There are a lot of people who are spinning the real numbers here. It's the opposite of articles we have all seen claiming that hybrids cost more to own and hurt the envirionment more than claimed. Both are equally misleading. Many folks are like me and will start monitoring boards like this as we first consider a hybrid purchase. Accuracy and real truth are most helpful and sites which clearly show an unreasonable bias one way or the other get ignored.
If you trade down from medium or large SUV or a performance car you saved money by getting out of a gas hog, not because you bought a hybrid. Moving to a smaller car (hybrid or not) you will see savings. The only true comparo as some have done is "apples to apples" of the same vehicle with smaller engine option versus the hybrid.
True ownership costs will improve once hybrids start to become available on the used market. This likely won't happen for a couple of years until late adopters who are more likely to turn over vehicles rapidly start trading them in. (Early adopters were shown to be the type to hold onto vehicles longer). Even then, I'd expect them to hold their value longer given current socio-economic realities. Good for current owners when considering true cost of ownership; bad for the bargain hunters.
I have enjoyed all the hybrids I've driven but our perfect vehicle doesn't appear to be out there yet. Our consideration of hybrids came prinicipally from a desire to reduce our environmental impact. Given our relatively low mileage makes the cost savings minimal for vehicles that do sell for a premium here in Canada but they are still very tempting.

 

I may have gained a car payment by trading in a paid off 2001 Ford Taurus with 93,300 miles on it, but I gained the peace of mind of having a fully warrantied car again. The Taurus averaged about 23-25 MPG. It had started to cost quite a bit more as expensive things started to break. In the long run I will save money with my HCHII, but in the mean time I'm just happy to have a nice new car that really gets good mileage.

If you want to talk about fuel cost savings, since April 15, when I bought the car till now, I've driven 5660.9 miles (about my usual mileage) and my fuel (averaged price) has cost $381. The same distance in my Taurus would have cost me $893 for a fuel cost savings of $512 for the first 170 days. Extrapolate that out to 365 days and the potential fuel cost savings are about $1100. Plus I get a $1050 fed tax credit and a $1500 OK tax credit. Total first year savings is rougly $3650.

 

This is a little broad, don't you think? How about citing specific "spin" numbers. Asking for clarification is always OK but dismissing as "spin," well that is not terribly precise and terribly unfair. The problem with too casual use of "spin" is that has become an euphemism for lying.
No problem. The internet has given us many choices.
In engineering, we often use a requirements based analysis. We list all of the requirements and assign a value to each. Then we rank each proposed solution against each of the requirements. Finally we multiple the requirement value against the ranking of each vehicle and sum up the results. This gives a way to quantitatively evaluate what at first might seem dissimilar vehicles.
You might check Ebay for used vehicles. But there is another reason why owners are keeping their hybrids longer ... they aren't wearing out like ordinary cars. The smooth power from the motors reduce vibration, heat and stress. Furthermore, the engines are often 'derated' compared to their gas-only versions. This means less stress, less strain and a lot longer life.
Ultimately, if you aren't driving a lot, the hybrid advantages tend to be of less value. In those cases, there are some very comfortable large vehicles for sale at low prices now. But certainly choose from your requirements.

Bob Wilson

 

My 2004 Prius gets almost exactly twice the MPG as my other cars (Subaru Outback and VW Jetta). In 130,500 miles I have used 2864 gallons of gasoline which cost $7,542. So I have saved over $7,500 in gasoline cost by driving my Prius. Of course, since my Prius has been trouble free for all 4.5 years, I have also saved maintenance costs, but that is more difficult to quantify.

JeffD

 

How about my Hybrid has saved me $2,417.78? (As of 11/7/2008)

Back in December of 2006 Hybrid Vue cost $2250 less that the Regular view.
I received a $650 tax credit on my 2006 income taxes $2250 - $650 = $1600 difference.
In the first two years of operation I have saved $1002.78 in gas. That figure is derived from the fact that the Regular Vue gets 5 mpg less that of the Hybrid Vue.
Source = FuelEconomy.gov 2007 Hybrid Vue 23 City 29 highway 26 avg
2007 Regular 4 cyl Automatic 19 City 25 highway 21 avg

I have taken the 5 mpg difference, computed the savings for each tank and have added up the savings. As of 11/7/2008 my 59,095 miles equates to a savings of $1002.78.
Source - my excel spreadsheet.

$1600 - $1002.78 = $597.22 I still have $597.22 to breakeven. That should occur in the next 14 - 16 months based upon my current driving patterns and gas prices of around $2.50.

Therefore, strickly on a cost/gas basis I breakeven in 3 years and a few months.

However, that does not take into consideration that the resale value of a Hybrid Vue vs a similarly equiped Vue. According to Kelly's Blue Book = my Saturn Hybrid Vue would net in excellent condition $11,670 vs a similarly configured excellent condition 4cyl Vue at $8,655. A difference of $3,015.

Therefore, if I sold my Hybrid Vue tomorrow I would would still be in the hole $597.22 but get $3,015 more. Therefore, I would net $2,417.78. Looking at the big picture I have already reached the breakeven point and continue to increase my value.

In addition, one must also consider the environmental benefits. Using the 5 mgp better figure from Fuel Economy.gov - I have already saved 335.044 gallons of gas.

 

I don't think I saved anything, compared to owning a similar, non-hybrid Civic.

