USA Today is in the thrall of . . . the Ford Escape Hybrid. As is the President of these here United States, who traded his gas-hungry Chrysler 300C for the gas – electric trucklette. No surprise, then, that we’ve heard rumors of shortages. Well, not rumors, exactly. More like an open admission by FoMoCo’s El Presidente del Americas. “We are constrained by the amount of components, including batteries, that the supply base can provide us,” Mark Fields said in December ’08. Same spin again in January ’09, via a Blue Oval Boy on Edmunds. The scuttlebutt: Ford loses money on every Escape Hybrid they sell; so it sells as few as possible. Of course, that doesn’t stop The Glass House Gang from using the vehicle to earn brownie points with the MSM . . .
Los Angeles County has 45 Ford Escape hybrid SUVs for its lifeguards — you know, the ones ofBaywatch fame. With a little help from some of the Escapes, they made 9,000 rescues over the past year. In the process, the hybrids cut the fleet’s fuel usage by 25%. That amounts to more than 5,000 gallons during the first six months of service, Ford says.
Impressive. But, once again, the Detroit automaker is touting relative vs. absolute gains. So, let’s have a closer look.
The SUVs replaced what had been mostly a fleet of Nissan Frontier pickups. The $29,645 Escapes accomplished the gas savings even as lifeguards drove 20% more due to higher beach attendance this year compared with last year. Escape hybrids have fuel economy of 29 miles per gallon in the city and 27 mpg on the highway. The SUVs also cut carbon emissions that figure in global warming.
To see this in perspective (i.e., over-think it), we need to compare the Nissan Frontier 4 X 4 to the Ford Escape Hybrid 4 X 4 (drivetrain betrayed by the EPA stats).
Problem: we don’t know how many Nissan Frontiers were in the Baywatch fleet before the Escapes escaped Ford’s funnel. An old Tahoe here and there could seriously skew the stats.
More importantly, which engine motivated their Nissan trucks: the QR25DE 2.5-liter DOHC 16-valve 4-cylinder (19/23) or the VQ40DE 4.0-liter DOHC 24-valve V6 (14/19)?
Assuming it’s a battle on all fours, the Escape Hybrid’s gas – electric mill and the Nissan Frontier’s four pot stump-up virtually identical horsepower (153 hp vs. 152 hp). But we’re torquing 136 lb·ft @ 4,500 vs. 171 lb·ft @ 4,400 rpm, respectively. That’s a lot more twist even if we’re not comparing the Ford Escape Hybrid’s gas – electric mill to the Frontier’s V6 (261 hp @ 5,600 rpm and 281 lb·ft of torque @ 4,000 rpm).
Which brings up another important variable: size. The Escape is a far less thirsty, lighter vehicle than the four cylinder Frontier (3804 lbs. vs. 4147 lbs. curb weight). But the Nissan is a much larger, more capacious, work-friendly vehicle. It’s a pickup truck, dontcha know.
To compare apples to apples, I reckon the Nisan Rogue is the best Ford Escape equivalent; Nissan’s mini-CUV’s wheelbase is just 2″ longer. The four-cylinder, four-wheel-drive Rogue gets 21/26 EPA mpg. FYI.
Which leaves us where? I dunno really. But simply regurgitating Ford press releases doesn’t reflect any glory upon USA Today, or tell consumers what they really want to know: what’s in it for me? Until and unless Ford can get Escape Hybrids into dealerships in any number, nothing.
RF.
Help me understand this torque thingy.
Torque to torque on gas engines, well I get it.
A little…
I do get confused (or mislead) by the torque @whatever rpm advertising.
The rpm come on (and continuance)is the real name of the game, right?
Now when they talk torque gas vs torque hybrid …this is not that clear to me.
Is the torque INCLUDING the battery/electric engine power?
Or just the gas engine?
I’m sorry, what did you say? I was a bit distracted by the scenery.
There is such a thing as over-thinking a thing. If the Escape Hybrid meets needs of the lifeguards at least as well as the old fleet did, then everything else is just mumbo-jumbo.
John Horner
Point taken. Text added.
paulie
A hybrid’s torque figures are measured according to the same parameters as any other engine.
Meh…all hybrids are just smug mobiles that are driven by people who need a fashion statement. They are not efficient either. When a $19K Fusion can get 23/34…where is the incentive to spend a whopping $8,000 MORE to get a car that only averages 10 more MPG?? It makes no sense. How much gas does $8K buy? Well at $2.65 a gallon, it buys 3019 gallons. Which means at 29MPG average, you can drive around 87K miles…which at 12K miles a year…means that your fashion statement will average out at in 7.25 years. Not worth it.
And when Ford loses money on each one it sells, why build them? All of the cheerleaders tell me that PROFIT is the most important thing.
I find it funny that a bankrupt company can make a small SUV that gets 32 MPG on the highway…BETTER than the Escape Hybrid.
Is that her car or does she work at the station…….Where is it?
Meh…all hybrids are just smug mobiles that are driven by people who need a fashion statement. They are not efficient either.
Indeed. They also kill blind people, electrocute EMTs, and are fugly.
Did I mention that Al Gore is fat, too?
I find it funny that a bankrupt company can make a small SUV that gets 32 MPG on the highway…BETTER than the Escape Hybrid.
Which one and what does it get in the city?
Don’t think the $19k Fusion Gas can get 1,145.7 miles on a single tank of gas as the Fusion Hybrid did last month. Also gets no tax credit either.
Thanks RF.
I think.
A hybrid (car) torque is measured using both, or one, of its engines.
Just from begining to end as the rpm(s) rise.
P71_CrownVic
Never being a fan of hybrids due to the cost vs return, I am humbly grateful to those purchasing and helping along an infant technology that will very likely lead to a fine automobile one day.
Eventually we will see cars very different from today.
For instance, harnessing energy from the use of breaks is just one part of this.
So thank you all you knuckleheads for helping to pay for this.
Never being a fan of hybrids due to the cost vs return
5 year cost per mile
Civic Hybrid with Leather: $0.51
Civic EX-L: $0.52
Don’t think the $19k Fusion Gas can get 1,145.7 miles on a single tank of gas as the Fusion Hybrid did last month. Also gets no tax credit either.
Oh please…don’t bring up that PR stunt.
