CR: Hybrids make more sense than ever

So... Honda Civic Hybrid does not save the buyer money?

 

It sounds like they are correcting their earlier errors about hybrid vehicle depreciation rates. I don't mean the double counting, I mean the inflated rates themselves. Does the word 'retraction' appear in the article?

 

No. Not in five years. Consumer Reports figures came out 500 in the hole after 5 years with the Honda Civic hybrid.

Mike

 

I wouldn't be so sure about that. The stupid junk science CNW "study" came out in around March 06 (http://priuschat.com/forums/prius-h...ergy-lifetime-than-chevrolet-s-tahoe-suv.html) and the junk science CCSU article came out in March 07, yet to this day, I still keep hearing the "Prius does more environmental damage than a Hummer" crap.

It seems like at least once a month, I fight a battle w/someone quoting the above junk science. It came up <10 days ago at Chrysler can't give away cars these days - MY350Z.COM Forums.

 

*sigh*.... so what exactly is the "non-hybrid equivalent" to the Prius again??

 

There is no such thing as a hybrid premium either. Why does no one (no one = journalist) ever question how long the payback is for leather seats, a more powerful engine, or a better suspension? Yet you pay more for each and every one of those.....

Comparing the Prius to a Corolla....ugh.

 

Well, there is no direct comparison, since there is not a non-hybrid Prius. Consumer Reports compared it to a Toyota Corolla XLE, which is about as close as you'll get. The Corolla gets even better fuel economy than the non-hybrid Civic. CR said the Prius would cost 4,840 more than a comparably equipped Corolla.

Mike

 

One has just to look in Auto Trader for asking prices for used hybrids to see that my the asking price for my used Prius is more that I paid for it, even before my government rebate.
I'm sure every Prius owner would pretty much find them in the same position.
I think it looks like we made a great investment, with or without a non-hybrid equivalent.
That said, mine is not for sale.

 

Consumer Reports still does not know how to evaluate the Prius. Comparing it to the Corolla XLE is nonsense. Prius is a mid-sized hatchback; not a sedan. Much more importantly, Prius was designed as a hybrid from the start; not an alternative powered Corolla. This is like auto buyers a hundred years ago comparing "horseless carriages" to horse drawn carriages; rather than to other "horseless carriages." Before I bought my Prius last year, I compared it against other hybrids including the Honda Civic hybrid, not non-hybrids. A technological sea change has occurred in the auto industry and Consumer Reports has still not changed gears. Another thing that bugs me is that they use 44 MPG for the Prius when I get 48 MPG. Prius also has several unique technological features, like a fuel bladder, that Consumer Reports totally ignores.

 

Your logic is flawed. The payoff time as a concern is perfectly legitimate because you're comparing a hybrid which costs more than the *EQUIVALENTLY* performing car. The Hybrid feature doesn't offer any benefit to the consumer except the ability to save money on gasoline. There are many many other cars I'd rathe have for $29K that look and perform way better than the Prius, so it's even worse than simply a fuel economy payback calculation.

You comparison would have been apples and apples had the leather been replaced with some other sort of material that provides the same benefit but costs more. In your case, you're citing leather vs no leather. It's not the same comparison.

 

Seriously? It's the Matrix. So it doesn't have a 'Prius' nameplate, but it is a small 4c, 5 door hatchback that's almost exactly the same size as the Prius.

Base Prius Pckg #2 is ~ $24400
Base Matrix with same equipment is ~$20000

CR makes another error due to lack of insight.

 

The OP was correct, there is no such thing as a 'payback period'. Such a concept would only be valid if one were using the vehicle for business and it generated some income. The only valid economic comparison has to consider that nearly all vehicles are money-losing propositions. One pays for the vehicle upfront, adds fuel, maintenance and repairs over time which increase the Total Cost of Ownership ( Edmunds ) then disposes of the vehicle at some later date ( either when it's worthless or at some resale value ).
The only valid comparo is to add up all the costs of the various vehicles under consideration and see which is less costly over the expected time of ownership. After this economic analysis performance, styling, comfort, safetly, etc are compared separately. Nowhere in here is there any 'payback period'.

