tonight to meet and greet with your fellow CarSpace members! See you there!
Can the hybrids ever become "Mass Market"? Toyota cannot get enough batteries according to their own news release. Have they peaked at their current sales levels?
Who knows? I guess it's possible. Isn't the Prius selling at a monthly rate that equates to around 250,000 per year? That sounds like mass market potential, as that's about the volume a fairly popular midsized or compact car would sell at. But, I think it's the only hybrid that sells in any serious volume. So I guess you could say it's a mass-market player in a niche market?
It budged plenty -- it went from 4% in 2003 to 6.5% in 2006.
How about when Greenspan CUT the rate from 5% to 1% between 2001 and 2003? Mortgage rates dropped from 7% to 4% -- hardly proportional.
I don't believe long term mortgage rates ever dropped to 4%. Regardless, even going by your bogus figures you haven't made a point. You're now claiming that mortgage rates both fell and rose by comparable amounts based upon comparable changes in the fed funds rate. Didn't your previous post claim that mortgage rates don't fall with rate cuts but do rise with rate increases?
I don't believe long term mortgage rates ever dropped to 4%. Regardless, even going by your bogus figures you haven't made a point. You're now claiming that mortgage rates both fell and rose by comparable amounts based upon comparable changes in the fed funds rate.
At their most extreme, they might have dropped to something like 4.875% for a 30 year fixed, and 3.5 points at closing. I do remember rates getting pretty low...if you ponied up the points.
But, when the Fed funds rate went from 1% to 5.25%, I think the typical 30 year mortgage only went back up to around 6.1%. And now that it's down to 2%, a 30 year fixed is more like 6.5% or so.
I'd also like to know who's paying $30 grand for a Prius? I'm the biggest fan of hybrids on this forum, but for $30K, I'd still be driving my small SUV. A hybrid is worthless at that price.
I'll bet dealers have lots of juicy tales of desperate SUV owners taking peanuts for their trade-ins and people losing their assets on the price of new hybrids. I want the gory details!
The one thing that a lot of the analyzers miss in trying to determine what's going on with the 'hybrid buzz' is why and who buys a $25000+ Prius.
No doubt there is a lot of image buying. Probably there was more of it initially when gas was under $3.00 a gallon ( pre Katrina ) However if you follow the Rogers Diffusion of Innovations model of new product acceptance, the hybrids as a group are now passing into the 'Early Majority' of the population.
Now it's about ... MONEY.
But... you say, 'How can you possibly save money buying a $28000-$30000 vehicle?' This is the key issue that almost all the analyzers miss.
When fuel was under $1.00 a gallon and housing 'equity' went up along with our 401Ks and stock investments we frankly had all the money we needed to buy which ever vehicle we desired. Lexus, BMW, Escalade, F150, Silverado 2500, you name it we could afford it back in the good ol' days of the 90s and early this decade. Fuel efficiency was of little or no consequence.
Now it is. Thus we run into these situations.. ..an attorney with a late 90s 328i is looking for a new [fuel efficient] vehicle to replace the 11 y.o. Bimmer. A Yaris is out of the question, as is a Corolla or a RAV all are far too basic. There just aren't enough goodies in them. ..a recently retired couple bought one of the first RX300's ever sold back in '98/'99. In looking for a new [fuel efficient] vehicle for travelling the RAV was an obvious choice because it's now the same size as that original RX. But it's way way way too basic. It is after all an entry level vehicle. ..two Navy officers are looking for a more [fuel efficient] vehicle to replace their Denali now that they have two children ( and an F150 and two Harleys ). The Prius fit's their 'expected expense' level of about $28000 - $32000. An Audi A4 for a Prius...the list goes on and on.
The common thread in all of these is that even if a buyer normally puts themselves in the $30000-ish buying stratum it doesn't mean that they have no concern for saving money in the cost of fuel. Of course they could get a Yaris and save money in total. But they outgrew the Yaris long ago, decades ago, when they were first struggling. It has NO FEATURES whatsoever except fuel economy.
The brilliant marketing coup that Toyota has pulled off is that it has found this goldmine of customers that fully expect to pay $25000 - $35000 for a vehicle every time they go to buy. These buyers categorize themselves this way. If they can find a vehicle that meets their 'amenities expectations' yet still gets 46 - 50 mpg.....they're done.
The desire to save money on fuel is not limited to those struggling.