A Fusion Hybrid can ONLY get that kind of mileage when driving it in an unsafe and unrealistic manner…and that is assuming that Ford didn’t cheat.
And $28K is an outrageous price to pay for a fashion statement (and an ugly on at that) like the Fusion Hybrid.
Why can Toyota produce the midsized Prius…with virtually the same technology for ~$22K…but Ford has to do it for $28K with the mid-sized Fusion…and they STILL are not turning a profit…
Lifeguard vehicle is used differently then a normal vehicle. For instance 4 wheel drive is a real necessity and highway MPG is not really important.
It wouldn’t surprise me if this is a case were hybrids really shine compared with regular vehicles.
People who only put 12K mi/year on their car, think gas will average $2.65 or less over the next seven years, and don’t do much city driving shouldn’t buy a hybrid from an economic perspective.
I don’t own a hybrid (I don’t fit in a Prius and I don’t need a small SUV and I don’t do much city driving), but even with an $8000 delta I should break even with gas around $3-$3.25.
Why can Toyota produce the midsized Prius…with virtually the same technology for ~$22K…but Ford has to do it for $28K with the mid-sized Fusion…and they STILL are not turning a profit…
Probably because the Prius has been out for 12 years and the Fusion Hybrid for a couple months. Do you understand the concepts of scale efficiencies and amortization?
The Fusion is a midsized sedan, so its competition is the Camry, not the Prius. Ford can charge a premium at this point, relative to the Camry, probably because there are still tax credits available for the Fusion — currently $1,700. Factor that in, and it runs about $500 more than the Camry.
Fusion to Fusion Hybrid, the price differential, after the tax credit, is $2,700, not $9K as you claim. That should pay for itself in about 5 years in gas savings at current prices.
I don’t fit in a Prius
Girth or height? I’m a substantial person and I felt small in the 3rd Gen Prius.
Considering maintenance costs (those Al Gore battery packs scare me) and resale value (sorry Ford, you’re better than GM but no Nissan) I’d stick with the Smyrna Surf Patrol. Either that or Pamela on a bicycle.
I’ve said this enough times to make it a best selling broken record.
“Penny pinchers? Get a Corolla.”
However I DON’T think that hybrids are a bad economic proposition at all. For example, hybrids encourage a far more conservative driving style than the typical ICE vehicle. In the real world the difference in ‘typical’ driving is far greater than the EPA figures because hybrid buyers are more vigilant with pursuing higher mileage out of their vehicle.
For example, to get better mileage with a hybrid most folks will coast to red lights, lay off the throttle during downhill runs, and generally make higher mileage a ‘game’. A lot of the same activities take place with folks who have trip computers with their ICE that track fuel economy. But unlike a hybrid, most folks driving ICE don’t pay any attention to that feature.
Hybrids also give far more immediate feedback in terms of how the car reacts to their driving style. An ICE will coast. Hybrids will replenish their batteries, slow down, and show you instant fuel economy in the three figures. This encourages a more relaxed driving style which makes the non-hybrid portion of the powertrain last longer.
So long as battery replacements are reasonable and plentiful I see no reason why hybrids won’t make advances over the next few years.
Considering maintenance costs (those Al Gore battery packs scare me)
What maintenance needs to be done on a NiMH battery pack? What does Al Gore have to do with them?
They’re warranted for 10 years/150K miles in California.
Maybe it is just me, but I’ve always been bothered by Ford’s claim that the the Escape is the “first hybrid SUV”. I consider the Two-mode Tahoe to hold that title.
I appreciate the fuel economy the Escape hybrid gets, but the Escape is a small crossover like the Rogue and CR-V. It is like the Acadia: it has the SUV look, but not the SUV stats.
Compare an Escape Hybrid AWD to traditional smaller SUVs like the Xterra, FJ Cruiser, Liberty, and H3. These SUVs make about 80% more torque and get 40% worse fuel economy than the Escape Hybrid. Then there’s major differences in approach/departure/breakover angles, suspension components, tires, skid plates, gearing, and towing capacity.
What is it that makes the Escape hybrid a SUV?
If you don’t agree with CrownVic, your brainwashing is complete.
If only Ford and other NA manufacturers put that much thought into diesel who’d need a hybrid?
You know what else leads to better fuel economy? Eliminating all of the retarded ‘all-way stop’ intersections by making runabouts and putting Yield signs instead!
Let’s just ban cars and get it over with. Enough pussy footing around about it. These eco nazis are not going to be satisfied until we ride horses and walk everywhere.
They were hoping emission standards would squeeze cars out of the world but funny thing is technology found a way. Now they harp on CO2 because they know it can’t be cleaned out of the exhaust anymore than it can from people. Well, there is a way to clean it from people but that is a bit drastic.
As to this viability cost analysis, what did we expect? It has to be justified with big numbers or there will be hell to pay. Somebody greenlighted this (pun intended) and it had to bear fruit.
Honestly, I think they tack a few zeros onto any statistic to make it look more alarmist. Like, saying 100,000,000,000 tons of CO2 gas is emitted every hour in the day in order to raise a red flag. Maybe in the US Capitol that might be true.
The goofiest ideas expect us to radically alter our lives and wait 250 years to see if it makes a difference. The “experts” told us it would take 700 years for the Ozone layer to fix itself. The space shuttle saw their precious hole over Antarctica close back up in about 5. When was the last time you read a story about acid rain or the ozone hole?
Call me a cynic but we have more important things to worry about, like destruction of our monetary system and hyper inflation. See how thrilled we are to pay more for energy next year in taxes for the good of the planet. When the mid term elections roll around there will be some moving vans pulling up to the Congressional offices.
When was the last time you read a story about acid rain or the ozone hole?
Ironic that you would mention those two problems, as the latter was solved through global cooperation, and the former has been substantially abated through a cap-and-trade mechanism domestically.
Speaking of “alarmist,” you may wish to consider rereading your own comments.
I have a basic question about climate change theory, since you seem to consider yourself versed in it. Could you tell me what the carbon cycle is and human respiration’s role in it, as compared to emissions from fossil fuels? Thanks.
They’re all in NYC serving as cabs. Seriously. I was blown away earlier this week at the number of Escape (and to a lesser extent Camry and Altima) hybrids duking it out on the streets with the sea of Panthers. (BTW, what the hell will the livery subplanet do after the Panther does away? I know when the Checker left in the mid-80s at least there was a number of RWD heavy duty platforms available…. now, not so much….)
