backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 176 comment(s) - last by Jedi2155.. on Aug 15 at 5:16 PM

Prius Converted to Plug-in  (Source: News.com)
Hybrid conversion kits cost around $10,000 on average

There are number of hybrid vehicles on the road today -- including the Toyota Prius -- but the road to full electric vehicles is a long one. The problem with achieving full electric vehicles isn't that manufacturers can't build them; it's that today's battery technology simply doesn't provide the driving range needed by the majority of drivers.

Sales of hybrid vehicles are up and some hybrid owners are taking matters into their own hands with third-party conversions to turn their hybrid vehicles into plug-in hybrids.

Several small startups are trying to woo hybrid car owners -- especially those who own the Toyota Prius -- into their shops to have the vehicles converted into plug-in hybrids. As it ships from the manufacturer, the Toyota Prius does not plug into the electrical grid. Rather, the vehicle uses a gasoline motor that recharges the batteries inside the car to increase overall fuel economy. The Prius can run on electric power alone, but typically does so only for short distances.

Small companies trying to market conversion kits to turn the Prius into a plug-in hybrid are boasting that their plug-in conversions will allow the Prius to be driven 40 miles on batteries alone. The same firms also claim that the overall fuel economy averages about 100 miles per gallon. The catch is that the third-party conversion kits are expensive -- typically costing around $10,000.

However, Felix Kramer founder of CalCars told News.com that there are around 200 plug-in hybrid conversions already on the roads since conversions started in 2004. Kramer looks at the plug-in hybrid realistically. With the current maximum range of 40 miles, the plug-in is the ideal second car in his opinion for commuters who still have a larger SUV or similar vehicle for the weekend or longer trips.

There are a few mechanics and car dealers currently installing plug-in hybrid conversions according to News.com, including Plug-In Supply. The company is selling $5,000 conversion kits that allow the Prius driver to travel 20 miles on fully charged lead acid batteries alone. For $11,000, the driver can get a lithium-iron phosphate battery kit in place of the lead acid batteries. The kit prices don't include installation, which can run another $1,000.

Safety of plug-in converted hybrids has been a concern after a Prius that had been converted burst into flames in June. According to News.com, a third-party investigator blamed improper assembly for the fire, not the hybrid conversion kit itself.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/13/2008 2:52:18 PM , Rating: 5
How does one save money by paying the roughly $5000 premium for a hybrid car then paying another $10k for the LI battery conversion? That does not compute. Considering the car will be dumped in another 5 years, you'll never make up the cost of the vehicle let alone the conversion kit.




RE: Saving money?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/13/2008 3:01:07 PM , Rating: 3
Most hybrids don't make much financial sense to me. I'd take a reasonably fuel efficient car with good handling over a hybrid boat with low rolling resistance tires.


RE: Saving money?
By chris2618 on 8/13/2008 3:53:59 PM , Rating: 2
If you had to pay nearly $10 a gallon they start to make a bit more sense


RE: Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/13/2008 4:21:27 PM , Rating: 3
The argument still applies. You don't spend nearly or even over $30k in car costs plus conversion costs to save money. If you want to save money, REDUCE your costs.

For example: get a cheaper house or just stay in the one you're in for 20 years instead of the typical 10 (move when you retire), keep that old TV instead buying a new one, keep that old computer around for 6 years instead of 3, have two used cars instead of two new one's, turn off lights that aren't being used, only wash clothes and dishes (if you have a dish washer) during off-peak times. I can create a list for you if you like. There's tons of ways to save money. Buying more expensive cars or just plain buying more stuff isn't one of them.


RE: Saving money?
By maverick85wd on 8/13/2008 5:36:40 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with all your recommendations for being efficient. At the same time, early adopters pay for what they're doing now so we can all afford them in the future.

If I had the money I'd love to have a car that got me 40 miles a day without having to stop for gas, if for no other reason than it takes time out of my day and can be a nuisance. If I had the money what's an extra 15 grand for that convenience?


RE: Saving money?
By masher2 (blog) on 8/13/2008 5:43:19 PM , Rating: 2
> "...without having to stop for gas, if for no other reason than it takes time out of my day and can be a nuisance. If I had the money what's an extra 15 grand for that convenience?"