OK then there are the 'gotta haves'. True story: A large auto group went to an auction and got into a bidding war for a base model Prius, No SKS, which retailed originally for $22000. But it was a 9 mo old fleet purchase with ~10000 miles on it. These professional auto buyers bid at each other til the winner took home this USED Prius for......$24900. I'm thinking of sending my own to auction to see if these dopes will pay me $18000 for my 2-1/2 y.o. with 81000 mi on it.
Again we're looking at it from just one perspective. It is about saving fuel but first and foremost it's about NOT giving up amenities. Of the 4 examples I noted above all were fully paid off and all the buyers were 'comfortably situated'. It was just time to get another vehicle. They were NOT about to step down to a Corolla or some such 'economy vehicle'.
Since the vehicle first came out this has been the rule rather than the exception. For every E4 whose car was totalled and now wants a base Prius at $22000 there are 10 buyers for whom paying cash at $25000 or $28000 a pop is not too much of a stretch.
2005 Prius... 15% City / 85% Hwy at ~63 mph... 81,000 miles in 31 months
47.8 lifetime average. In this nice weather it's 50-52 mpg. In winter it's 44-45 mpg. Using VA E10 gas it's 45 mpg on average; using NC 'whole gas' its 49 mpg.
The best trip was a Sunday drive for 50 mi at 65 mpg. The best fuel economy for longer than one trip that I've ever heard was from a customer who posted his results on GreenHybrid in June 2007 where he went 1026 miles on 11.9 gallons. He must have had a perfect commute in perfect conditions.
It is about saving fuel but first and foremost it's about NOT giving up amenities.
Every case you gave us, did indeed give up a heck of a lot of amenities for a few pennies saved at the pump. All buyers with more money than brains. Anyone that would go from a 328i or A4 to a Prius had no idea what their car was designed for. They wasted their money buying those sport sedans in the first place. What I see is the typical Knee jerk American reaction to everything.
So what will Toyota do with all the customers waiting and they have NO batteries to build enough Prii? Was this a giant screw-up in planning? On a scale with the Tundra plant in San Antonio? It looks to me like Toyota is taking the biggest beating in this down market. It plays right into GMs hands. They can close the plants that are losing money with high priced UAW workers and no one can scream. They bring in their cheap cars from off shore that are selling right now and all is well at GM.
You would be underselling your 2005 Prius at $18k. I see Mossy Toyota in San Diego has a 2005 with 48k miles for $32,995. They will find a fool I am sure.. Here are 4 others equally over priced.
PS That is the dealer that gave me the test drive that sold me on the Sequoia. Nice salesman. Horrible prices. They wanted $5k more than I paid for a 4X4 on the 2WD Limited they had. Down by the beach where all the drug dealers live.
Toyota did do a masterful job of marketing the Prius and setting up the options and price points just right.
I think VW is going to shoot themselves in the foot with the available options and trim levels on the TDI.
It looks like right now that VW is not going to offer the Jetta TDI with some of the higher end options available on the gas Jetta. Instead of just making the TDI engine an option on every trim level they seem to be making the TDI a separate trim level. I don't have enough information to say that they are doing this for sure but the little bit of pricing I have been able to get does seem to suggest it.
And for the 2nd time in two months the F150 is not atop the 'most units sold' standings...
Corolla Camry Civic Accord F150
Was last month Civic Corolla Camry Accord F150
I have complete faith in our innate sense of self-preservation overcoming all in the end.
The next big move IMO will be a huge surge of investments into locally produced biofuels of some sort. There simply is too much money to be made even if Big Oil gets ultra agressive and drops the price of oil to under $3 again.
I think that you're right about levelling off here at this time, but... I think it depends all on battery production capacity. Toyota has already announced a 60% increase in production, and sales presumably, for this coming year. That means that they must have found more batteries. They also have announced a new JV plant where they are going to make batteries themselves probably for the Gen3 and other vehicles.
The Li-Ions will be part of this latter venture but I'm sure that all the Li-ions will be 'niche' vehicles. NiMH technology is just too good and too stable to just dispose of it. When the Gen3 Prius comes out next summer it will be NiMH technology.
When the PHEV option is released in about 2011 I'm going to say that it will be very limited to just a premium trim level for those the MUST have the latest and greatest. But I'm pretty sure that the 'standard' Prius Gen3 will be a NiMH technology through it's entire life.
"Will easy oil drop in price and shut down the shale oil projects as they did in the 1980s? I don't think it will become practical until we have a real shortage of oil. "
How much easy oil is out there? I think there is not nearly enough cheap oil, the stuff under $50 a barrel, to satisfy even 50% of the world's needs. Offshore oil is costing upwards of $70 a barrel to produce. I just read something that said the break even for oil sands from Canada is now about $70 a barrel.
