- #203 of 1054
-
Re: In answer to both.. [kdhspyder]
by coldcranker
-
Jan 18, 2009 (1:18 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jan 18, 2009 10:54 am)
kdhspyder said: "Yes there are certainly those that will not look at the FFH for a variety of reasons, not as much power as the V6, antipathy against the idea of hybrids, fear, normal reticence toward changes, etc. "
I'm not in that group, as you accused me of. The group I'm in says why pay $7,000 more for the batteries/electrics in a Fusion Hyb than a comparably equipped plain Fusion that still gets 33 MPG hiway. My group also doesn't like the decrease in braking performance, handling, and steering from hauling around the extra 400 lbs of batteries/electrics over a plain Fusion. My group also doesn't put on over 15,000 miles per year, which means its very difficult to recoup the extra $7,000 cost sooner than about 8 years.
|
- #204 of 1054
-
Re: In answer to both.. [coldcranker]
by gregg_vw
-
Jan 18, 2009 (5:03 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: coldcranker (Jan 18, 2009 1:18 pm)
Well then don't buy the FFH! It is not for you (or your "group."). But please understand that some of us are not figuring things the way you do, and "difficult to recoup the extra $7,000" may not be part of the buying decision. You buy a car for the reasons you lay out, but you must realize that other people buy cars for reasons that may not fit how you calculate things. Enjoy your 33 mpg Fusion--it's a great car--but not everything can be broken down to cost per mile, and anyway not everyone agrees how to calculate that. A simple statement that you have looked at the pros and cons and made your decision will suffice. It doesn't matter if I don't agree with your calculations. Once you decide, who cares if I don't share your view?
|
- #205 of 1054
-
Re: In answer to both.. [kdhspyder]
by bpizzuti
-
Jan 18, 2009 (5:32 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Jan 18, 2009 12:28 pm)
You know, that's really something the Feds should take up, maybe as part of fueleconomy.gov or something. You know if one of the manufacturers does it it's going to be rigged. Maybe we can get Edmunds to do it. Nexpart and Nexcat are pay-for-play so we couldn't realistically do it.
|
- #206 of 1054
-
Re: In answer to both.. [gregg_vw]
by coldcranker
-
Jan 18, 2009 (6:21 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: gregg_vw (Jan 18, 2009 5:03 pm)
gregg_vw said "Well then don't buy the FFH! It is not for you (or your "group."). "
Thank-you! I'm free now, because of your permission.
|
- #207 of 1054
-
Re: In answer to both.. [coldcranker]
by bobgwtw
-
Jan 18, 2009 (9:01 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: coldcranker (Jan 18, 2009 6:21 pm)
Seems to me everyone's leaving one very important factor out of these discussions - depreciation or residual value. Depreciation is the largest single cost of owning a car; and so far the hybrid's are depreciating at a significantly lower rate than the gassers.
|
- #208 of 1054
-
Re: In answer to both.. [bobgwtw]
by kdhspyder
-
Jan 19, 2009 (3:26 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: bobgwtw (Jan 18, 2009 9:01 pm)
Yes this is true. It's one of the key costs in owning any vehicle. It's why back in post #202 I emphasized 'RESALE VALUE'. Depending on how long one keeps the vehicle a good portion of the 'hybid premium' is recovered upon resale. OTOH if the vehicles are kept for a long period of time like 10-12 years or until they are run into the ground then there is no 'recovery of the hybrid premium' ..but.. the savings in fuel costs over that 12 yr period are greater than the extra paid upfront.
Then there is the ridiculous situation of last summer where 1 y.o. hybrids were selling at higher prices than NEW hybrids at MSRP. Not only was there no depreciation but after one year there was significan't appreciation. Highly unusual? Yes but that was the situation for the better part of 3-4 months.
|
- #209 of 1054
-
Re: In answer to both.. [coldcranker]
by gregg_vw
-
Jan 19, 2009 (6:44 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: coldcranker (Jan 18, 2009 6:21 pm)
you are welcome...don't mention it
|
- #210 of 1054
-
Electric Mileage
by bigt
-
Jan 24, 2009 (9:59 am)
-
|
|
The Milian HB uses only batteries while you stay under 47 mph. Does anyone know how many miles you can drive in this mode before the gas engine kicks in to recharge the batteries? I read somewhere that it is only 1-3 miles. If this is true then isn't sort of a joke about getting great carbon free electric mileage?
|
- #211 of 1054
-
Re: Electric Mileage [bigt]
by akirby
-
Jan 24, 2009 (10:11 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: bigt (Jan 24, 2009 9:59 am)
That's not exactly true. It is *possible* to go up to 47 mph but you have to be really careful. A little extra throttle and the gas engine has to kick in. Remember that these are not electric vehicles and don't have the battery power necessary to run for long distances. The battery allows the gas engine to be turned off at slower speeds or while stopped. The only thing a hybrid buys you is better mpg than a non-hybrid. It is NOT a substitute for a gasoline engine.
|
- #212 of 1054
-
Re: Electric Mileage [akirby]
by bigt
-
Jan 24, 2009 (11:18 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: akirby (Jan 24, 2009 10:11 am)
Hi, I am curious what happens in a HB vehicle when you start it in the freezing cold and turn on the heater. I assume the gas engine immediately kicks in? Does the same thing occur during the summer when you turn on the AC?
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles 