The time you save in gassing up a bit less often is going to be far outweighed by the need to plug in and unplug the vehicle every time you stop.


RE: Saving money?
By Jedi2155 on 8/13/2008 7:24:40 PM , Rating: 1
I don't know how long it takes to for one to plug it into a wall outlet but I bet it doesn't take more time over a day than it does to fill up. I fill up about once every week to week and a half for about 320 miles of driving each fill up taking up a minimum of 7-10 minutes of time such as waiting for the slow as heck credit card reader (worse if you pay with cash) plus the extra drive to the station and getting in and out of the car.

Versus driving home into the garage and just plugging it in to the nearest outlet which should take no more than 30 seconds to do each day. In either case these are minuscule amounts of time saved comparable to extra step in the bathroom such as washing your hands after every use which I heartily recommend everyone do.


RE: Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/13/08, Rating: -1
RE: Saving money?
By lightfoot on 8/13/2008 8:44:42 PM , Rating: 2
You do not stand by the car while it is recharging - you do when you refuel.

He is counting the 30 seconds of active participation required to plug in the car, just as it takes 5-10 minutes of active participation to refuel a car. Not that it seems like much of a savings either way.


RE: Saving money?
By omnicronx on 8/13/2008 11:45:54 PM , Rating: 2
Dont forget that you need to leave your car for x amount of hours for it to fully recharge, or you will end up going to the gas station anyways. If you are only using the car for your 10 minute commute to the train station then you have no problem, but what about after getting home from a day of work and having to drive your kids, pick up food, etc etc.. you just are not going to have that long recharge time and you will spend time waiting for your car to charge..

I always laugh at my friend who had a similar conversion done on his prius, when he tells me that he cant come out tonight because he is letting his car charge and it is a fire hazard so he cannot leave.. People never think of that one... which you should considering we are talking about a 3rd party conversion kit here..


RE: Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/13/2008 11:53:21 PM , Rating: 2
Really? Is that something the conversion company wants its customers to do to prevent lawsuits?


RE: Saving money?
By omnicronx on 8/14/2008 8:14:41 AM , Rating: 2
Its a giant battery that is not a stock part.. to me, its pretty much common sense.


RE: Saving money?
By Alexstarfire on 8/14/2008 8:19:47 AM , Rating: 2
Fire hazard? I've yet to hear that one, and I'm pretty well read, and versed, on plug-in conversions.

Anyways... that's the guy's personal preference. He could come out, but doesn't want to. Maybe he's just using that as an excuse?


RE: Saving money?
By whirabomber on 8/14/2008 8:43:15 AM , Rating: 1
Yes, I guess a prius is more likely to burst into flames while driving than charging.

This article does clear up why GM expects folks to pay $30-35k for the Volt.


RE: Saving money?
By omnicronx on 8/14/2008 9:34:41 AM , Rating: 2
Really? because I have never heard of one bursting into flames while driving.. on the other hand...

http://www.dailytech.com/Retrofitted+Plugin+Prius+...


RE: Saving money?
By trisct on 8/14/2008 4:05:54 PM , Rating: 2
Quote:

On its final voyage, the driver noticed that the back seat caught on fire -- the driver then quickly pulled over to the side of the road and was able to exit the vehicle.

/Q

Sounds to me like this actually IS an example of one bursting into flames while driving. Not the other hand at all.


RE: Saving money?
By Jedi2155 on 8/15/2008 5:16:32 PM , Rating: 2
Keep in mind that there is about 40 miles of range on the battery. If you couldn't be bothered to unplug and drive out a lot, just don't plug it in until the end of the day. Unless you're constantly driving around like a night hawk, I'm sure most people are in their homes and not likely to leave for at least 8 hours a day as one typically needs sleep which is enough to charge up the entire battery.


RE: Saving money?
By lothar98 on 8/14/2008 5:50:39 AM , Rating: 2
If that's what you really want, cars like that are already available today, you just have to change your mindset on what you really want to be driving on a daily basis. check this out for instance
http://blogs.thecarconnection.com/blogs/marty_blog...