I purposely took a ride in an Escape to see how it was holding up, and besides the barf/urine proof cloth seats, it seemed pretty durable at 56k miles. The cabbie really liked it (seating position, handling, mpg) but lamented about his Panther.
long126mike
“5 year cost per mile
Civic Hybrid with Leather: $0.51
Civic EX-L: $0.52”
Um, aren’t you leaving out kind of a big thing…like cost to purchase?
Don’t mean to mess up a good argument with fact, but how do you leave this out when trying to analyze?
Um, aren’t you leaving out kind of a big thing…like cost to purchase?
Um, no.
You must be unfamiliar with the Edmunds TCO methodology.
I’m curious. What do you think the true market value price differential is between the two (you know, the so-called “hybrid premium”)?
I hate to be the one to say this, because it’s gonna make me sound like a tree hugger, buy my god, you guys seriously are saying things that make it sound like you have your heads in the sand.
Do you honestly think that nothing bad is happening by us burning these fuels on a daily basis? Look at all the pollution near roadways and freeways from cars. I’m not talking about global warming, I’m talking about cancer. I’m talking about lung and respiratory problems. Think about that.
Now what happens if everyone starts driving a hybrid? If you use 30 to 50% less fuel, wouldn’t it be ok to say that you also are polluting 30 to 50% less? Do you think lowering the amount of pollution produced on a daily basis would be a good thing or a bad thing for the health of society?
What about the hybrid tech itself? Aren’t these hybrids going to last longer since the ICE parts of the car are used about half as much, thus enduring less wear per drive compared to a 100% ICE car? Well now the hybrid premium not only is used to lower the annual cost of fuel for you, but also increases the time period before you have to buy a new car.
These hybrid vs non-hybrid comparisons have to be based on more than just the cost of gasoline.
Actually, in late-2008, Ford execs said that once the Fusion got up and running, Ford’s hybrid program would be break-even. Not sure if that is true, but I wouldn’t doubt it.
And, yes, they are constrained by supply, but not in sheer numbers, per se. The contract is for 25,000 units/year Escape and 25,000 units/year Fusion. And, as I understand it, there is a greater incremental cost for each battery over that, which basically makes it not worth buying. But, as importantly, they also make more on each Fusion than each Fusion hybrid (similar Escape) even if the Fusion hybrid is break-even or slightly profitable. The 25,000 unit limit is probably the number that allows Ford to exercise its margins appropriately. So, there is no reason for Ford to negotiate for, say, 35,000 or 50,000 batteries if they don’t feel it will be in their best economic interests (it’s one of those reason why they are still out of bankruptcy). So, yeah, it is about profit/loss.
I’m sure if they saw sustained demand for 50,000 units/year/vehicle, Ford would support it, but I still don’t think they see evidence of that without applying some sort of incentives. I suspect that over the next few years, though, as gas prices increase, Ford will up hybrid production towards 100,000-150,000 with the introduction of new models.
If you use 30 to 50% less fuel, wouldn’t it be ok to say that you also are polluting 30 to 50% less?
Actually, it’s not always a linear relationship between fuel consumption and emissions of the main criteria pollutants, unlike CO2 emissions. The former are more a function of the emissions control technology in the vehicle.
For example, one could get a Lucerne with an air pollution score of 7 and a Civic with a score of 6 in most states. The California market in particular has a huge variety of PZEV and AT PZEV vehicles (like the BMW 328i).
When a $19K Fusion can get 23/34…where is the incentive to spend a whopping $8,000 MORE to get a car that only averages 10 more MPG?? It makes no sense.
Wrong metric. You don’t purchase miles, you purchase gallons. Convert the figures into gallons per mile and it makes more sense:
23 MPG = 1/23 GPM
29 MPG = 1/29 GPM
That’s approx. 21% less fuel you’re using, almost a quarter.
And long126mike, it’s good to finally see someone with some common sense around here addressing the regurgitated wingnut talk radio nonsense that gets posted as comments…
And long126mike, it’s good to finally see someone with some common sense around here addressing the regurgitated wingnut talk radio nonsense that gets posted as comments…
Well said, and +1 – I was starting to wonder if this site had been overrun by the wingnutosphere at times.
I don’t have kids now, but even when I do, I can’t imagine driving around w/ the kids on the weekend is going to be more mileage than commuting.
Don’t most people do most of their mileage driving by themselves? The vast majority of cars I’ve seen here in Chi-town are people commuting by themselves.
My opinion is to get something fuel efficient (& CHEAP) as possible for the 8-9 months out of the year that are “rideable” (bicycle, waiting for public transport, motorcycle,skateboard,rollerblades…) and buy whatever 10mpg monster you want that fulfills your hauling needs for the other 3-4 months.
Should still save tons of $$ over a hybrid.
I can’t see myself blowing (which indeed, it is in my case) money on a hybrid when I can snag a 3 year old 250cc motorcycle that does 60-65 mpg highway and probably 40-50’ish city for $2-$3k. over a hybrid that does what…51 city 45 highway for an extra $20-$22k (extra $12k-$15k used…)
If hybrids had NO price premium (in my lifetime ??I’m in my 30’s) over a normal car there is no reason not to get one, but as long as you can snag any number of lower cost, almost-as-good vehicles for significantly cheaper there isn’t a whole lot of point to getting one out of specialized circumstances…..(very short/non-existent commute with tons of driving on the weekends, taxi-drivers…)
I just wanted to say TTAC is exceptional at finding photos to go along with the posts.
I long since lost track of, and interest in, the subject and the following posts, however I WILL remember this pic!! Thanks!!
What do you consider NO price premium. Exactly the same price or the same price + fuelsavings after 10K.
Because if you’re waiting for exactly the same price than you will wait a very long time. Not because it cost more to build but because a company can ask more money for a cheaper to run vehicle.
I would like to point out that buying a bigger engine, say a V6 Camry versus an I4, will NEVER pay for itself based on gas savings. So why does everyone persist in saying that buying a hybrid is not economically rational? Is paying for better acceleration rational but paying for better fuel mileage irrational? Let’s ask that blonde in the picture. Maybe she likes guys with low carbon footprints.
maniceightball
That’s approx. 21% less fuel you’re using, almost a quarter.
