Hybrids in the News

PF_Flyer · March 2006

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=109598

TOKYO  After nearly two years on sale, Toyota finds it still can't crank out enough versions of its smash hit Prius hybrid to go around. Production at the main plant building in Japan is set to double this summer, up to 120,000 units a year, according to a Japanese newspaper report.

stevedebi · March 2006

"The 2004 Prius first shipped in fall 2003. The 2000 ECHO first shipped in fall 1999. Are you saying that the original Prius, the ECHO, and the 2004+ Prius all use the same platform? Do you have any substantiation for that? I just find it hard to believe given the differences in the cars."

I possibly should have mentioned I was speaking of the Gen 1 Prius. I thoght everyone knew that the Gen II was a complete redsign.

stevedebi · March 2006

"The bigger consideration is the supply and that the Prius is Toyota ( Civic a Honda ). Both of these factors favor the hybrids holding value. "

You'd better hope the supply consideration is not true. When people are trading in their 2004 hybrids, there are apt to be a lot more hybrids available.

Personally, I think some of the good resale values the hybrids now enjoy is based on the scarcity of the hybrids, combined with the spike in fuel prices last year. However, as more hybrid choices become available, the advantage will be decreased. This effect is doubled if the newer hybrids are cheaper (which should happen as volume increases).

kdhspyder · March 2006

Agreed. All of what you state is true.

moparbad · March 2006

Save Gas - Lose Money

The endless debate on ownership costs continues.

Hybrid buyers do not buy hybrids to save money, so who cares!

dewey · March 2006

Hybrids will save money. Assuming you dont mind driving an economy car without celebrity status/

http://www.businessweek.com/print/globalbiz/content/mar2006/gb20060310_046845.ht- - - m">Honda Fit hybrid
ECONOMY. For one thing, a gas-electric version of the Fit -- or Jazz as it's called in Europe -- would likely deliver big-time on fuel efficiency. The straight gasoline-burning versions of the Fit, which will be introduced in the U.S. in April, offer a 1.5-liter engine, while in other markets, 1.2-liter and 1.3-liter versions are available. The Nikkei reports Honda is planning an even smaller 1-liter engine version for the hybrid, which should deliver fuel economy similar to the Toyota (TM ) Prius: average 55 miles per gallon.

Perhaps more important, the hybrid version of the Fit won't be a budget buster. The Nikkei reckons it will cost around $11,800 in Japan -- just $1,700 more than a conventional Fit. That makes it considerably cheaper than Honda's new, larger Civic hybrid. That model went on sale in the U.S. last year for $21,000. (see BW Online, 9/15/05, "Civic Minded at Honda")

BUILD IT SIMPLE. Not only should that guarantee sales, it would also introduce a new class of buyer to hybrids. "For people looking for a compact and reasonable Honda car, the Civic might have become a bit too big and high class, but a hybrid Fit would broaden the popularity of hybrid cars," figures Osamu Kobayashi, chief analyst covering autos at Standard & Poor's.

How can Honda afford to make a hybrid at a reasonable price? A major reason: its hybrid systems are already less complex than Toyota's and use fewer components. For example, Honda's hybrid system needs about half the batteries and has only one electric motor, compared to Toyota's two. While that means Toyota's hybrid systems have more powerful, analysts say Honda's are cheaper to produce and smaller -- just what's needed for a subcompact.

varmint · March 2006

Eventually. When production costs come down, and if gas prices go up.

But I tend to agree with Mopar on this. Hybrid buyers are not seriously interested in saving cash.

moparbad · March 2006

Only problem is that the Fit Hybrid is not sold in North America. Even the regular Fit is not yet sold, and even the non-hybrid Fit is expected to retail for $13-16,000.
Honda hybrids that are available at this time are significantly more expensive than the non-hybrid versions.

kdhspyder · March 2006

Dumb article.. CNN Money copies the original CR report, but since they referenced CR then they (CNN) dont have to make any corrections. It wasnt their data or testing or conclusions.

Journalistic excellence.

kdhspyder · March 2006

This has always been the case when a real buyer comes in to buy one. The price is maybe 4th or 5th in importance.

