Honda Accord Hybrid - worth the extra $$$? - READ ONLY

223 messages, Last post on Feb 07, 2006 at 6:12 PM

You are in the Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer

This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Hybrids Host for directions! discussion.

What is this discussion about? Honda Accord, Hybrid Cars

Outline

Messages Page 2 of 23: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; ...; 23; Prev; Next; Last

#10 of 223 HAH a great car for the Yuppie by gagrice Jan 18, 2005 (6:12 pm)
If you have a good job and the house is secure. I say the car makes little difference. If you are a young couple and allow yourself to get seduced into the HAH it is a shame. Even worse if you don't own a home. That car may be the down you need to get qualified. I have a great story about a couple in our church. They were looking for a car a couple years ago. They also wanted to buy a nice home. They passed on the expensive car and bought a nice Elantra hatchback. Plenty of room for the two kids. They were able to qualify for a $200k home in the suburbs. The husband got transferred to TX this last fall. They sold that home for $490,000 moved to TX bought a bigger home cash and had enough left to buy a new Volvo cash. The moral of this story is get your priorities in order before you buy an expensive car. Replies to this message: gfedchak (Jan 20, 2005 2:32 am)
#12 of 223 thinking HAH , HAH by luckylou Jan 19, 2005 (8:10 am)
My wife and I want to simplified our life as we get older. We have been looking into getting a Honda hybrid but thanks to this discussion and other related topics here at Edmunds , we can make the correct decision. Now we have been leaning toward the EX I4 with leather and NAV. it does very good mileage and is very reliable .The difference in price with the HAH is quite a few thousands . Once the Huppla on the HAH passes the prices will drop and other good changes will be added to this hybrid, hopefully the moonroof and trunk space and perhaps bringing back the station wagon. Lou
#13 of 223 Re: A new type of Hybrid [gagrice] by robertsmx Jan 19, 2005 (8:12 am)
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 18, 2005 2:50 pm) That is what those that purchase are hoping for in mileage What would you say about those who aren't achieving the promiseland from EPA world with a non-hybrid? Common sense dictates that a more efficient way of utilizing energy is going to return better results. Now, what does this "better" to? Certainly not firing in the dark, but similar style and conditions. Apples to Apples, not Apples to Fruit cake. Replies to this message: gagrice (Jan 19, 2005 8:29 am) robertsmx (Jan 19, 2005 9:46 am)
#14 of 223 Re: A new type of Hybrid [robertsmx] by gagrice Jan 19, 2005 (8:29 am)
Replying to: robertsmx (Jan 19, 2005 8:12 am) What would you say about those who aren't achieving the promiseland from EPA world with a non-hybrid? I would say EPA estimates are going to be closer with the non-hybrid car. Consumer Affairs agrees with that conclusion. Only one HAH has lived up to the EPA estimates for the owners reporting their mileage on green hybrid. "Zero emission" hybrid cars are all the rage at the moment. Consumers who want to be eco-friendly like them. Time-obsessessed bureaucrats in the D.C. area are snapping them up because zero emission vehicles are allowed to use car-pool lanes. Others are buying them because, with gas prices around $2, they expect to reap huge savings in fuel, which is where the gotcha comes into play. Truth be told, most drivers don't get the 45 miles per gallon they expect in city driving. Reason? The federally-mandated fuel tests don't measure hybrids properly. Many drivers may find themselves getting around 30 mpg in city driving. Replies to this message: robertsmx (Jan 19, 2005 9:46 am)
#15 of 223 Re: A new type of Hybrid [gagrice] by robertsmx Jan 19, 2005 (9:46 am)
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 19, 2005 8:29 am) Not necessarily. EPA estimates are going to be close regardless of hybrid or non-hybrid orientation of the car if the driving conditions involve similar situations as EPA adopts to estimate the fuel economy. To understand “how close”, you must realize that 10% of 20 mpg is just 2 mpg, or 18-22 mpg spread. OTOH, 10% at 40 mpg comes to a range of 36-44 mpg. So you’re correct, the former would be “closer” when you look at absolute number, but in percentage, may not be. As for real world fuel economy in the same world, we haven’t seen enough of comparisons to draw conclusions that anti-hybrid sentiments use. There was one that I remember, yes the one C&D had a few months ago with 4-5 cars driven over a range and varied circumstances. We have discussed it before. Need to do it again? If you want 45 mpg in city driving, get Civic Hybrid. Accord Hybrid isn't supposed to fill-in for every aspect of a car ranging from a micro car to a heavy duty pickup truck. Take it for what it is! "Zero emission" hybrid cars are all the rage at the moment. Is it, really? I didn’t know that. If you want zero emissions, go for it. But stereotyping hybrid technology makes no sense to me. If it offers cleaner (relative, not absolute term), greater efficiency and at similar or better performance, I couldn’t complain about it. But then I must not be keeping up with the times.
#16 of 223 by electrictroy Jan 19, 2005 (10:58 am)
FUEL SAVINGS OF ACCORD HYBRID vs. A 30mpg CAR ($3.00 a gallon) 100,000 miles = $1200 200,000 miles = $2400 300,000 miles = $3600 (engine dies; no battery replacement) Financially, I still think it makes more sense to buy the cheaper, non-hybrid car for $20-25,000. troy Replies to this message: dewey (Jan 19, 2005 11:18 am) robertsmx (Jan 19, 2005 1:00 pm)
#17 of 223 Re: [electrictroy] by dewey Jan 19, 2005 (11:18 am)
Replying to: electrictroy (Jan 19, 2005 10:58 am) electrictoy, the above figures are dependent on what you assume gas prices are! Unless you are some Great Oracle, nobody knows how high or low future gas prices will be! The gas saving payoff of a HAH may be worhwhile---depending on what prices of gas you project in the future.
#18 of 223 by electrictroy Jan 19, 2005 (11:26 am)
Which is why I computed $3.00 a gallon... about 1 dollar higher than the current average. troy Replies to this message: dewey (Jan 19, 2005 7:35 pm) robertsmx (Jan 20, 2005 6:23 am)
#19 of 223 Re: [electrictroy] by robertsmx Jan 19, 2005 (1:00 pm)
Replying to: electrictroy (Jan 19, 2005 10:58 am) Financially, it would make more sense to not own a car and either bike/walk or start using public transportation, if possible.