Since when 21% is close to 1/4 and not 1/5?
Meh…all hybrids are just smug mobiles that are driven by people who need a fashion statement. They are not efficient either. When a $19K Fusion can get 23/34…where is the incentive to spend a whopping $8,000 MORE to get a car that only averages 10 more MPG?? It makes no sense. How much gas does $8K buy? Well at $2.65 a gallon, it buys 3019 gallons. Which means at 29MPG average, you can drive around 87K miles…which at 12K miles a year…means that your fashion statement will average out at in 7.25 years. Not worth it.…
For many, based solely on economics, hybrids may not make sense. But you are focusing only on simple direct cost economics. How about all the military expenditures the US blows through keeping the supply of oil flowing? How about all the ass kiss aid to countries that hate use? Gotta buy some good will. What about the cost of health issues that arise from burning fossil fuel? Climate issues? Some of those clearly have no place in your thinking, judging from you posts. That’s fine, for you. To those who realize that there are real implications that arise from releasing assorted byproducts of combustion into the atmosphere, the dynamics of vehicle choice may take into account more than just cost of operation. That group is small, but growing rapidly. All that said, the cost needs to come down (or fuel up) for hybrids to appeal to more people so there really is a meaningful reduction in emissions.
And, yes, global cooperation was responsible for the reduction in ozone damage and acid rain. Despite all the cries of “it costs too much to do anything about it” all the industries that had to comply are all still here. Ever been at a vintage car show? Recall the smell from the exhaust of all those old but well maintained cars running at once? Remember that the next time you are in bumper to bumper traffic. Just think of what you would be sitting in if society had listened to all those carmakers saying that the exhaust standards could not be met and would destroy the industry. Well, the exhaust is much cleaner, and those who are dying/dead today can’t blame emission regulations for their death.
EDIT: Riding a Bike: spot on. Not everything has a direct dollar return for it to have value to the purchaser.
New Headline:
There’s No Escape From Blather about Hybrids.
Hmmm
Alright there is a serious debate here.
1. They are driving a compact CUV / SUV on sand. They could easily use snow tires or deflate the tires 15-20% to get the desired traction they need, without USING FOUR WHEEL DRIVE.
2. Is that Pamela Anderson.. looks like her Rover. Then again.. she does have the kids, and her puppies dont look the same now as they did 15yrs ago.
3. I completely understand.. that with the hybrid market, you need to have at least 1 generation where you may not get money back on the hybrid market. However, if ya let the vehicle get into its 2nd and or 3rd gen version.. ya definately going to see a return. But Ford wont have to worry about that, very few of the vehicle they produce over the last 15yrs have lated past 2 generations.
4. Im appalled that the lifeguards pitched the pickup, and bought that gutless dirtbox. Then again Im still appalled that people even want to drive the Escape.
5. Im still poed at the arguement of the hybrid fusion v the 4cycl jobbie, and both without a HATCH. Which MIGHT cause people to buy a larger vehicle.. albiet pointless. Which brings up the debate about Fiesta v coming focus v Fusion (wishful thinking hatch / wagon version) in comparo against Escape v Edge v Exploder.
6. I will say this much. The hybrid model, works fine for those who have a VERY SHORT COMMUTE. My wife could consider this, for the purpose of not using any fuel at all for the 5 minute ride to her bus every morning.
I don’t see why this is a debate over hybrids.
There’s a more important issue here: Why is a major American newspaper reprinting what is obviously a press release, and passing it off as an article?
This shows you just how lousy most automotive “journalism” is. The content is just there to fill space and sell advertising. They don’t take it very seriously, and they certainly don’t take the audience very seriously.
PCH101…
I can honestly answer that..
Because USAToday isnt a source I go to for Automotive News.
Then again.. unless Dan Neil or Michelle Maynard is behind the scenes.. I really dont bother.
USAToay does a car section and or review.. by a guy who COULDNT POSSIBLY give a bad review of any vehicle. It was so unbias and so completely garbage.. it was “sold” along side giving comments to those who had questions.
Then again..
Why do ya give a question to a guy who “does car reviews” for USAToday. Worst part.. the questions, are some of the SIMIPLIEST and most OBVIOUS questions.. Ive ever heard of people asking. Not to mention.. those who want advice.. go to HIM for ideas on what to drive.
This is why I am losing my hair.. cause I spent 6 months trying to read that crap.. and began pulling large lumps of it out!
long126mike
Although I am a fan of Edmunds, when I value a car, I don’t place value on the resale.
This because that is subjective.
Having given away any family car not passed down to my chidren, the only thing I value is reliability.
But, this cost vs return analysis is not mine.
http://editorial.autos.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-documentid=435228
“For example, the Honda Civic Hybrid has a starting manufacturer’s suggested retail price of more than $22,500 for a base, 2007 model. A 2007 Civic LX gasoline-powered sedan with many comparable amenities carries a starting MSRP that is some $4,800 less.
True, the 2007 Civic Hybrid is rated by the EPA at 49 mpg in city driving and 51 mpg on the highway, for a combined 50 mpg. This is 30 percent better than the combined rating of 33 mpg for the gasoline-powered, 2007 LX model.
But even if a driver maximizes his or her fuel savings and gets the full 17-mpg benefit in the Hybrid, he or she would need more than a dozen years of 15,000-mile annual travel before the gasoline savings—calculated with gasoline at approximately $2.40 a gallon—would recoup the $4,800 extra paid for the Hybrid over the traditional Civic LX.
Some of the price difference also may be recouped by a one-time federal tax credit. In the case of the Civic Hybrid, the maximum credit is $2,100 for a 2007 Civic Hybrid.”
charly>
I have already read about ev motorcycles coming to market that are basically/almost a no price premium (MSRP) of a 600cc sportbike.
Here is one:
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s-order.php
The problem is range/speed. at 60mph max it’s not too useful.
@paulie
The selling price differential is about $2,500-2,700 at the moment, and no tax credits are available. At current gas prices, that would be made up at a little less than halfway through an average vehicle’s expected lifespan.
The problem with using older statistics is that it’s not a static model. Two things are in flux – 1) gas prices; 2) cost of hybrid systems. The first one has wide variance, but it’s safe to assume the baseline price over a sufficiently long period of time will be closer to today’s prices than the $1/gallon era. The second one is gradually coming down, as one sees with most developing technologies. The only aspect that runs counter to that are certain material input prices (like lithium or nickel) which could put upward pressure on battery or other component pricing, but over time that’s not going to be the case.