Demand is still very strong around the world. Even if OPEC produces more oil they will likely use most of that increase internally. There is also a lot of demand for oil under the surface. If prices dropped even $20 to $30 dollars a barrel we would see a lot more demand from poorer countries that are currently doing without. Countries like Indonesia, China, India and Malaysia would increase their subsidies again, increasing demand.
Gasoline usage would certainly head back up with even a drop to $3.50 a gallon in the USA. People would fall back into their old habits pretty quickly.
Unlike the 80s I think production of oil shale will happen. I suspect it will be slow going for 10 to 15 years until that get all the technical issues worked out. Water might be a limiting factor, but I heard Shell is buying up water rights like crazy.
CT has several companies making biodiesel from various sources. Depending on how much you buy you can get B100 in CT for between 2.95 and 2,50 a gallon.
If I had a business and owned a fleet of vehicles that would be a no brainier. Diesel in CT runs between 4.90 and 5.00 dollars a gallon.
Everyone knows there is no real money made on a Civic. They cannot stay in business just selling Civics and Fits. The WHOLE auto industry is in for lean times. I would say Toyota made some real blunders that will cost them over the next couple years. They got into the full sized truck business at a POOR time.
It IS going to be very very tough for most for the rest of the year. Minivans and large cars are in the pits as well as SUVs and trucks. Crossovers are so-so at best. The first one with a 30 mpg minivan will OWN the market.
Here is a little known situation for most of the public ( your highlighted text ).
I give you $40000 to invest in your mini-auto store. I'll pay all the bills up front and you give me half the net profits from the sales of the vehicles.
Data: 1 Sequoia with an MSRP of $45000 sits on the lot for about 120 days and eventually sells for a $1000 profit. It costs you $40000 to buy that vehicle. 1 Corolla with an MSRP of $16500 sits on the lot for 10 days and eventually sells for an $800 profit. It costs you $13333 to buy that vehicles ( you can buy 3 for $40000 ).
Where do you spend your money? What's 'my' part in each of these two situations? These are pretty accurate numbers in normal times.
Comments
Funny how that works, isn't it? When the Fed Funds rate goes down, it has nothing to do with home loans. But when the Fed Funds rate goes up, the poor mortgage lenders are forced (FORCED!) to raise rates.
A suspicious person might see corruption there. Fortunately, our politicians aren't the suspicious type -- either in real estate or oil futures.
.
Again, this is simply a claim. The quote from the article says he "can get 60 mpg in a regular Honda Accord." Well, sure, I CAN get 150 mpg from my Civic Hybrid. I did it once on a 1.4 mile downhill trip from a gas station to my folks' house. But I'd never use that to exaggerate the ACTUAL mpg I get (48).
I promise you, anyone who "can" get 60 mpg from an Accord doesn't drive it like a normal person. Just as the guy who DOES get 64 mpg from his Civic Hybrid doesn't drive it like you or I would. He sacrifices convenience, time, and often safety to achieve that number. And that's fine -- it's his choice to do so. It's a free country.
But it's not practical for most people.
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/business/homepage/20080701_Oil_gets_markets_off_t- o_worst_first_half_since_2002.html
That's not what I'm hearing. In the case of the US the argument is that by expanding our drilling to ANWR and the coastlines we may increase production by 2 million barrels per day but that would be around 2020 if we started today. These people are not saying this would have no effect they are saying it would have a minimal effect in a world that is probably using 100 million barrels per day by then. If we're looking 12 years down the road I consider that to be long range planning. Is more drilling really the best idea we can come up with?
The problem is that the speculators don't have to take delivery of their contracts; they can roll them into new future contracts.
The carrying charges on oil contracts is fairly high. A trader that is consistenly rolling over his contracts into the next month is losing money. Oil is not the only commodity that has gone up this much in the last few years. Some of these other commodities with similar price increases are sold primarily between producer and user. Can't blame the speculators there. Given that the demand for oil is relatively inelastic why should it not exhibit a comparable price run-up?
What if Saudi Arabia sold it's oil directly to the end users? No middle-men or speculators. What do you think they could sell it for given the fact the world cannot get by without this 9-10 million barrels per day? It's been established that the market will pay $140/barrel so they certainly shouldn't sell it for less than that. Why would they? Every $10 they took off this price would result in around $100 million in lost revenue per day. They're not exactly a rich country, especially compared to most of their oil customers. So we could whine that they need to cut the price on their primary source of revenue because it's hurting our lifestyle but exactly how compelling would that argument be to them?