Most people in the U.S. still think of diesel as a large truck only option. Personally I don't think that's the case anymore.

You can also look up the smart car as another option. Both can get 40 mpg and "fill-up" a lot faster than a pure electric.


RE: Saving money?
By therealnickdanger on 8/14/2008 7:42:01 AM , Rating: 2
RE: Saving money?
By Alexstarfire on 8/14/2008 8:21:55 AM , Rating: 2
ahhh, highway mpg... only suckers look at that to figure out how much mpg a car gets. That may apply to other countries.. but the highways in the US aren't much better than taking local roads when it comes to job commuting.


RE: Saving money?
By rdeegvainl on 8/14/2008 10:43:07 AM , Rating: 2
or people that it actually applies to. Take michigan for example. lots of highway driving, that isn't backed up. Easy to get optimal mileage on the highway, like the stretch between reed city and cadillac that I lived by. 30 miles of easy going 4 lane highway. It actually stretches down to grand rapids. Or in my mother-in-laws example, she drives to peoples homes all around the northern michigan area, taking in mostly highway miles. yeah I know, not everyone situation is like that, but to say only suckers look at that, is to completely write off anyone that does a lot of driving.


RE: Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/14/2008 11:53:44 AM , Rating: 2
I look at hwy miles because that's my typical drive. I get right smack on the hwy figure for my car and I have a leadfoot. Driving a bit more sedately and without any trick driving methods, I can get 33 mpg easily. If you live in an urban area, then hwy mileage is meaningless but that doesn't mean it doesn't apply to everyone.


RE: Saving money?
By Solandri on 8/13/2008 4:54:53 PM , Rating: 5
Assume $5k premium plus $10k battery conversion.

Average U.S. electricity cost is $0.10/kWh.
A Prius uses approx $0.262 kWh/mile.
That works out to 2.62 cents/mile.

Say a Prius-equivalent gas car gets 35 mpg.
At $10/gal, that works out to 28.57 cents/mile.

The all-electric Prius saves you $0.2595/mile.
To make back the $15k initial investment would thus take 57,800 miles.

If gas is $4/gal, the gas car uses 11.43 cents/mile.
To make back the $15k initial investment would then take 170,260 miles.

(Beware people saying gas cars cost $0.50-$0.80/mile. I've seen at least one electric car proponent make this mistake. That cost includes depreciation, licensing, insurance, etc. All of these are costs that an electric car would incur as well. The $ cost of operating a gas car is just the gasoline burned plus any maintenance needed above an electric car.)


RE: Saving money?
By SilthDraeth on 8/13/2008 5:08:26 PM , Rating: 2
and at an average driving rate of 5k per year, it would take 10 years to make up the cost of $10 per gallon gas, or nearly 35 years at $4 dollar a gallon gas.

If you drive more per day than lower the total time.

That is why a Prius makes no sense over a Corolla unless you pay the exact same price for either or.


RE: Saving money?
By blaster5k on 8/13/2008 5:21:41 PM , Rating: 3
I bought a Civic not long ago (to replace a 17-year old compact). Since I drive maybe 10k miles a year at most, the hybrid didn't make any sense. And cars without manual shifters are no fun anyway.


RE: Saving money?
By othercents on 8/14/2008 10:11:36 AM , Rating: 2
Same here, but I purchased a used 1999 Civic with cash from the sale of my 2006 Altima. Now I don't have a $350 per month car payment, I drive 300 miles per month to and from work, and the Civic gets around 30 miles per gallon. When you are comparing something you own against something you have to get a loan for, it doesn't make much sense. However if you own an SUV that gets 15 mpg and can get a Prius for the same loan payment, then it might make more sense.

However If gas got all the way up to $10 a gallon, I would buy a bike and pedal to work. $100 per month on gas to drive 14 miles to and from work when I could just as easily pedal there is ridiculous.

D


RE: Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/14/2008 11:56:06 AM , Rating: 2
I'll take $100 a month at $10 gas. That's nothing. We spend more than that in a week between our two cars.