Regardless, the economics are sound at this point. It’s not a speculative, economically-irrational technology.
Actually, in late-2008, Ford execs said that once the Fusion got up and running, Ford’s hybrid program would be break-even. Not sure if that is true, but I wouldn’t doubt it.
Ford “execs” also said that Volvo was not for sale, their stake in Mazda would not be sold, Ford would be profitable in 2009, that they would sell 100K Flexes a year, that EgoBoost would deliver V8 power with V6 economy.
And all of those things have been proven otherwise.
You can’t believe one word that comes out of Ford’s collective mouth.
For many, based solely on economics, hybrids may not make sense. But you are focusing only on simple direct cost economics. How about all the military expenditures the US blows through keeping the supply of oil flowing? How about all the ass kiss aid to countries that hate use? Gotta buy some good will. What about the cost of health issues that arise from burning fossil fuel? Climate issues? Some of those clearly have no place in your thinking, judging from you posts. That’s fine, for you. To those who realize that there are real implications that arise from releasing assorted byproducts of combustion into the atmosphere, the dynamics of vehicle choice may take into account more than just cost of operation. That group is small, but growing rapidly. All that said, the cost needs to come down (or fuel up) for hybrids to appeal to more people so there really is a meaningful reduction in emissions.
Oh please…not this global warming crap again.
I am sitting here, typing this and the temperature outside is 49 degrees…In southern Minnesota in JUNE! There is no global warming as a result of me driving my Silverado.
Secondly, there is no oil shortage. North Dakota is sitting on more oil than Saudi Arabia.
Third, the air, lakes, rivers, etc are MUCH cleaner now then they have been in ANY of our lifetimes. But if you want to talk about pollution, lets talk about something that is real…the waste from making the batteries and then the issue of disposing them. That can’t be “green” now can it?
So, the only reason left to buying a silly hybrid…is pure operational economics…because all of the other things you asserted are untrue. And when operational economics are taken into account, hybrids are a joke. There are diesels out there that get the same mileage as hybrids…without all of the green junk.
There are diesels out there that get the same mileage as hybrids…without all of the green junk.
That what I’ve said above: “Bimmer:June 7th, 2009 at 12:02 am
If only Ford and other NA manufacturers put that much thought into diesel who’d need a hybrid?”
Oh please…not this global warming crap again.
I am sitting here, typing this and the temperature outside is 49 degrees…In southern Minnesota in JUNE! There is no global warming as a result of me driving my Silverado.
That’s a specious argument. There’s this thing called “averages”. Global warming is the increase in the average temperature. Day-to-day temperatures may fluctuate wildly, but average temperature are increasing. Statistics don’t lie.
Secondly, there is no oil shortage. North Dakota is sitting on more oil than Saudi Arabia.
And yet it produces a paltry 2% of the domestic oil supply. That’s a drop in the bucket relative to the world oil supplies in light of diminishing returns a la peak oil.
Third, the air, lakes, rivers, etc are MUCH cleaner now then they have been in ANY of our lifetimes. But if you want to talk about pollution, lets talk about something that is real…the waste from making the batteries and then the issue of disposing them. That can’t be “green” now can it?
The cleaner air, lakes and rivers are a testament to the effectiveness of the clean air act and clean water act.
The claim about the environmental cost of batteries is mostly FUD. NiMH batteries are over 90% recyclable and cost effective to do so. They are less toxic than the lead acid battery you have in your Silverado, a vehicle which itself contains more nickel than the NiMH hybrid batteries you complain of.
So, the only reason left to buying a silly hybrid…is pure operational economics…because all of the other things you asserted are untrue. And when operational economics are taken into account, hybrids are a joke. There are diesels out there that get the same mileage as hybrids…without all of the green junk.
Yeah, but how many diesels are available for sale in the U.S.? And what effect will opening the floodgate of diesels have on the clean air you speak of so highly?
Hybrids can be very economical depending on the deal and values of the buyer. Nobody’s forcing you to buy one. You ought to appreciate the fact that those hybrid drivers are keeping your air cleaner, and keeping the demand and price of fuel down.
I am sitting here, typing this and the temperature outside is 49 degrees…In southern Minnesota in JUNE! There is no global warming as a result of me driving my Silverado.
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2005/04/gwsbingo.php
Just one more square…
It’s always nice to see a package of specious arguments put forth at once – global warming doesn’t exist because it’s cold in one spot on one day, hybrid batteries destroy the planet, diesels are supercars, the US has endless supplies of oil, and the natural environment is in pristine shape as we speak.
Yes, and up is indeed down.
Statistics don’t lie.
Oh sure they do, when doing the bidding of a person who wants to be right at all costs.
I think Global Warming is nothing more than an extemist religion headed up by some very powerful people.
Believe, or ye shall be cast out!
I think Global Warming is nothing more than an extemist religion headed up by some very powerful people.
Yes, and they’re coming to get you in your bunker this very minute. Prepare.
Back to the economics of the hybrid…
For compact vehicles like the Civic, you more or less have to be a long-term keeper in order to get ahead. I’ll focus on late model used examples since most folks buy used instead of new these days.
The MMR values for a 2005 Civic Hybrid and Civic LX with 60,000 miles are…
2005 Civic Hybrid: $9750
2005 Civic LX: $8450
The regular Civic averages 33 mpg according to real world feedback from fueleconomy.gov . The Hybrid averages 45. If you drove each one of these 100,000 miles the Hybrid would consume $2425 less in gas. The overall advantage appears to be for the hybrid.
However it may indeed end up costing more to maintain. If the CVT tranny goes south or the battery needs to be replaced, you will likely lose most of your savings. There’s also higher cost components for the hybrid line as well as higher insurance costs. From a small car perspective the hybrid will likely not yield the savings unless you’re planning on becoming a long-term keeper.
The Civic hybrid saves about $240 every 10,000 miles in gas assuming gas cost $3 a gallon. If the price goes to $5 a gallon or the driver ends up using it for 200,000 miles, the hybrid would likely be the winner.