Except that's not true. When Greenspan was raising the rate from 1% in 2003 to 5.25% in 2006 the 30 year mortgage rate hardly budged. But there's nothing better than a good conspiracy theory, even when it's unfounded.
I actually think that even if you gave these people a very competitive fixed rate a lot of them would still be walking away from their homes. They don't want to make payments on something that's worth 25% less than what they owe. For people like this you can't blame the unscrupulous lenders. They gambled and lost with house money, or in this case the bank's money and soon to be the taxpayer's money.
That's because those are tied to longer-term rates, such as the T-bill rate, I believe
You're right, home mortgage rates are more tied to the T-bill rate, which fluctuates based upon the perception of future, long term inflation. Lowering the fed funds rate is a inflationary move and typically won't help long term loan rates.
He drove to NY from Chicago back in May to get on The Early Show and got 71 mpg in the Prius. "Hypermiling" To Much Better Mileage
So I believe his claims. And I do some of the techniques (I'm not switching to synthetic or buying a Scan Gauge or overinflating my tires). And it was 103 yesterday so I did run the AC on max for a while.
Fuels vary in energy content, and some fuels contain less energy than others. Using oxygenated fuels or reformulated gasoline (RFG) can cause a small decrease (one-to-three percent) in fuel economy.
In my Sequoia it is more like 10% mileage loss.
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=122733
While we can definitely say China is late in this respect, there is a momentun
buidling up that suggest they will catch up fast. True, this is a matter of survival.
we can say for now that the most advanced environment protection techniques still co-exist with the ugliest polluting sources, the latter being overhelmingly numerous.
Still, the Chinese pursue the american dream of having a car and commuting this way. Beijing's four peripheral highways are being clogged by cars with an average speed of 5 mph in 2007 (30 mph in 1994) but this is still progress for so many.
Although everybody will say otherwise, America is still influencing many other countries, including its competitors. A strong move of US towards alternative fuels and transport means would clearly send a positive signal , even to China. I happen to hope that there is more to the US dream than just guzzling gas like there is no tomorrow.
My dad had a 2000 Park Ave that had all the above problems. Intake failure and blown head gaskets well before 100k miles. Not to mention about everything electrical had a nasty gremlin by 80k miles. You couldn't give me one of those cars.
BTW, finally got rid of my POS 2000 Suburban. I couldn't take all the rattles, substandard build quality. I looked at the latest model Suburban's and Yukon's and wasn't impressed.
So I may regret this but I picked up a loaded 2007 Ford Expedition. It has much better towing power vs GMs 5.3 4speed combo. Hopefully it will be better than my last Ford. We'll see. I want to buy American (at least my Expedition was made here instead of Mexico like my Suburban was). Just seems every domestic I've owned has been garbage for various reasons, not all had to do with reliability.
Exactly! Garbage comes in many forms, rattles, resale and service!
Regards,
OW
Also, I wonder how much of this increase is supply and demand and how much is just greed, panic and "speculation". Does anyone know if gas prices in Europe and the rest of the world has risen in price the same as in the U.S?
As for gas expense - this is the first month it has choked me. My Shell bill was $700, and my Chevron bill was $250. That's a lot of wampum for fuel, with no vacation driving in there either. And that's without using the Suburban much at all.
I will attest to that. GM quality started downhill about 71. Had a number of GM 60s and 70s cars. Some 60s and 70's had at same time and clearly to me the 70s' were inferior to the 60's.
Then, had an 86 Suburban, 84 Honda and 86 Honda at same time for 14 years. While I appreciated and liked the utility value of the Suburban, the Hondas were superior in all attributes of quality/reliability such as fit/finish, paint, interior, instruments and controls, suspension sophistication, engine, etc. The Suburban always had some rattles while the Hondas were tight till they were sold. There was always something falling off the Suburban such as trim pieces. Gas gauge always gave problems as did 77 Chevy Caprice. Suburban paint was awful after 14 years while Hondas still shiny and gleaming. All were garaged. Suburban had rust problems in doors, rear tailgate, quarter panels. Hondas did not.
On topic, IIRC, think I got 16-17 mpg driving at 60 on interstate without a load or passengers. Did not save any records. It had a 350 and was 1500 model,
Let's say an individual drives their car 5,000 miles a year and gets about 30 miles per gallon on average. That would equate to about 167 gallons consumed yearly at a cost of $4.00/gallon coming to $666 (ironic number, eh?).
