http://www.cnn.com/2005/AUTOS/tipsan...its/index.html

OK. Tax credits on hybrids is always good, especially if they can offset the cost of the hybrid system (and make it free to the consumer). But if you read this article, one thing will probably jump out at you...

The amount of the credit is based on the vehicle's fuel economy as compared to a similar 2002 model-year vehicle. To get any credits at all, a vehicle must get at least 25 percent better fuel economy than a similar 2002 vehicle.

I find that restriction a bit alarming. Obviously, lawmakers are favoring US manufacturers with this 2002 rule. Japan has been selling innovative and efficient hybrids long before 2002, and therefore will NOT qualify for these big tax breaks. Lagging US companies to date only have the Escape, which itself is licensed Toyota technology. And the rule will make it so that GM's planned hybrid trucks and SUVs that make a 2-3mpg improvement will receive heavy tax credits, but buyers of 70mpg Insights will get NOTHING. I wouldn't be surprised at all if US corporations have been doing some heavy lobbying to get this rule put into the law, so that their inferior cars can actually compete with the Prius, Civic, and upcoming hybrids like the Camry.

This is ridiculous. Lawmakers are swayed by special interests (US auto companies) at the cost of true progress (actually setting MPG standards).

[edit] OOPS, could a mod please change the title? It's misspelled and I don't want to look like a total fool in my first forum post...

 

Dah! I was just about to post this.

why do you say stinks of politics? This--even tho no numbers, but just how it's written--seems like it's a better tax deal.

edit: you're right. it's difficult to tell if this is a good thing or not, even tho the article implies it's good. it depends on what "2002 version of a similar model" means. civic and all american cars are the only ones that work well w/ this. prius and insights it's uncertain.

reedit: check this link. it's on the cnn link at the bottom
http://money.cnn.com/popups/2005/aut...n.exclude.html
it's examples of tax credits for each model. prius gets the 2nd best tax break, while honda civic GX gets the biggest. no idea why civic 2006 isnt mentioned.

insight: -1450 (only the auto...manual gets almost zilch : \ )
prius: $- 3150
the chevy silverado truck gets 250$ deservingly.

 

I believe at the time of the article the EPA numbers for the civic werent determined.

 

I just saw that section at the bottom too. I'm really not sure how the credits are determined, then. The article doesn't mention why the Prius gets such a large credit, when it obviously did not make a 25% improvement on FE over the 2002 model. I also read a while back (on Edmunds, I believe) that US lawmakers would try and favor American cars with these tax breaks, so somehow I think CNN's article is a little confused. If anyone can shed some light on this disconnect, that would be great.

 

They problem with 25% is that it sure is harder to get a car that gets 40mpg to get to 60 vs one that gets 20 to get 30.

 

25% improvement in mileage is 40 to 50, 20 to 25. I know the Civic may not get as much credit as the other, even though its absolute mileage is very good, because the ICE-only civic is already so efficient (around 30/40 currently, don't know 2002 figures).

Having the payouts be based on differential mileage makes sense, as it rewards "strong" hybrid systems like the Prius more than more "mild" systems like the Silverado. However, the payouts could be inflated merely because the "similar" ICE cars are not nearly as optimized as they could be (compare GM sedans from 2002 with Honda sedans on that note)

 

Is the insight not good for air? I brielfly remmeber when i skimmed the stats when i first got interested in hybrids, it released maybe 100x more than the auto, and I assumed it was cuz of the clutch.. That stinks cuz i'm more an air guy than a mile guy.

 

Not sure if this has already been posted elsewhere, but I found an another article discussing the 2006 tax credits. Here it is:

http://hybridcars.about.com/od/news/...dtaxcredit.htm

Within the article is a link to a list of estimates of the tax credits from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy:

http://hybridcars.about.com/gi/dynam...ed.htm%23table

Just in case anyone is interested.

 

The new tax credit is for the hybrids that are "put in service" in 2006. I just got mine but I'm not using it yet. When the clock strikes 00:01 on Jan 1 then I will put it in service and be claim the tax credit. It does not say what the purchase date is just the in service date.

 

The insight with the manual has a different engine than the one with the CVT, it has nothing to do with the transmission itself, which is somewhat of a coincidence (I don't understand why they couldn't sell the lean-burn version with the CVT, or the "clean" engine with the MT for that matter).

The lean burn engine can achieve somewhat better mileage when cruising at steady speed because it lowers the fuel/air ratio under light engine loads, saving a bit of fuel. However, this causes somewhat hotter combustion which I believe creates more Nitrous Oxide compounds in the exhaust than running a stochiometric mixture. Most of this is burned off in a special catalytic converter, but not all. It is only NOx emissions specifically in which the MT Insight is worse than other hybrids. In terms of CO2 emissions though, the manual is still better, because that's directly related to fuel consumption.

Another tradeoff between driving range and emissions with the PZEV rated hybrids is that they have smaller gasoline tank capacities, because they must have special extra containers in them to prevent any emissions from fuel evaporating due to heat expansion as well. I have to admit that being able to go very very long times without stopping for gas is a nice benefit -- I have a ULEV Civic with 13.1 gallon tank, allowing me to go as long as 700 miles without stopping, it's unfortunate most of the new models only come with 11 gallon tanks.