For larger vehicles the differential is far greater. If a fellow purchases a 2005 Escape 2WD with the 4 cylinder/automatic, he’s likely looking at 21 mpg. The hybrid from the same year offers 29 mpg. Overall savings given 100,000 miles of driving? $4850. Double the miles and the savings on fuel skyrocket to $9700.
The increased purchasing cost works out to a $2900 disadvantage for the hybrid ($7400 vs. $10300). Over 100k, the net savings less maintenance and insurance would amount to $1900. Driving it 200k? You’ll be looking at a far more substantial $6800 in savings.
Conclusions:
1) The bigger the vehicle you buy and
2) The longer you keep the vehicle.
3) The more money you’ll typically save by buying a hybrid.
But if you buy a TDI and make your own fuel, you’ll completely cremate either one of these options.
Advantage: Idiosyncratic souls who drive diesels.
If the CVT tranny goes south or the battery needs to be replaced, you will likely lose most of your savings. There’s also higher cost components for the hybrid line as well as higher insurance costs.
So you believe a CVT is more likely to have trouble and be more expensive to maintain and repair than a normal automatic transmission?
You also believe the battery may need to be replaced? Could you please find evidence of this being common?
As for insurance, many insurers offer discounts for driving a hybrid. Edmunds assumes no differential in maintenance, repair, or insurance costs, and they’re correct in doing so.
Working with your example of used vehicles, the price differential is $1,300. I’ll assume this is accurate.
At current gas prices (not $3), real-world fuel economy differentials (44.8 v 31.5) yield a savings of $243 per 10,000 miles, very near your estimate.
The expected lifespan of an average vehicle is around 210,000 miles, which is probably conservative with these vehicles.
Regardless, the simple payback is 53K miles with this example, leaving around 100K more miles in which the hybrid is yielding a savings of $243 per 10K miles, or another $2,430.
Assuming buyers are rational, any future buyers of your vehicle, should you not drive it to its death, would know the cost differential from gas savings and that should be reflected in a resale differential.
Also, the proper comparison is probably with an EX, not an LX, trim, so your price differential in this model is probably lower, which only lowers the payback period.
As for the TDI comment and “making your own fuel,” assuming that “fuel making” to be lower cost than conventional fuel is a very shaky assumption at best, and naturally completely unrealistic for anyone but a truly dedicated individual.
With respect to its depreciation, if you compare a Civic Hybrid with Leather to a Jetta TDI of similar true market value (with the Jetta being about $460 more), Edmunds estimates 5-year depreciation on the Jetta to be $12,748 compared to $11,178 for the Civic Hybrid. So despite costing $460 less at purchase, the Civic Hybrid ends up being worth $1,100 more after 5 years.
long126mike :
Yes, and they’re coming to get you in your bunker this very minute. Prepare.
Ridicule me if you must. But be careful lest you appear just plain mean. Am I not allowed to use my own gifts of reason and logic? If not, then my freedom is truly already gone, and I might as well just give you my password to this site.
Somebody else mentioned the possibility that the high priests and high priestesses of global warming want nothing more than to get ALL of us out of our cars. I think this is distinctly possible. The elites want us all to walk or ride the bus; except the elites themselves. They will still have their SUVs and they will still fly in their private jets.
No matter what we do, it’s never enough. They will use any tool they have, statistics, ridicule, even the point of a gun that is US Law…to go after the US but they will say nothing and do nothing to/about countries who pollute far more.
For example, the Kyoto Treaty. The REAL polluters were not going to be held responsible in that treaty. I’m left to believe that it’s nothing more than a way of pushing the successful down to the lowest common denominator; that of third world countries. In terms of freedom, liberty, choice, and so forth. And all the while, making us pay through the nose for the privilege of participating in the treaty.
No thank you, this was a bad deal for me and for my country.
I repeat: I think the Global Warming thing is a religion, sometimes bordering on being rabid. It simply has not been scientifically proven that it is present, or that it’s caused by humans. What is it when you’re told that you must believe, even in the absence of scientific fact? It’s a religion, that’s what it is. I already have one religion, don’t need another, thank you!
And let’s move that temperature monitoring station away from the tailpipe of that plane already…
That’s a specious argument. There’s this thing called “averages”. Global warming is the increase in the average temperature. Day-to-day temperatures may fluctuate wildly, but average temperature are increasing. Statistics don’t lie.
And who is to say that those possible temp. increases are to be blamed on humans?
Fact is, humans have not been on this earth long enough to accurately determine if/why the earth is heating up. These cycles last many, many hundreds of years. We don’t have enough statistics to say anything concrete about global warming.
Scientists have extracted ice core samples dating back to 650,00 years ago in the Antarctic. From those samples they are able to determine what the temperature was years ago…and the current warming trend is not outside the natural variability. In fact, the latest scientific data suggests that we are headed for a period of global cooling. But how could that be? Al Gore and his cronies said the planet was heating at an alarming rate…and we all must drive silly hybrids and replace our light bulbs with ones that look like a pigs tail. Yeah…right.
And yet it produces a paltry 2% of the domestic oil supply. That’s a drop in the bucket relative to the world oil supplies in light of diminishing returns a la peak oil.
I didn’t say they were producing any…but they are sitting on somewhere between 200 BILLION and 500 BILLION barrels of oil. It is called the Bakken oil formation.
The cleaner air, lakes and rivers are a testament to the effectiveness of the clean air act and clean water act.
Exactly…not some silly hybrid fashion statement.
Yeah, but how many diesels are available for sale in the U.S.? And what effect will opening the floodgate of diesels have on the clean air you speak of so highly?
There are hardly any diesels for sale in the US…a testament to how backwards our country is. The much more expensive messiah of automobiles…HYBRIDS…are for some irrational reason favored over the simpler diesel.
And diesel would not affect air quality AT ALL! Diesels sold in this country have to be just as clean as gas engines.
—————
All of the greenies and Al Gore sheeple hate the automobile and will simply lie to get rid of it. They would rather we go back to a horse and buggy…
They have no facts to back up what they say, highly educated scientists can refute their outrageous claims with simple logic and actual science.
ZoomZoom, from my perspective, global warming or not, The less garbage the 4 million people in my city need to ship around thanks to recycling/composting, and the less soot/grime/crap that ends up on my car each morning from emission pollutants, the better.
Air quality can be so bad people have respiratory problems. Surely a reduction in emissions can help there regardless of whether or not I help the overall planet? Same too of my choice to use renewable, emissions-free energy sources rather than coal for my home power?