Price of HCH2, delivered 2006-06-30: SEK 240 000
Market price of used HCH2 today: circa SEK 150 000
Depreciation: SEK 90 000
Fuel for driving 35 000 km, at SEK 12.00 / L, and 5.2 L/100 km: SEK 21 840
Three years road tax: 0 (the first three years, government incentive)
Maintenance (20 000 km): SEK 2000
Total cost: SEK 113 840

Price of Honda Civic 1.8 2006: SEK 170 000
Market price of used Honda Civic today: circa SEK 120 000
Depreciation: SEK 50 000
Fuel for driving 35 000 km, at SEK 12.00 / L and 8.0 L/100 km: SEK 33 600
Three years road tax: SEK 3000 (estimate, not sure of the actual figure)
Maintenance (20 000 km): SEK 2000
Total cost: SEK 88 600

(1 USD is around 8.00 SEK)

I admit this is not a 100% complete cost summary. Cost of capital should have been included, and insurance. There are some parking and congestion fee benefits as well for the hybrid, but the compariston is pretty fair overall. EPA figures for Civic 1.8 is 6.6 L/100 km, using 8.0 L/100 might be a bit pessimistic.

I'm very happy with the HCH2 anyway, it's a cool car, very pleasant to drive. The sedan body is very rare over here since only the hybrids have that body style and few hybrids have been sold. To break even, I would need to drive another 100 000 km, and it wouldn't hurt if oil prices went up too. If they went up a lot (why not USD 200/bl?), also depreciation will look better for the hybrid. Market prices for old, used hybrids are very solid over here.

Finally, the comparison is not 100% fair because the non-hybrid (hatchback) Honda Civic was very popular in 2006, with delivery times up to a year. So I couldn't have bought a non-hybrid then even if I wanted to.

 

After 11.4 years of driving my 2007 Camry Hybrid I estimate I have saved at LEAST $14-15,500 in fuel costs alone! In maintenance I have only have had to replace the 12V battery at $275 with an Optima after 11.3 years. No other maintenance costs that I have had to make!! Great value for the money!!! I am hoping to get at least 200,000 miles out of the car.

 

$14-15.5K? Probably not unless you drove a horrible gas guzzler and would have done so for 11 years. Context would be helpful. What did you drive before you drove the Camry?

In short...

To save $14K, you would have needed to drive a vehicle that got a combined 13.6 mpg
To save $15.5K, you would have needed to drive a vehicle that got a combined 11.4 mpg

(And the above assumes you drove a full 200K miles between 2007 and 2017)

Since you didn't give us very much to go on, let's run the numbers comparing it to a regular Camry.

2007-2017 average gas price $2.92/gal (Raleigh looks to be just slightly below US average https://www.gasbuddy.com/Charts)

Camry hybrid 34 mpg combined
Camry 25 mpg combined

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find...22825&id=22823
(Note that the site indicates only a $400/year savings based on average driving)

Even rounding UP to the desired 200K miles...

The hybrid cost you $17,176 in fuel
The regular cost you $23,360 in fuel

That's a savings of about $6184. Nothing to sneeze at, but a far cry from your estimate.

If all of your driving has been highway, those savings narrow substantially... only $1,663 in savings between Camry Hybrid/Camry,

Your post is the opposite of the poo-pooers that claim that the battery cost offsets any savings. Pure propaganda.

 

I did the math compared to my last SUV( Toyota 4 Runner ) that got 18-20mpg. I replaced that car with my 2007 TCH. I spend 100 a month on gas now and it was a little more when gas prices were higher. So, 11.4 years saving 100 per month since I average 38-40mpg and I get a savings of 13,680 + the fact that I have only once replaced the 12V gel cell battery ONCE at 11.3 years and it is recommended to be changed after every 4 years. That saved me 2 batteries at 500 a piece. That gives you the $14,680 savings I calculated. I'm not sure where you got your data but I am sure of how much I have saved. !! 15,000 was very close!

 

My data is backed by links and executed with basic arithmetic. Here's one I omitted:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...es-since-1990/

I averaged the prices from 2007 to 2017. The average of these values is $2.92. From the gasbuddy link, you can plot Raleigh vs. the US average and see that Raleigh is a little lower... so you actually spend LESS than $2.92 meaning my calculations are higher than your actual.

Unless your "I got XX mpg" is backed by detailed records, you're likely over estimating it. Furthermore, 38-40 mpg for a Camry is very atypical unless you're an extremely conservative driver into the hypermiling range. Sure, you CAN likely get 38-40, but your ACTUAL average is likely much closer to 34. Given that your claimed 4 Runner mpg of 18-20 is exactly what fueleconomy.gov says is the combined mileage for a 2000 4 runner (19), I doubt you've gotten 38-40 LIFETIME mpg.

Even so, with CONTEXT, now your claim has a little more meaning. Based on the 200,000 you mentioned, which you haven't actually achieved yet, your maximum savings on fuel is $13,560. If you've driven less than 200,000 miles, you've saved less.

Counting batteries you haven't replaced as savings is like counting transmissions you didn't have to replace. It would be more valuable to compare battery replacement cost/frequency of the 4 runner to the Camry, not the fact that you didn't have to replace the Camry's battery. Why not count savings in the $4000 hybrid battery you didn't have to replace? If you work your approach consistently, you could have saved another $10K in hybrid battery and transaxle not-replacing costs.

You still haven't mentioned:

What year 4 runner
Your ACTUAL miles traveled
Basis for computations beyond "$100/month now"

I'm probably coming off as an a$$, but the more evidence-based your claims are, the better. Without detailed records showing otherwise, you're likely very average. Claiming that you're significantly better than average should be supported by data.