Lately there may be a new trend (?) emerging. A young professional couple came in with two luxury vehicles. they want to trade one for a Prius. 'Is there a package higher than Pck #8?'

markjenn · March 2006

Actually, the CNN article does refer to the corrected CR analysis where two of the six hybrids came out cheaper. But I wonder if, like the original faulty CR report, they drew strong conclusions about cost-ineffectiveness from the original bad data, and then left those conclusions in place even when the new data was much more mixed as a face-saving measure.

So I agree that this is a less than sterling example of journalistic excellence, both from CR and CNN.

- Mark

tagman · March 2006

Here's a little blurb about the increasing trend to use hybrid technology for commercial trucks.

link title

Kirstie_H · March 2006

A financial magazine reporter aims to interview someone who has purchased a hybrid and would like to discuss why you chose buying a hybrid and if you're happy with your vehicle. Please respond to ctalati@edmunds.com before Wednesday, March 15 at 5 PM EST with your daytime/weekend contact info.

moparbad · March 2006

Hybrid Hoax from Forbes

Consumer Reports stirred up a hornets nest of interest and debate regarding cost of ownership of hybrids.

Time, Money and Emotion from Detroit News

kdhspyder · March 2006

The AMT limitation has always been known. It's why the initial reaction that the credit was 'welfare for the wealthy' was a specious argument.

Quote from the Detroit News column:
On the other hand, now that Consumer Reports has weighed in against hybrids, fewer people will believe they can truly save money with a hybrid purchase.

Buying a hybrid in order to save money is never a good idea. This has always been the case. Most actual buyers do not expect to save money by their purchase.

tagman · March 2006

admission by CR that its math was flawed and that in fact two of the six hybrids considered, the Prius and the Honda Civic, would save owners money

Previously on this forum I had argued that the HCH and the Prius were the first Hybrids to be financially and mathematically a good choice. It mostly fell on deaf ears. But now, Consumer Reports FINALLY admits that those are the two hybrids that do indeed make economic sense. What a relief it is to finally read this. The economic difference may not be tremendous, but it could be huge if fuel prices take a sudden increase in price. Because then the fuel savings would be more significant and the resale of the vehicle would likely jump even higher.

And, the good news is that the hybrid technology will get even better.

TagMan

kdhspyder · March 2006

In the Toyota training for the new Camry these tidbits came out...

Next hybrid likely will be the Sienna next year. It makes great sense given the demographic and the emphasis on economy.... and to gain a leg up on the Odyssey.

Corolla? A real 50+ mpg compact with the Prius drivetrain. Great scoot and great FE.

Supra/Celica hybrid?

tC hybrid?

gagrice · March 2006

Most actual buyers do not expect to save money by their purchase.

I would say of the Prius buyers that is pretty much true. The ones that have squealed the loudest have been the RX400h buyers that were only getting 20 MPG or less. They could not understand why they were not getting better mileage driving the same as in the RX330 they traded in.

The point is wealthy people are more concerned about the money than the upper middle class that buy the Prius as a statement.

tagman · March 2006

The point is wealthy people are more concerned about the money than the upper middle class

Are you speaking from experience or just guessing?

After all, the Prius is big with the celebrity croud . . . and they're wealthy . . . and not too concerned about the money . . . so what you're saying doesn't exactly work. The truth is that there are different motivations in all the economic classes. Categorizing people like that never works out very well.

dpat · March 2006

While the prius and civic may make financial sense right now, they wouldn't without the major tax credits now attached to them. I will remain skeptical about hybrid technology's viability until there is a car with a hybrid option where the hybrid option will save you money in the long run without tax credits and without sacrificing much performance or many features. I think hybrid technology shows great promise, but am not convinced it is ready for mainstream use yet.

gagrice · March 2006

Prius is big with the celebrity crowd . . . and they're wealthy . . . and not too concerned about the money

You are getting into the demographics of the wealthy. I said the people that buy the Prius are trying to show their green image to the world. That would include the Hollywood group. The business man that worked for his wealth will be a bit more concerned that he is getting what he paid for. When he goes in and buys the latest from Lexus and the window sticker says 31 MPG City, he expects to get 31 MPG in the city. More than likely he has not spent long hours blogging on Edmunds. So he will not be aware that the EPA estimates for the hybrids are WAY off. Another point: he probably would not pay any attention, except the mileage is "In Your Face" on a little screen.