I’m personally much more interested in local impact than global. Perhaps it matters less to people in less densely populated areas.
TINY SLOW DEISELS?!
What do ya call the
E Class
C class
Along with BMW competitors.
I also believe its almost possible to buy their SUV of either size in deisel.
VW entire line..
Passat
Jetta
Beetle
Golf
Toureg
Ya call a V10 Deisel Toureg or the Jetta in deisel as a wagon or sedan as TINY / SLOW?
Honda and Toyota have yet to invest in the market because their they dont have a 30g tarket point point for the market.
I.E..
Its almost impossible to buy a BMW / MB for under 30.. and get a decent vehicle. Where as H n T target is much lower.
Diesels provide same if not better fuel economy as hybrids and almost as clean.
Global warming is Global BS! Earth within long periods of time either warms up (scientists find dinosaur bones near South Pole) or cools down (Ice Age). And I don’t want to use CFL lights since they contain Mercury! Tree huggers will have to drive to the Recycling Depot and pollute air to do so. And most people would toss it in the trash and then Mercury would get into water supply from a landfill. So, no thanks!
@Bimmer
Great parody post!
It’s funny when people confuse their conditioning with reason and logic.
Diesels that are not tiny and slow do not get exceptional fuel economy. Compared to equal output petrol engines yes they do. Compared to a tiny ICE hybrid they do not. Cars with loads of fuel economy (compared to hybrids here) are slow. There’s no bones about it or the auto makers would be making 10 second cars that get 65 mpg.
OK mike… let’s play…
“So you believe a CVT is more likely to have trouble and be more expensive to maintain and repair than a normal automatic transmission?”
Yes, I believe there is ample evidence online that supports this position. You may also want to take note that Honda offered longer warranties to some (not all) owners of Honda hybrids who have CVT transmissions
“You also believe the battery may need to be replaced? Could you please find evidence of this being common?”
Come to the auctions. Visit the online enthusiast groups like insightcentral, hybridcars, greenhybrid. The evidence is there.
“As for insurance, many insurers offer discounts for driving a hybrid. Edmunds assumes no differential in maintenance, repair, or insurance costs, and they’re correct in doing so.”
No they’re not. Not even close. There are more parts that will have limited life in a hybrid and the replacement costs for certain components (02 sensor, Cat converter, starter, even tires) are far more expensive in the hybrid versions.
“The expected lifespan of an average vehicle is around 210,000 miles, which is probably conservative with these vehicles.”
Not really. Most owners do not keep the vehicle that long and with the Honda hybrids, there are substantial costs that may make further upkeep seem uneconomical.
“Regardless, the simple payback is 53K miles with this example, leaving around 100K more miles in which the hybrid is yielding a savings of $243 per 10K miles, or another $2,430.”
You assumed maintenance and insurance would be the same which is completely bogus.
“Assuming buyers are rational, any future buyers of your vehicle, should you not drive it to its death, would know the cost differential from gas savings and that should be reflected in a resale differential.”
“Assuming buyers are rational”…. you can pretty much stop right there.
“Also, the proper comparison is probably with an EX, not an LX, trim, so your price differential in this model is probably lower, which only lowers the payback period.”
No, I happen to own a 2003 Civi Hybrid and the features coincide perfectly with the LX model. It has no sunroof, cloth interior, and pretty much the basics.
“As for the TDI comment and “making your own fuel,” assuming that “fuel making” to be lower cost than conventional fuel is a very shaky assumption at best, and naturally completely unrealistic for anyone but a truly dedicated individual.”
Aaaahhh…. but I know of several who actually buy it from a company that does the refining. It’s not so much a matter of dedication than simply finding a reliable source.
“With respect to its depreciation, if you compare a Civic Hybrid with Leather to a Jetta TDI of similar true market value (with the Jetta being about $460 more), Edmunds estimates 5-year depreciation on the Jetta to be $12,748 compared to $11,178 for the Civic Hybrid. So despite costing $460 less at purchase, the Civic Hybrid ends up being worth $1,100 more after 5 years.”
Edmunds is a completely unrealistic source for pricing automobiles. The MMR has millions of actual transactions and provides a far more accurate picture of today’s market. That’s why I use it.
Personally I do like Honda’s hybrids quite a bit. At the moment I own two of them. However I temper any purchase with the fact that every car, even one with an H on it, has it’s weaknesses. The Civic Hybrids have spotty reliability histories compared with the Prius and usually end up selling for far lower prices. So long as you can prepare and inform yourself of those circumstances, you should be fine.
So, to summarize, you claim all this evidence exists, yet provide no actual evidence beyond repeating your claims and “go look at that forum.”
The fact that you don’t understand the notion of a vehicle lifespan and how that differs from an individual’s length of ownership of a given vehicle is telling. Also that you can’t grasp the notion of a quantifiable cash flow being reflected in the value of an asset relative to a comparable asset without that cash flow.
You’re also all over the map. I discussed new models, then you pulled MY2005 models out of the air, and now you’re talking about MY2003. The last two aren’t even the same generation of vehicle as the current one. Come on.
Lastly, you rely on the “Edmunds is wrong because I say so” line. Great. Guess that settles it.
Diesel > Hybrid
Smart people > Al Gore and his sheeple
To dispense with your comment about depreciation, KBB has depreciation of a 2003 LX at 57% of original value, EX at 60%, and the Hybrid at 59%.
As for insurance, please consult the following.
http://www.hybridtravelers.com/FAQs.html
Diesel > Hybrid
Smart people > Al Gore and his sheeple
You = Bored Troll
Let’s see what the free market thinks of the 2nd generation Civic Hybrid relative to its non-hybrid counterparts.
According to KBB again, the 2006 LX retains 74% of its value, the EX 73%, and the Hybrid 80%.
Care to continue?
@long126mike:
-Link stating that hybrid cars are more expensive to repair compared to their traditional ICE counterparts:
Hybrid vs ICE
-Link showing the estimated repair cost of a Prius’ CVT transmission to be $9,350: 2003-2008 Toyota Prius Full Review. (Scroll down to see it)
-Link showing the estimated repair cost of a Corrolla’s auto transmission to be $1550: 2003-2008 Toyota Corolla Full Review. (Scroll down to see it)
-Link showing the estimated repair cost of a Honda Insight’s CVT transmission to be $6345: 2000-2006 Honda Insight Full Review . (Same deal with scrolling down)
-Link about dead Insight Battery at 104K miles: Dead Insight battery.