Your first paragraph is erroneous for two reasons.

First, at $29000 there is no other vehicle that offers the same fuel economy, it's not even close. There is no 'payoff time' at this price level. If you are going to throw a 'performance' criterium into the comparo then the comparo becomes invalid. The Prius is not intended for performance, it's only intended for fuel economy. Comparing the two is truly apples and oranges.

Second, the Prius is a 5 door hatch so if you're comparing 'similarly performing vehicles' then you must compare it to other 5 door hatches. Sedans simply don't have the flexibility to offer what a 5 door hatch does.

Concerning the 'length of ownership' criterium this too is a double edged sword cutting in favor of the Prius.
...If you hold it for a short length of time you generally lose little or none of the hybrid priemium. For example now in this extraordinary market 1 y.o. USED Prius' are being sold at auction at more than the MSRP of a NEW 2008. It's unusual for sure but it is the real world market at this time.
..If you hold it for a long length of time such as 12 years then you lose the 'hybrid premium' completely but over that time you've saved so much in fuel that the savings are far in excess of the original 'premium'

 

It offers more than just the ability to save gas.

I have always thought of the quietness as being another feature of the hybrid system. Every single person who rides in my car is fascinated by how quiet it is. People make comments all the time when I'm rolling around in stealth mode, parking, or stopped at an intersection. Previously you had to pay a huge premium to get luxury car that offered a quiet ride.

Tim

 

I might be wrong but I think the official CR word is that the Prius Base gets 44 mpg and the Touring 42 mpg. So maybe they split the difference. I haven't yet managed to get that mileage over any period less than 20 miles, but I think they work the cars tested pretty hard. And of course, I doubt the driver of the Prii tested is an experienced Prius driver.

 

I have a 2001. I wish I had kept some of the "payback calculations" tossed around in 2001 proving that the hybrid concept was flawed. It would be so much fun to post them right now. I kept the car instead.

 

To their credit CR has a very extensive testing cycle. It's much more representative of 'real world' driving than one might think. But CR's whole mission in life is to watch out for the consumer. They try to find over-exuberant claims and puncture them; they try to find scams and expose them; they try to find dangerous situations and warn about them.

They have no sense of 'fair play'. It's like your mother telling you 'Never play in the street'...

That being said on their extensive testing procedure they try to get the worst out of a product because sure enough there are those that won't be able to get 48 or 50 or 55 mpg. Worst case scenario, and we've all seen it, the Prius gets about 35 mpg for a 5 min trip.

In an exchange I had with a CR tester on Edmunds their 'city' component is similar to a parent making several trips around town in a day. The worst case scenario for any vehicle. He also admitted that they got 48 mpg on an extensive highway test.

I don't belong to Consumers Union; I don't subscribe to their site; I don't read any of their magazines, except on occasion; I've never consulted the site nor the magazine before making any purchase; I make my own decision based on my own data. But I believe that I do understand where they are coming from.

 

I read an article on Li ion batteries for cars a few months ago, and I knew conventional ICE cars were dead. I traded my car for a Prius, after driving the Prius and convincing myself it was state of the art.

The car industry has a problem right now: it has millions of conventional ICE cars it needs to sell, at a time when everybody wants a hydrid, which are available in relatively small numbers. There are two ways to deal with it: plead with Bush to get his oil buddies or those big money speculators to drop oil prices, or make ICE cars look good relative to hybrids. So the big sell is on. No hybrids mentioned in the car section of my Sunday paper today. That's a start.

 

I think they have a very specific driving cycle for all their vehicles. I really doubt they're trying to squeeze mileage out of any vehicle and I doubt they're intentionally wanting to drive any vehicle any differently, to keep it as close to an apples to apples comparison.

See ConsumerReports.org - Most fuel-efficient cars for table of the most efficient (current) vehicles they've tested.