No I am not wealthy. Bill Gates is wealthy. Millionaires are upper middle class commoners in America.

snakeweasel · March 2006

No I am not wealthy. Bill Gates is wealthy. Millionaires are upper middle class commoners in America.

Please define Millionaires and Upper Middle Class.

Either your definitions are wrong or your living in a different America.

gagrice · March 2006

Please define Millionaires and Upper Middle Class.

Most anyone that has worked and owned a home for 20 years would more than likely qualify. With the equity in a home and a 401K package your net value should be close to 1 million dollars. That qualifies you as a millionaire. I just read in the Wall Street Journal that California is losing millionaires at an alarming rate. People selling their overpriced CA homes and moving elsewhere to escape the second highest income tax in the USA. NYC being the worst.

If your family income is over $85,000 per year you would be considered upper middle class. I know that is what is needed to just get by comfortably in many places.

A couple would be hard pressed to buy the average home in San Diego with only $85,000 combined income. Our average home now is $624,000. Not much of anything including condos under $300,000.

snakeweasel · March 2006

Most anyone that has worked and owned a home for 20 years would more than likely qualify.

You would be surprised at the number of people that wouldn't qualify even counting 401k and homes.

If your family income is over $85,000 per year you would be considered upper middle class.

A family income of $85,000 or more would put you in the upper 20% in the US. The medium family income in the US is just shy of $44K.

Your comment that millionaires are upper middle class in this country isn't exactly accurate.

rorr · March 2006

"...and the resale of the vehicle would likely jump even higher.

And, the good news is that the hybrid technology will get even better."

If the hybrid technology gets even better, wouldn't that lead to REDUCED resale value for current generation hybrids?

backy · March 2006

Maybe not. Cars like Accords and Camrys add more power, refinement, technology, and features with each new generation yet the resale value of the old models continues to be strong. Why? Because they are known to be reliable. If the reliability of hybrids like the Civic and Prius continues to be strong, they should hold their value also. The one thing that would reduce the resale value for current hybrids is if future hybrids offer the same or better features and performance for a significantly lower price. Then, why buy a used Prius for $15k when you could buy a new one for $18k?

kdhspyder · March 2006

The one thing that would reduce the resale value for current hybrids is if future hybrids offer the same or better features and performance for a significantly lower price. Then, why buy a used Prius for $15k when you could buy a new one for $18k?

This wont happen though because Toyota doesnt change the prices of existing models dramatically in either direction unless it's to add features; e.g. this year's Prius.

OTOH making a new vehicle a hybrid, such as the Corolla could have such an effect. But the Prius would still be a midsized vehicle with semi-luxury features. This is smart product management. It does hold the value of preowned vehicles for the existing owners.

backy · March 2006

The variable here is if Toyota succeeds in their mission to cut the "hybrid premium" in half, which has been publically stated as their goal.

snakeweasel · March 2006

No the real variable is other manufacturers coming out with their own hybrids. Whats going to happen to the market 4-5 years down the road when there are 25-30 different hybrid models to chose from?

tagman · March 2006

Whats going to happen to the market 4-5 years down the road when there are 25-30 different hybrid models to chose from?

Exactly! It's going to be more mainstream. So, the marketplace simply will be similar to what we have now.

TagMan

rickmacg · March 2006

The hybrid bandwagon may very well turn into a giant electrochemical and metals nightmare. But hey, why care if people can spend lots of money (or less if mass appeal starts to wain) and get great MPG ? But what happens when the massive batteries and heavy metals used in this technology incur the infamous "disposal fee" your dealer charges you for normal oil/fluid changes now ? Where will the batteries be disposed. Has anyone heard of a hybrid battery reclamation facility ? And then there are the many EMTs that need to spend $$$ on specialized training on extracting crash victims without causing electrical hazards (like cutting high voltage lines.) In an accident, would a hybrid require a HAZMAT team to erradicate the battery acid spilled all over the ground. And what about the chemical burns from passing cars splashing thru puddles of acid.

So what kind of picture am I painting here ? Originally I started to get all geeked up about these electric cars. But thinking it thru a bit I don't think this is the way to go. Low sulfur diesel fuel (LSDF) is about to make its way to US soil. In fact, VW has stated it has stopped importing diesel VW's in anticipation of this LSDF. Smart move. Why sell more diesels that will require a return visit to the dealer to re-adjust an engine for LSDF .vs the current US grade diesel.