-Link about dead Civic Hybrid battery at 109K miles. Owner had to replace at own expense: Dead Civic hybrid battery.
The differentials that exist in MMR are based solely on what’s actually sold. KBB and Edmunds use mathematical models instead and their conclusions are obviously far different.
As for everything else you wrote… I don’t respond to insults. You apparently have issues far beyond the 20 posts you’ve dedicated towards this topic. But I will say you’r pretty damn funny.
“The fact that you don’t understand the notion of a vehicle lifespan and how that differs from an individual’s length of ownership of a given vehicle is telling.”
Absolutely hilarious! Henny Youngman would be proud!
I got 65 mpg driving from miami to Tampa to orlando to jacksonville to Miami in a prius.
This was when it was about $3.50 per gallon.
I saved over $200 in gas on that 7 day trip alone (vs if I had taken a 13mpg Jeep liberty).
I am a petrol head(350z currently for sale…) but I loved seeing how low I could go and silently spooling around car parks…great fun !!
@long126mike:
-Link stating that hybrid cars are more expensive to repair compared to their traditional ICE counterparts:
Hybrid vs ICE
-Link showing the estimated repair cost of a Prius’ CVT transmission to be $9,350: 2003-2008 Toyota Prius Full Review. (Scroll down to see it)
-Link showing the estimated repair cost of a Corrolla’s auto transmission to be $1550: 2003-2008 Toyota Corolla Full Review. (Scroll down to see it)
-Link showing the estimated repair cost of a Honda Insight’s CVT transmission to be $6345: 2000-2006 Honda Insight Full Review . (Same deal with scrolling down)
-Link about dead Insight Battery at 104K miles: Dead Insight battery.
-Link about dead Civic Hybrid battery at 109K miles. Owner had to replace at own expense: Dead Civic hybrid battery.
I tried using facts once already…it didn’t work.
My former employer (government) had Escape Hybrids, they worked very well and were pleasent to drive on road. I did like the start-stop system and driving through the parking garage with just a “hum” being emitted from the vehicle.
Overall, the engine moved along nicely at highway speeds between 65-80mph (Idaho speed limit is 75mph).
However, for light field work it was terrible. The AWD system would constantly get stuck because off-road, speeds are seldom over 25mph and that is when the computer wants to shut off the gas motor. Finally, realized that running the AC on Max would keep the gasoline motor running and keep from getting stuck on the soft surfaces. And ended up using the Explorers more often than not when two-track trails came into play.
I wonder how the AWD system works for the lifeguards.
Also, I saw a new Fusion Hybrid this morning…Hybrid or not, the new Fusion is a sleek car and definitely has more finesse over the previous model.
Those are awfully impractical boots for the climate. And if she’s expecting a snap snow, the rest of her outfit it similarly so.
She is obviously not from Canada :P
Oh please…don’t bring up that PR stunt.
A Fusion Hybrid can ONLY get that kind of mileage when driving it in an unsafe and unrealistic manner…and that is assuming that Ford didn’t cheat.
P71_CrownVic: Given that you purport to love facts so much as per your post above, please let me know on what basis you can make the above statement? I only ask given that I ran the event in Washington DC, so would love to know how I made the team drive ‘in an unsafe and unrealistic manner.’ Also keen to learn how you assume I cheated as well. Sure the 30 or so other people involved including independent witnesses would also love to hear.
In future, I suggest you stick to facts not baseless assumptions.
Also still waiting to hear about the bankrupt company that makes a small SUV that gets better than 34mpg in the city and 31mpg on the highway that you alluded to early on? That is what is known as a fact – keen for more facts like these rather than baseless and inane comments.
P71_CrownVic: Given that you purport to love facts so much as per your post above, please let me know on what basis you can make the above statement? I only ask given that I ran the event in Washington DC, so would love to know how I made the team drive ‘in an unsafe and unrealistic manner.’ Also keen to learn how you assume I cheated as well. Sure the 30 or so other people involved including independent witnesses would also love to hear.
In future, I suggest you stick to facts not baseless assumptions.
Also still waiting to hear about the bankrupt company that makes a small SUV that gets better than 34mpg in the city and 31mpg on the highway that you alluded to early on? That is what is known as a fact – keen for more facts like these rather than baseless and inane comments.
They used Drivers trained in
mileage-maximizing techniques…which is Ford PR spin speak for hypermiling…a driving style that, here in the real world, is unrealistic and unsafe.
And Ford is about as honest as a thief…you cannot believe what they say. Remember, they said that Volvo was not for sale, and that their stake in Mazda was not for sale, and that they would sell 100K flexes a year, and that they would be profitable by 2009, Egoboost would cost $700.00 and give V8 power with V6 economy…none of which is true.
So, yes, I have my doubts that the Fusion hybrid actually completed this as it was reported (or spun).
Unverifiable and outlandish anecdotes? Gee, how meaningful.
I don’t respond to insults.
That entire comment you made was loaded with insults and I haven’t insulted you once.
So what you’re doing is projecting your own shortcomings and not actually addressing the fact that your assertion about resale differentials have no basis in reality.
A sad, but all too common approach favored by someone whose argument is not holding up.
Hold on now, you can’t just say hypermiling is unrealistic and unsafe. You must realize that there are different levels of hypermiling.
For example, maintaining proper tire pressure and just maintaining your vehicle in general helps get the mpg’s up, and that’s not unsafe. Things like not accelerating towards a light that’s red, that’s not unsafe. Things like maintaining a proper distance between yourself and the car infront of you so that you don’t have to slam on the brakes when they slow down a little bit, that’s not unsafe. Not flooring your car every time you get the chance to. Speeding? Well there is staying with the flow of traffic and then there is speeding, and everyone knows the difference.
Things like drafting, duh of course that’s unsafe but real hypermilers don’t condone that kind of behavior. Rolling through stopsigns, again same thing, hypermilers don’t condone it. But hey, that’s something a lot of people do anyway just to save time.
Turning off the car while it’s in motion or at a stop, well that doesn’t even apply to the fusion hybrid since it will do that automatically for you.