For sake of argument, let's take the same guy and say he uses hypermiling techniques. So at the same amount of 5,000 miles per year he gets 60 miles per gallon on average (big stretch). This will, of course be roughly half the previous consumption at about 83 gallons consumed yearly at a cost of $4.00/gallon coming to about $333.
So this person, by employing techniques, potentially dangerous for himself and others, is saving $333 annually. Even at 10,000 miles a year, it's only $666 he'd be saving. How much is a worn ignition worth? How much is a new set of tires from premature wear by over inflation? How much would it be to have the wiring system inspected for premature wear, etc, etc. You can see where I'm going with this.
There is clearly no monetary pay off for this when considering the issue of safety and vehicle maintenance/repair. As a result, I honestly believe that a majority of this hypermiling movement is for ego and who can post the highest numbers in a certain segment. If these people want to post big numbers next to their initials, they should stop playing the arcade in their Prius and go put .50 into a machine at the mall.
And, no, doing all of this crapola under the guise of "saving" folks from the grip of the terrorists just doesn't fly IMO.
I can't even describe the difference in towing performance with the 5.4's extra torque at lower rpm and the advantage of 2 extra gears, which the first 4 gears in the Ford are all lower than the first 3 with the GM 4 speed. The Expe is effortless with how it tows where the Burb always felt strained. I guess that's why the Expe is rated to tow quite a bit more than a 1/2 ton Suburban, yet doesn't ride like craps like the 3/4 ton Suburbans.
Last month I spent $500 on gas, which includes several out of town trips. My wife's gas is paid for with her company car, so the gas bill in my earth destroying SUV isn't that bad. Not to mention, with gas prices I got a $6 - 8k discount on the Expedition vs. if gas was still $2/gal, so that purchase price savings will buy quite a bit of gas
It budged plenty -- it went from 4% in 2003 to 6.5% in 2006.
How about when Greenspan CUT the rate from 5% to 1% between 2001 and 2003? Mortgage rates dropped from 7% to 4% -- hardly proportional.
If you don't think the mortgage industry engages in conspiracies, then please explain how they all wrote mortgages based on phony qualifications, then packaged them into fraudulent bundles, and sold those bundles to investment banks who, when the scheme imploded, received a bailout from (guess who?) the Federal Reserve Bank.
.
How about when Greenspan CUT the rate from 5% to 1% between 2001 and 2003? Mortgage rates dropped from 7% to 4% -- hardly proportional.
What did the T-bill rate do around that same time, though? It's possible that their rates changed at the same time, and that affected the mortgages.
Did 30 year fixed mortgages really drop down to 4% in 2003? I refinanced my condo in early 2003, going from a 30 year to a 15, and got 5.5%. I took the option with fewer points, though, so I might have been able to get a cheaper rate if I'd ponied up some cash up front. Considering I sold the place about a year and a half later though, I guess I made the right decision.
However, those figures are misleading because they only count the NUMBER of cars sold. They leave out the prices paid for them. Here's a quote from the news article:
"GM credited a six-day sale featuring zero-percent financing offers with driving traffic to showrooms at the end of the month."
GM, Ford, and Chrysler are selling their cars for thousands below MSRP, and carrying the notes on them interest-free for 6 years. Toyotas and Hondas are selling at or above MSRP, and buyers pay interest on any factory financing.
US automakers may be "selling" their cars, but they're not making any money by doing so. The japanese companies are making loads of profit on theirs.
Detroit is in worse trouble than anyone will admit.
.
No mass market cars are selling anywhere near MSRP right now. Did you mean invoice?
I know -- I've heard that fixed rates are based on the Treasury Bill (not the T-note, T-bond, or any other U.S. Treasury issue). And I've also heard that adjustable rates are based on the LIBOR -- London Inter-Bank Overnight Rate.
But this is precisely my point -- lenders keep playing the shell game with rates, so no one ever really "knows" what they're based on, and therefore can never make an apples-to-apples comparison.
The 10-year Treasury Bill has dropped from 5.1% a year ago to 4.1% as of last week. Yet 30-year mortgage rates average 6.2% today -- the same as they did a year ago. During the same period, the Fed Funds rate has dropped from above 3% down to 2%.
I defy anyone to draw a link between mortgages and any financial instrument issued by the Federal Reserve Bank or the U.S. Treasury when those rates are going DOWN. But when they go UP ..... you know the deal.
Toyota Corolla, Honda Civic and Honda Fit are all selling out across the country, and dealers are getting full sticker for them.
Toyota Prius and Honda Civic Hybrid have 1-2 month back-orders, and are selling for $2,000 to $5,000 over sticker.
This is a big holiday weekend coming up. Count how many ads you see from Toyota, Honda and Nissan offering cash back and cheap financing. Then count the number from GM, Ford and Chrysler.
You can start with GM's ad right on this web page for "0% apr for 72 months."
The fit has been hot ever since it came out so that isn't anything new.
I am sure some people are paying sticker for Civics and Corollas but plenty of people aren't. I helped my sister by a Corolla for a couple of hundred bucks over invoice.
I thought that the days that people would pay invoice or higher for a Honda or Toyota were long since past? Now I could see if it was a hybrid...that's going to bring a premium, most likely. And they're not going to discount a small, fuel-efficient car like a Civic, Yaris, Fit, or Corolla all that much. I imagine there's more wiggle room in a Corolla or Civic, though. But larger cars, like the Accord, are probably going out the door with incentives. Remember, Honda sort of shot themselves in the foot with the larger 2008 model...even if it's still a fuel efficient car. And I have a feeling that one reason the Camry is so popular is simply BECAUSE people are getting them at a good price.
As for bigger stuff, like the Ridgeline, Tundra, Sequoia, etc...I'm sure they're discounting them just as deeply as any Ram, F-series, or Chevy C/K.
You'd think so, but a couple of folks over on the Camry Hybrid board describe (accurately, I'm sure
mass market
The Oxford Pocket Dictionary of Current English | Date: 2008
mass mar·ket • n. the market for goods that are produced in large quantities. • v. (mass-mar·ket) [tr.] market (a product) on a large scale.
How large is "large scale" when it comes to cars?
According to this story, hybrids are right now "on the FRINGE" of mass market status:
Mass Market Next Hurdle
Hybrid and pure Electric Vehicles (EVs) continue to be on the fringe of the mass market due to costs and range, and these disadvantages are not going away, even with $4 gas. The recent introduction of a new type of electric motor/drive from the aerospace industry is posed to move Series Hybrids into the mass market category. This breakthrough provides more power, better stamina, and increases simplicity which drives down costs.
Until now, there have only been two options for the electric motor for Hybrids, either a Permanent Magnet Motor (used in Toyota and Honda’s drive trains) or a 3-Phase AC Induction Motor (used by GM and Tesla).
I think you left out some numbers that are significant. Honda was down 20% on SUV and Truck sales. Toyota was down 38% on SUV and truck sales. GM still sold about 70,000 more vehicles than Toyota last month. No matter what they did to get them off the lots. They did sell them. How long will those Ridgelines, Pilots, Tundras & Sequoias sit before being sold? I know even last year when I bought my 2007 Sequoia for $10k under MSRP and $5k below Invoice it had been on the lot a LONG time. So yes Honda was able to break even on the sales percentage by the fact that they sold a lot of CIvics. Edmund's is showing the V6 Accords selling right at Invoice in San Diego. So they are not cutting a fat hog. Everyone knows there is no real money made on a Civic. They cannot stay in business just selling Civics and Fits. The WHOLE auto industry is in for lean times. I would say Toyota made some real blunders that will cost them over the next couple years. They got into the full sized truck business at a POOR time.
In the stock market, one of the signs that the market is about to change direction is that the news no longer has much of an effect. Sort of like you can only beat on a dead horse so long. From the consumer perspective, we've been looking at a "bear market" of rising prices at the pump, and for a while there the price would jump up on ANY news of an increase in the price of the underlying crude. But on May 27, the price at the pump here was $3.99 and that's where it sits today even though crude has gone up over 25% since then. So why is increasing oil suddenly not affecting prices at the pump? The market sentiment has certainly affected automotive stock prices and the AR Index
A curious situation. If you feel like chatting about it, feel free to stop in to our weekly chats.
Tuesday means Mazda chat night! The chat opens at 8:45 pm ET and runs until 10 pm ET. I hope you're able to join us tonight to meet and greet with your fellow CarSpace members!
See you there!
Who knows? I guess it's possible. Isn't the Prius selling at a monthly rate that equates to around 250,000 per year? That sounds like mass market potential, as that's about the volume a fairly popular midsized or compact car would sell at. But, I think it's the only hybrid that sells in any serious volume. So I guess you could say it's a mass-market player in a niche market?
It budged plenty -- it went from 4% in 2003 to 6.5% in 2006.
