Hybrid Cost Comparison

[Brougham-Holiday]

I just found this link on yahoo, sadly the GM Hybrids are at the very bottom of the list in terms of value.

See the chart/story here!

[Satty]

The GM hybrids are a pretty pathetic entry. The half-hybrid sedans are absolutely awful, not even close to being worth the premium. The SUVs are pretty worthless because of the huge price increase over their traditional counterparts. Ford did it right, they took a practically sized SUV and boosted the fuel economy without adding $10k to the price tag. GM would have been much better off with an Equinox hybrid.

[siegen]

What an incredibly worthless article. The author doesn't know what "features" are, and just compares base models for everything.

For example, the Honda Civic Hybrid's 42.2 mpg average fuel mileage will save you about $623 per year, but its base price is almost $7,600 more than the conventional Honda Civic.

They're comparing the Civic hybrid to the Civic DX. They should be comparing it to the Civic EX, which is equipped similarly. The correct price different is $3,900, not $7,600. I love it when unintelligent people write articles.

Of course, we can't forget the most popular hybrid -- the Toyota Prius. Compared to the Honda Accord, a midsize gasoline- only sedan that costs a bit less, the Prius should take about a year to make up for the price difference and will save you an additional $1,045 in gas costs.

The Accord is much larger and better equipped than the Prius, with around 10 more cubic feet of passenger volume to boot. The base Prius doesn't even have cruise control standard. Where are these comparisons coming from? The Prius should take about one year to pay for itself? What a load of manure.

[Intrepidation]

I'd rather drive in my $1000 RWD, BOF, V8 car and still save thousands.

Wow, who am I starting to sound like?

[PurdueGuy]

The GM hybrids are a pretty pathetic entry. The half-hybrid sedans are absolutely awful, not even close to being worth the premium. The SUVs are pretty worthless because of the huge price increase over their traditional counterparts. Ford did it right, they took a practically sized SUV and boosted the fuel economy without adding $10k to the price tag. GM would have been much better off with an Equinox hybrid.

I assume "the SUVs" are the 2-modes? Things may have changed, but when the hybrid Vue first came out (before the new Vue), the tax incentive pretty much covered the price difference between the regular & hybrid. They didn't make many of them, though, apparently due to battery supplier issues.

[Satty]

Yeah, I was talking about the 900s.

[PurdueGuy]

It's funny how the BAS system is so good (value-wise) in the Vue, yet so lousy in the aura/'bu.

[thedriver]

Not to mention that supposedly the Mariner will save you $220 in fuel over the mechanically identical Escape. Small errors, but enough to damage the credibility of the article...

Edited July 20, 2008 by thedriver

[GXT]

It's funny how the BAS system is so good (value-wise) in the Vue, yet so lousy in the aura/'bu.

There was a comparison of the Rav4. CR-V, Vue Hybrid, and a few others in one of the major mags. The Vue Hybrid got the worst fuel economy, (IIRC) the worst performance, and the highest price of the lot. They managed only 20 MPG with the hybrid Vue and 24 MPG with the 4-cyl Rav4.

Edited July 21, 2008 by GXT

[PurdueGuy]

There was a comparison of the Rav4. CR-V, Vue Hybrid, and a few others in one of the major mags. The Vue Hybrid got the worst fuel economy, (IIRC) the worst performance, and the highest price of the lot. They managed only 20 MPG with the hybrid Vue and 24 MPG with the 4-cyl Rav4.

frankly, I wouldn't put much confidence in an article like that - reviewers for magazines so often push cars way hard. To get 20mpg in a regular vue under reasonable driving habits would be shameful, let alone in the hybrid. All that article tells me is the Vue hybrid doesn't get good fuel economy when pushed really hard. How many hybrid owners buy their vehicles then push them hard? More often they obsess about driving like a grandma & getting the best fuel economy.

[loki]

isn't the 09 bu hybrid rated "much" higher than the 08?

[GXT]

frankly, I wouldn't put much confidence in an article like that - reviewers for magazines so often push cars way hard. To get 20mpg in a regular vue under reasonable driving habits would be shameful, let alone in the hybrid. All that article tells me is the Vue hybrid doesn't get good fuel economy when pushed really hard. How many hybrid owners buy their vehicles then push them hard? More often they obsess about driving like a grandma & getting the best fuel economy.