In late 2005 a vacation to Disney in Orlando I stumbled across a GM Hydrogen Hummer H2 at Epcot's Imagination interactive exhibits. It is in a tour within a houst of the future. Gas mileage for this puppy... ready... 60 MPG for a Hummer ! So lets get the Hydrogen Fuel cell distribution channel in place. India has pledged to do just that in thier own country. Comendable.

So think about the hybrid. Be wary of the craze. Maybe it still works for you but they do pose more of an ecological hazard then other technologies such as LSDF and Hydrogen Fuel Cell. Oh yeah, Ethanol ? That will become nothing but the same (or slightly cheaper) price per gallon with @ 40% less efficiency in combustion then regular fuel. So that just means same price and worse MPG. You will wind up spending more $$ to refule on that unless someone figures out something different (at a premium of course.)

Just think, if a giant Hummer can get 60 MPG... imaging what a Ford Fusion, Pontiac Vibe, ... fuel cell vehicle can do. Put time into the equation and defer your buying decision. Buy a beater that you can drive in the short term. This will speed technology up by forcing the mfr. to deliver a practical solution to the average consumer.

I'll save you the trip to Disney with a link to the H2H http://www.gmhummer.com/hummerspecs/h2h/main.htm .

tagman · March 2006

Buy a beater that you can drive in the short term. This will speed technology

Oh, sure, THAT will speed technolgy? Sorry, but progress has to be rewarded and embraced, not abandoned or ignored! Driving a beater does NOTHING but stay the course and rewards no one for making progress.

Progress comes in steps.

And improvements are not always final solutions.

There are always those that complain about improvements, such as hybrid technology, because improvements often don't completely solve the problems, so those folks would rather we continue and continue and continue with the problems instead of at least solve a part of it with an improvement. The improvement isn't good enough for them, so we never make any progress. This is the way it's been for decades.

Hybrid technology is such an improvement and is a stepping stone into the future. The politics of the real world will not discontinue the use of petroleum based energy all too quickly. The infrastructure will change in a way that does not too dramatically shift the power and wealth and control from those that have it.

Hydrogen will come at a pace that accomodates the real global and political and business interests. So, instead of complaining that hybrid technology isn't the perfect solution, we need to realize that it is an important step in the right direction, and that it is much better than doing nothing at all, which is basically what the naysayers have perpetuated for generation after generation!

TagMan

snakeweasel · March 2006

So, the marketplace simply will be similar to what we have now.

No, it should drive down prices plus start to drive down resale values.

As for going mainstream there is a large segment of the population that will not buy a hybrid version if they cannot see immediate or almost immediate savings.

backy · March 2006

If someone is driving a typical mid-sized car today, which gets in the mid-20s mpg, and buys a car like a Prius that can get in the 40s mpg, there is an immediate savings.

snakeweasel · March 2006

If someone is driving a typical mid-sized car today, which gets in the mid-20s mpg, and buys a car like a Prius that can get in the 40s mpg, there is an immediate savings.

There is only a savings at the gas pump. Add on the extra price of the car and that savings disapears very quickly. Where is the savings if your saving $25 dollars a month at the pump but paying $35 a months extra in car payments? In your example if the Prius costs more than $1,175 more than the mid-size car then there is no savings what so ever (based on 15k miles driven a year).

trust me there are cars similarly sized as the Prius that get better than mid 20's that run thousands less than the Prius.

kdhspyder · March 2006

I traded out of a 2000 Camry into a 2005 Prius because the Prius was a better vehicle with more features and better FE.

The key deciding point though was that it was a better vehicle than I had been driving;
Then it met all the criteria I wanted in a midsized auto;
Then it saved me $ in fuel;

You are partially right though about resale values. There are not a lot of hybrids being traded so the supply is small... but so is the demand comparatively. Actually the two are pretty much in balance so the tradein prices are 'fair'; i.e. in balance.

gagrice · March 2006

buys a car like a Prius that can get in the 40s mpg, there is an immediate savings.