How about when Greenspan CUT the rate from 5% to 1% between 2001 and 2003? Mortgage rates dropped from 7% to 4% -- hardly proportional.
I don't believe long term mortgage rates ever dropped to 4%. Regardless, even going by your bogus figures you haven't made a point. You're now claiming that mortgage rates both fell and rose by comparable amounts based upon comparable changes in the fed funds rate. Didn't your previous post claim that mortgage rates don't fall with rate cuts but do rise with rate increases?
US automakers may be "selling" their cars, but they're not making any money by doing so. The japanese companies are making loads of profit on theirs.
Toyota's sales fell by 21.4%. Their truck sales were off by 38.9% and their car sales were down by 9.4%. You seemed to have missed that stat.
At their most extreme, they might have dropped to something like 4.875% for a 30 year fixed, and 3.5 points at closing. I do remember rates getting pretty low...if you ponied up the points.
But, when the Fed funds rate went from 1% to 5.25%, I think the typical 30 year mortgage only went back up to around 6.1%. And now that it's down to 2%, a 30 year fixed is more like 6.5% or so.
I'll bet dealers have lots of juicy tales of desperate SUV owners taking peanuts for their trade-ins and people losing their assets on the price of new hybrids. I want the gory details!
The one thing that a lot of the analyzers miss in trying to determine what's going on with the 'hybrid buzz' is why and who buys a $25000+ Prius.
No doubt there is a lot of image buying. Probably there was more of it initially when gas was under $3.00 a gallon ( pre Katrina ) However if you follow the Rogers Diffusion of Innovations model of new product acceptance, the hybrids as a group are now passing into the 'Early Majority' of the population.
Now it's about ... MONEY.
But... you say, 'How can you possibly save money buying a $28000-$30000 vehicle?' This is the key issue that almost all the analyzers miss.
When fuel was under $1.00 a gallon and housing 'equity' went up along with our 401Ks and stock investments we frankly had all the money we needed to buy which ever vehicle we desired. Lexus, BMW, Escalade, F150, Silverado 2500, you name it we could afford it back in the good ol' days of the 90s and early this decade. Fuel efficiency was of little or no consequence.
Now it is. Thus we run into these situations..
..an attorney with a late 90s 328i is looking for a new [fuel efficient] vehicle to replace the 11 y.o. Bimmer. A Yaris is out of the question, as is a Corolla or a RAV all are far too basic. There just aren't enough goodies in them.
..a recently retired couple bought one of the first RX300's ever sold back in '98/'99. In looking for a new [fuel efficient] vehicle for travelling the RAV was an obvious choice because it's now the same size as that original RX. But it's way way way too basic. It is after all an entry level vehicle.
..two Navy officers are looking for a more [fuel efficient] vehicle to replace their Denali now that they have two children ( and an F150 and two Harleys ). The Prius fit's their 'expected expense' level of about $28000 - $32000.
An Audi A4 for a Prius...the list goes on and on.
The common thread in all of these is that even if a buyer normally puts themselves in the $30000-ish buying stratum it doesn't mean that they have no concern for saving money in the cost of fuel. Of course they could get a Yaris and save money in total. But they outgrew the Yaris long ago, decades ago, when they were first struggling. It has NO FEATURES whatsoever except fuel economy.
The brilliant marketing coup that Toyota has pulled off is that it has found this goldmine of customers that fully expect to pay $25000 - $35000 for a vehicle every time they go to buy. These buyers categorize themselves this way. If they can find a vehicle that meets their 'amenities expectations' yet still gets 46 - 50 mpg.....they're done.
The desire to save money on fuel is not limited to those struggling.
OK then there are the 'gotta haves'. True story: A large auto group went to an auction and got into a bidding war for a base model Prius, No SKS, which retailed originally for $22000. But it was a 9 mo old fleet purchase with ~10000 miles on it. These professional auto buyers bid at each other til the winner took home this USED Prius for......$24900. I'm thinking of sending my own to auction to see if these dopes will pay me $18000 for my 2-1/2 y.o. with 81000 mi on it.
Since the vehicle first came out this has been the rule rather than the exception. For every E4 whose car was totalled and now wants a base Prius at $22000 there are 10 buyers for whom paying cash at $25000 or $28000 a pop is not too much of a stretch.
47.8 lifetime average.
In this nice weather it's 50-52 mpg. In winter it's 44-45 mpg.
Using VA E10 gas it's 45 mpg on average; using NC 'whole gas' its 49 mpg.