If you take a look here you will see some more "real-world" #s:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?acti...el=Vue%20Hybrid

I wish the sample size was a bit larger, but you will see that the heavy city drivers are getting in the 22s for MPG.

According to that site it also looks like the RAV-4s and CR-Vs get in the 21s for heavy city drivers.

~5% better city fuel economy is not a great result for a hybrid.

Edited July 21, 2008 by GXT

[Drew Dowdell]

Any hybrid vehicle "study" that frames ROI in terms of time rather than distance @ cost per gallon is bunk.

The best comparison is cost per mile @ N price per gallon

[PurdueGuy]

Let's throw the #s out there. I'll use the 2007 Vue GL, since the '08 only has 2 entries, which is worthless for real comparisons. 12 for the '07 isn't great, but much better.

From user entered #s

'07 Vue GL:

23 city 32 hwy 26.2 comb

'07 Rav4 2wd 4cyl:

21 city 28 hwy 24.6 comb

'07 Honda CR-V 2wd:

21 city 32 hwy 25.5 comb

Vue vs Rav4

9.5% city, 14% hwy, 6.5% comb

Vue vs CR-V

9.5% city, 0% hwy, 2% comb

I punched the #s not sure how the Vue would come out. It's about what I guessed, though - not awesome by any means, but I don't know the cost comparison on buying the vue vs the honda or toyota, or the size comparisons of each.

I really wish I could compare the Vue GL vs the regular Vue, as that's a much more meaningful comparison when looking at what the hybrid system is doing. Unfortunately, there are only 1-2 reports for the regular 4cyl automatic Vue per year for the '05-'07 range, so a meaningful comparison can't be made. I punched the numbers when the Vue GL was first coming out, though, and without a tax rebate (which almost completely covered the cost increase), the BAS system in the Vue was paying for itself in about 130k miles IIRC. That was when gas was probably in the $3-3.50 range.

I'm not saying the Vue GL is amazing, it's not. But the numbers have shown the BAS system in the Vue to be worthwhile (hopefully much more so in the next gen BAS system), as long as the system proves reliable, simply because the system pays for itself within (what I consider to be) a reasonable lifespan. Unfortunately, the Aura numbers did not look as favorable when I punched them out.

[CARBIZ]

I skimmed the article, then dismissed it as a poorly written piece of crap.

$3,995 MORE for the Malibu Hybrid?

Ah, hello - IDIOT - when you get the hybrid version, you also get the 1LT equipment (Stablitrak, etc) not available on the LS, so the price increase (apples to apples) is $2,100. That's HALF.

That doesn't make for as sensational headlines, though.

[GXT]

I'm not saying the Vue GL is amazing, it's not. But the numbers have shown the BAS system in the Vue to be worthwhile (hopefully much more so in the next gen BAS system), as long as the system proves reliable, simply because the system pays for itself within (what I consider to be) a reasonable lifespan. Unfortunately, the Aura numbers did not look as favorable when I punched them out.

I picked only the accurate-looking high-% city numbers to compare because there is too much noise in general on that site. For example that one Vue entry getting 32MPG with 46% city. That is 22% higher than than the rated fuel economy and way out of line with the other entries.

This reviewer managed 23.5 MPG with the Vue Hybrid in mult-day driving:

http://www.canadiandriver.com/ctc/blog/tru...-vue-hybrid.htm

Add 22.2 with the CR-V:

http://www.canadiandriver.com/ctc/blog/tru...nda-cr-v-ex.htm

Unfortunately their Rav-4 review used the V6.

That is just under 6%. 6% is very bad. I expect more like 40-50% from a hybrid.

I laugh when I hear GM advertising their hybrids as the cheapest in the industry (or do they say "least expensive"?). Sometimes you get what you pay for.

[siegen]

Ah, hello - IDIOT - when you get the hybrid version, you also get the 1LT equipment (Stablitrak, etc) not available on the LS, so the price increase (apples to apples) is $2,100. That's HALF.

Same story with the other vehicles, especially the Civic. The author did no feature comparisons at all, just took the base model in each circumstance and compared it right over. Very poor information. By comparing the Prius to the Accord in particular, the author managed to make the Prius look really good with a one year payback period.