You have researched cars including the Prius as much as anyone on this board. What did you end up buying? Your calculator won the battle. I can maybe see a savings with someone that drives 30k+ miles a year. Only on the Prius, Insight and HCH.

You can buy two finely equipped Elantras for the price of one top of the line Prius.

rorr · March 2006

"I stumbled across a GM Hydrogen Hummer H2 at Epcot's Imagination interactive exhibits. It is in a tour within a houst of the future. Gas mileage for this puppy... ready... 60 MPG for a Hummer !"

Ah, no. If you heard that from your tour guide, your tour guide was woefully wrong.

According to the link that YOU POSTED (you do read the stuff in your own links, correct?), GM states the H2H would have a total RANGE of 60 miles (NOT 60mpg). That's a RANGE of 60 miles.

So, how much hydrogen fuel does the H2H carry? Well (again, according to your link), it has THREE on-board fuel tanks. Two special carbon-fiber tanks in place of the standard Hummer tanks, and a third tank in the rear cargo area of the Hummer (if you check the photos, you can see a picture of the third tank in the cargo area). Total hydrogen carried in THREE tanks? Well, at 350-bar pressure (close to 5000 psi), it carries 12 pounds of hydrogen. You get all worked up about the acid in the batteries of hybrids, and the thought of highly explosive hydrogen (you remember the Hindenburg?) stored at 5000 psi doesn't make you nervous?

Another thing. The H2H DOESN'T HAVE A FUEL CELL. It burns hydrogen in a turbocharged version of the standard 6.0l V8 in the Hummer. And produces a whooping 180hp. Wow. 180hp from a turbocharged 6.0liter V8. And with three fuel tanks the vehicle has a range of.....60 miles.

BTW - where do you think the hydrogen comes from? The hydrogen stations BURN natural gas to produce the hydrogen on-site.

Wouldn't it be simpler (and more efficient) to simply convert the vehicles to burn natural gas?

"Be wary of the craze."

I couldn't have said it better myself.....

snakeweasel · March 2006

BTW - where do you think the hydrogen comes from?

You don't produce hydrogen you isolate it. You can get hydrogen from water as well as many other sources. The main problem right now is the cost of isolating it.

backy · March 2006

The statement I replied to was that there is no immediate savings from owning a hybrid. If one is talking about recouping an up-front price difference immediately, that is unrealistic. Hybrids would have to cost about $20 more than a regular car to be able to gain immediate savings.

Each person needs to do the math for himself/herself to determine if there is any long-term dollar advantage in owning a hybrid. For me, two years ago, there was not. But everyone's circumstances are different.

rorr · March 2006

"You don't produce hydrogen you isolate it. You can get hydrogen from water as well as many other sources."

Semantics.

Okay, you isolate (produce, extract, render, etc.) hydrogen. Yes, you can....."get" hydrogen from water. Of course, you need to input energy (in the form of electricity) and of course, this energy (in the form of electricity) must be generated from SOMEWHERE.

PART of the problem right now with "getting" hydrogen (regardless of the source) is cost. Another problem is the energy source used to "get" the hydrogen. Are we currently so inundated with clean energy that we simply can't use it all? I don't think so. Yet another problem is the FACT that the amount of energy USED to "get" the hydrogen is MORE THAN the amount of energy it is physically possible to extract on the downstream side (whether by burning in a converted ICE or used in an avant garde fuel cell).

The only place that I can think of that the use of hydrogen for a fuel makes sense is Iceland. Iceland has abundant clean energy (geothermal), a low population, and no oil. In this case, it makes sense to convert their geothermal energy to electricity, produce/isolate/extract/etc. the hydrogen from water, and use it rather than importing oil. But it ONLY makes sense in this case because they HAVE a source of abundant clean energy and a relatively low population.

gagrice · March 2006

Thank you for setting the record straight on that Hummer. I am really turned off by the waste of money on hydrogen research. At least with hybrids there is some practical results after a few billion is spent. Not so with hydrogen fuel cells.

rorr · March 2006

I think the thing that irritates me the most about hydrogen is that (my impression) the advocates are so enamored with the idea of water vapor as the ONLY emmissions at the tailpipe that they completely overlook the other issues.

tagman · March 2006

As for going mainstream there is a large segment of the population that will not buy a hybrid version if they cannot see immediate or almost immediate savings.