The best trip was a Sunday drive for 50 mi at 65 mpg.
The best fuel economy for longer than one trip that I've ever heard was from a customer who posted his results on GreenHybrid in June 2007 where he went 1026 miles on 11.9 gallons. He must have had a perfect commute in perfect conditions.
Every case you gave us, did indeed give up a heck of a lot of amenities for a few pennies saved at the pump. All buyers with more money than brains. Anyone that would go from a 328i or A4 to a Prius had no idea what their car was designed for. They wasted their money buying those sport sedans in the first place. What I see is the typical Knee jerk American reaction to everything.
So what will Toyota do with all the customers waiting and they have NO batteries to build enough Prii? Was this a giant screw-up in planning? On a scale with the Tundra plant in San Antonio? It looks to me like Toyota is taking the biggest beating in this down market. It plays right into GMs hands. They can close the plants that are losing money with high priced UAW workers and no one can scream. They bring in their cheap cars from off shore that are selling right now and all is well at GM.
http://www.mossytoyota.com/used-inventory/index.htm?reset=InventoryListing&invTy- - pe=used&SBmake=Toyota&SBmodel=Prius
PS
That is the dealer that gave me the test drive that sold me on the Sequoia. Nice salesman. Horrible prices. They wanted $5k more than I paid for a 4X4 on the 2WD Limited they had. Down by the beach where all the drug dealers live.
I think VW is going to shoot themselves in the foot with the available options and trim levels on the TDI.
It looks like right now that VW is not going to offer the Jetta TDI with some of the higher end options available on the gas Jetta. Instead of just making the TDI engine an option on every trim level they seem to be making the TDI a separate trim level. I don't have enough information to say that they are doing this for sure but the little bit of pricing I have been able to get does seem to suggest it.
Corolla
Camry
Civic
Accord
F150
Was last month
Civic
Corolla
Camry
Accord
F150
I have complete faith in our innate sense of self-preservation overcoming all in the end.
The next big move IMO will be a huge surge of investments into locally produced biofuels of some sort. There simply is too much money to be made even if Big Oil gets ultra agressive and drops the price of oil to under $3 again.
The Li-Ions will be part of this latter venture but I'm sure that all the Li-ions will be 'niche' vehicles. NiMH technology is just too good and too stable to just dispose of it. When the Gen3 Prius comes out next summer it will be NiMH technology.
When the PHEV option is released in about 2011 I'm going to say that it will be very limited to just a premium trim level for those the MUST have the latest and greatest. But I'm pretty sure that the 'standard' Prius Gen3 will be a NiMH technology through it's entire life.
How much easy oil is out there? I think there is not nearly enough cheap oil, the stuff under $50 a barrel, to satisfy even 50% of the world's needs. Offshore oil is costing upwards of $70 a barrel to produce. I just read something that said the break even for oil sands from Canada is now about $70 a barrel.
Demand is still very strong around the world. Even if OPEC produces more oil they will likely use most of that increase internally. There is also a lot of demand for oil under the surface. If prices dropped even $20 to $30 dollars a barrel we would see a lot more demand from poorer countries that are currently doing without. Countries like Indonesia, China, India and Malaysia would increase their subsidies again, increasing demand.
Gasoline usage would certainly head back up with even a drop to $3.50 a gallon in the USA. People would fall back into their old habits pretty quickly.
Unlike the 80s I think production of oil shale will happen. I suspect it will be slow going for 10 to 15 years until that get all the technical issues worked out. Water might be a limiting factor, but I heard Shell is buying up water rights like crazy.
If I had a business and owned a fleet of vehicles that would be a no brainier. Diesel in CT runs between 4.90 and 5.00 dollars a gallon.
It IS going to be very very tough for most for the rest of the year. Minivans and large cars are in the pits as well as SUVs and trucks. Crossovers are so-so at best. The first one with a 30 mpg minivan will OWN the market.
Here is a little known situation for most of the public ( your highlighted text ).
I give you $40000 to invest in your mini-auto store. I'll pay all the bills up front and you give me half the net profits from the sales of the vehicles.
Data:
1 Sequoia with an MSRP of $45000 sits on the lot for about 120 days and eventually sells for a $1000 profit. It costs you $40000 to buy that vehicle.
1 Corolla with an MSRP of $16500 sits on the lot for 10 days and eventually sells for an $800 profit. It costs you $13333 to buy that vehicles ( you can buy 3 for $40000 ).
Where do you spend your money? What's 'my' part in each of these two situations? These are pretty accurate numbers in normal times.