More Consumer Reports rants

My salesman originally said hybrids are never worth the extra cost. I agreed, and I even worked it out on a spreadsheet; it would have taken 200,000 miles to pay back the extra cost of the hybrid over a conventional vehicle.

As it happened. I did buy one, because I got a clearance price on a new 2012 model, so it didn't cost much more than a conventional vehicle, but still carries the 8-year warranty on hybrid components. Other benefits I hadn't counted on was the availability of free charging at work and elsewhere around the city. Also, I'm actually saving more on fuel than I originally thought. When I was promised 50 mpg, I never expected that I'd be doing better than that most of the time.

 

I gather your spreadsheet told you with absolute confidence that each car's value would be ZERO and each would self-destruct at exactly 200k miles ? Moreover, your crystal ball spreadsheet was able to divine the exact maintenance and repair costs for the next ~ 10 years ?

 

That's an odd response. I didn't claim anything about depreciation, maintenance costs or recovery value. Assuming all that stuff is roughly equal for a hybrid or a non-hybrid, I'm not sure why you'd think it's relevant.

 

Ah, I see. You are confident in comparing costs while ignoring costs. Are you familiar with the term GIGO ?

While I am at it, allow me to define "assume." It means "make an nice person of you and me." You and your dealer assumed a lot, all in the name of spitting out a number you endow with some magical imbued accuracy. I know you are surprised by my post after you admitted you miscalculated. Kudos to you. I am pointing out your assumptions because they come up over and over again.

 

Nice of you to point that out.