Gosh, snakeweasel, there's a large segment buying them up right now as fast as they can make them . . . and the benefits aren't even yet as impressive as they will be as the technology and the benefits continue to improve over time. Therefore the market will improve as well.

TagMan

tagman · March 2006

Where is the savings if your saving $25 dollars a month at the pump but paying $35 a months extra in car payments?

It's not as though the only difference between the vehicles is the MPG. what if I increase my payment by $100 a month to get other upgrades? Is that not worth it, in your opinion? It's a preference, and the Prius offers a variety of upgrades beyond the great MPG's . . . especially when compared to just basic transportation. There is NO non-hybrid Prius . . . so there is NO premium in the traditional sense. The Honda Civic hybrid does have a $2790 upgrade cost for the hybrid technology, and Consumer Reports FINALLY admitted that is DOES pay back the buyer financially, although not by a lot, admittedly. But the other benefits, such as cleaner exhaust emissions, are there as well as MPG's, and what are they worth?

TagMan

snakeweasel · March 2006

Gosh, snakeweasel, there's a large segment buying them up right now as fast as they can make them

Look at the number of hybrids sold and then look at the number of cars sold in total. When you do you will begin to see that the segment thats buying them is actually quite small. Even if you triple the number of hybrids sold its barely a dent in the total market.

Last year there were just over 200K hybrids sold, thats a whopping 1.28% of car sales. There are single car models out there that sell more. Presuming every hybrid sold in the US is still on the road we would have less than half a million out there. with well over 200 million registered vehicles in the US that would mean that Hybrids make up one quarter of one percent of all vehicles. Hardly a large segment.

lets talk when they make 15-20% of the market share, not 1.25%

snakeweasel · March 2006

It's not as though the only difference between the vehicles is the MPG. what if I increase my payment by $100 a month to get other upgrades?

false argument as you still have the hybrid premium. In other words other upgrades may be had in another car and only increase payments by say $60 a month. Concentrate on only the premium against the alternatives.

It's a preference, and the Prius offers a variety of upgrades beyond the great MPG's . . . especially when compared to just basic transportation.

I am not comparing it against a chevy Aveo Value at 10K with nothing on it. I am comparing it with other cars of similar size that are similarly equipped. Again you are presenting a false argument.

There is NO non-hybrid Prius . . . so there is NO premium in the traditional sense.

yes there is unless the only car available is the Prius. The premium is the cost difference between the Prius and a similar car that would be bought if the prius is not chosen.

and Consumer Reports FINALLY admitted that is DOES pay back the buyer financially, although not by a lot, admittedly.

But CR ignored the time value of money which puts the hybrid at a slight disadvantage.

tagman · March 2006

We're not going to agree on this, I can see. I am aware that the market segment is small. That's the way it begins. But, it is growing fast, and that is because people are willing to buy the hybrid technology even though it is not as good as it will get down the road. That's quite a testimony

I bought one of the early computers when they started building them. It was painfully slow and not very powerful and it cost a bloody fortune by comparison to today's computers. I do not regret it one bit!

And even the one I just bought will be nowhere near as good as next year's model. But I'm glad to have it!

Hybrid technology will improve. You can count on it. You do not have to jump in now, but remember, just like computers, it will all continue to improve, and improve, and improve, and sooner or later people find a comfortable time to jump in.

Ocassionally, some NEVER do, because the process of improvement cripples them. Like digital cameras. Some won't buy one, because the next model will have more megapixels. Who is THAT obsessed?

TagMan

kdhspyder · March 2006

You and I agree on the economica analysis of one vehicle over another in purely an economic sense.

One area where we dont agree is what is the value of certain features in one trim level over another.

Leather over cloth
SR over no SR
V6 over 4c
Hybrid over non-Hybrid

What 'value' can you put on these subjective 'needs'?

snakeweasel · March 2006

And this has what to do with anything. If I am going to compare car 'A' with car 'B' both will have comparatable equipment. I am not going to compare a 4 cylinder to a 6, or a stripped down one to a fully loaded one. Its never a fair comparison.

The only time I will make comparisons like that is with in the same model car.

Now of course since the Prius is hybrid only you can't really compare that hybrid against a non hybrid so you would have to compare it with a similar vehicle.

Hybrids in the News

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles