CNN Hybrid worries/answers article - GreenHybrid

Adelwyn · #1 (**permalink**) 03-15-2006, 11:47 AM

I just found this article that I thought would interest people, especially those still thinking about buying a hybrid:
http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/14/Auto...ries/index.htm

There is also an article talking about the Consumer Reports calculations as well.

foo monkey · #2 (**permalink**) 03-15-2006, 12:29 PM

That's the best main-stream media article on hybrids, I've ever read.

Pravus Prime · #3 (**permalink**) 03-15-2006, 01:48 PM

Quote:

7. Worry: Hybrids do not get the level of mileage promised
If, by "promised," you mean "EPA estimated," they certainly don't. And neither will anything else. The problem with hybrids, though, is that even though all vehicles might get about 15 percent fewer miles per gallon than the government says -- that's one common estimate -- 15 percent of a big number is a far larger miss than 15 percent of a small number.

At any rate, if you're calculating how much you'll save on gas by looking at EPA estimates, you're probably overestimating by a wide margin.

Conclusion: Assume that it won't. Whether that's a concern is up to you.

And that's why people conclude that they're not cost-effective.

Other than that, a pretty good article. CNN has been doing a pretty good job all things considered.

bwilson4web · #4 (**permalink**) 03-15-2006, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adelwyn

I just found this article that I thought would interest people, especially those still thinking about buying a hybrid:
http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/14/Auto...ries/index.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by article

. . .
6. Worry: Hybrids will not hold resale value
Don't be fooled by stories about used Toyota Priuses selling for near-new prices. The Prius is a unique, hybrid-only vehicle with an eye-catching design. It's produced and sold in low volumes. In terms of holding its value as a used car, the Prius has more in common with the Mini Cooper, another resale value champ, than a Ford Escape Hybrid SUV.

Like the Escape, most hybrid vehicles are versions of ordinary, non-hybrid vehicles with little to visually distinguish them.

Conclusion: A genuine cause for concern.

There is also an article talking about the Consumer Reports calculations as well.

I don't claim to always read things exactly right but in this case are they saying:

Prius holds value because it is unique in appearance<
Other hybrids lose value because they look like other cars <

This just doesn't make sense to me. Regardless, the Prius, Insight and HCH have viable, used hybrid inventories. So it should be easy enough to check completed Ebay listings to see what has happened to the used versions of these cars.

Delta Flyer · #5 (**permalink**) 03-15-2006, 04:24 PM

Overall, it was a fairly written article.

plusaf · #6 (**permalink**) 03-20-2006, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adelwyn

I just found this article that I thought would interest people, especially those still thinking about buying a hybrid:
http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/14/Auto...ries/index.htm

There is also an article talking about the Consumer Reports calculations as well.

LOL!
Literacy doesn't strike again.....
from that article....
"As far as expense goes, the hybrid-specific components of most hybrid vehicles have extremely long warrantees, so cost shouldn't be an issue."

from the Dictionary....
war·ran·tee (wôr"…n-t¶", w¼r"-) n. One to whom a warranty is made or a warrant is given.

well, i hope You're a "long warrantee" and I am, too..."

plusaf · #7 (**permalink**) 03-20-2006, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pravus Prime

And that's why people conclude that they're not cost-effective.

Other than that, a pretty good article. CNN has been doing a pretty good job all things considered.

um,yes and no.... [as i am wont to say...]

if your 25 mpg's are off by 15% and you drive 10k miles a year, it'll cost you an extra 17.6% in fuel, which is about 70.6 gallons a year.

if you buy a Prius expecting 60 and only get 85% of that (51), the Prius will cost you the same 17.6% more in fuel, which is 29.41 gallons.

nearly 40 gallons difference at how much per gallon? $2.50? $100 a year.

whatever math you use, you'll be the one to decide if it's "cost-effective."

now, if you're driving a non-hybrid in stop-and-go heavy commute traffic, you may not average even 15 mpg, while the hybrid will get as good or maybe better mileage.

"it all depends." really applies here.

leahbeatle · #8 (**permalink**) 03-20-2006, 06:59 PM

Not a bad article- I thought that most of it was pretty fair. The issue with calculating the amount of money that you save by driving a hybrid is that there is no ONE way to calculate it and no ONE formula that someone could use to satisfy everyone here. Yes, plusaf, it all depends. But you have to admit that "Assume that it won't. Whether that's a concern is up to you." pretty much boils down to "it all depends." So the writer did a decent job.

Also, I'd like to point out that the warrantees thing was likely a typo, not an actual mistake about the spelling or meaning of the word warranty or warrantee. Later in the article, in the section on battery pack life, it is correctly spelled: "Besides, typically there are extremely long warranties on hybrid components, including batteries."

Still, I would guess that most non-lawyers do not know the difference between those two words- it's like affect and effect, only less commonly used.

plusaf · #9 (**permalink**) 03-20-2006, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leahbeatle

Not a bad article- I thought that most of it was pretty fair. The issue with calculating the amount of money that you save by driving a hybrid is that there is no ONE way to calculate it and no ONE formula that someone could use to satisfy everyone here. Yes, plusaf, it all depends. But you have to admit that "Assume that it won't. Whether that's a concern is up to you." pretty much boils down to "it all depends." So the writer did a decent job.

Also, I'd like to point out that the warrantees thing was likely a typo, not an actual mistake about the spelling or meaning of the word warranty or warrantee. Later in the article, in the section on battery pack life, it is correctly spelled: "Besides, typically there are extremely long warranties on hybrid components, including batteries."

Still, I would guess that most non-lawyers do not know the difference between those two words- it's like affect and effect, only less commonly used.

right on, LB, but i still love the "how many mpg's can dance on the head of an economic comparison" threads....

!

... and, on behalf of my son-in-law, i'll take that "lawyers" comment as a compliment....

. i'm one of those old f*rts who grew up in large grade school classrooms where the teacher ruled and we learned spelling, grammar, diagramming sentences and memorized the multiplication tables. that's how old i am! and proud of it!

. that 'tweren't no typo... it was a grammar-o. cheap editing. i had to look back at the top to see if it said "Associated Press" as the source. if you want to see bad logic and bad science, note the correlation between those two!

hugs!

Sledge · #10 (**permalink**) 03-21-2006, 04:48 AM

Nothing about exploding batteries? How about rescue workers getting electrocuted?

Bah! This article is worthless