RE: Saving money?
By theoflow on 8/14/2008 3:33:33 PM , Rating: 2
I really don't mean to be rude, and I am not telling you to bike to work, but why not start biking to work now?

I live about 10 miles from work and have been thinking about starting to bike to work. I even think 3/4 of the trip has a bike lane.

I am just wondering what are the reasons why people don't bike to work so I can convince myself that I should bike to work.


RE: Saving money?
By roastmules on 8/15/2008 2:50:04 AM , Rating: 2
However, if you look at current prices, a 5-year old Prius is worth more than a 1-2 year old Suburban...

I recently had my grandmother in-law buy a big SUV, since it was cheap, and she only drives about 100mi/month. The total cost is quite cheap, as for 100mi/month the price of gas is negligible.

I however, have a 300-HP, AWD, 27-mpg Volvo V70R. Great power, handling and good mileage to boot - better than any SUV, and just as much cargo capacity.


RE: Saving money?
By Alexstarfire on 8/14/2008 8:29:30 AM , Rating: 2
5k? What have you been looking at? The average amount driven per year is closer to 12k, and the government says 15k. If you drive 5k then that's great. The best way to save money is to not drive, but it's far from the yearly average in the US.


RE: Saving money?
By blaster5k on 8/13/2008 5:11:47 PM , Rating: 2
That doesn't factor in any added maintenance costs as a result of the conversion. I don't think the extra battery will go the distance without being replaced.

But anyway, it seems the only way you get a payback in any reasonable time is by NOT being environmentally friendly and driving a heck of a lot.


RE: Saving money?
By JustTom on 8/13/2008 5:38:40 PM , Rating: 2
This is a good point. But how much maintenence is saved on the gas motor because it is being used so much less often?


RE: Saving money?
By calyth on 8/13/2008 6:37:16 PM , Rating: 2
AFAIK, the engine oil has detergents that also break down over time. Hence the advice that if you put a car for storage, give it new oil, and when you start to drive it again, change that oil again.

So not using the gas engine that often doesn't linearly decrease the cost of maintaining it, I think.


RE: Saving money?
By mindless1 on 8/13/2008 9:37:28 PM , Rating: 2
It definitely decreases the cost of maintaining it. Variable speed engines driven constantly break down the oil faster, require more frequent oil changes and typically use more oil.

Put a good synthetic in a small engine and don't run it often and you can easily go a few years between oil changes. Further, there's a lot more to engine maintenance costs than an oil change and if it's designed to be reasonably yielding to the owner changing the oil then you don't even have to pay shop overhead to do it nor be annoyed by their taking your air filter/etc out trying to sell you a new one.

If someone does it themselves and supposing the annual cost of the oil change were $20, that's a mere $200 over a 10 year span which is a very low cost for most automobile maintenance and repair.

Use something mechanical more often and it breaks down sooner unless designed so well that it runs until all the parts have rotted or rusted away.


RE: Saving money?
By blaster5k on 8/13/2008 11:37:36 PM , Rating: 2
You can get more wear over time though if the car is exposed to the elements -- even if it doesn't have as much use. Here in New England, we've got big temperature swings and salts used on the roads during the winter. These take their toll on a car.

The temperatures are also bad for some battery types and can significantly reduce their life.


RE: Saving money?
By Doormat on 8/13/2008 5:34:08 PM , Rating: 2
The US average is something around 12-13K mi/yr. So at $4/gal, that's 13 years. You'd be buying a new battery before then, resetting 2/3rds of the price. You're not likely to catch up, ever.

At $10/gal its an easy decision to make - under 5 years. But it'll be a while before we get there (I'm figuring average gas prices will go up $1/yr for the foreseeable future).


RE: Saving money?
By FITCamaro on 8/13/2008 6:01:40 PM , Rating: 2
If we start drilling our own oil and increasing our refining capacity, it'll likely fall.


RE: Saving money?
By websfear on 8/13/2008 10:30:04 PM , Rating: 2
You have either been smoking something weird or you really believe that piece of crap line.

They can drill all they want, and even build new refineries - it isn't going to matter one bit because it is all going to go to China, Japan or Europe.

Unless they can impose a limit on the Oil Companies that oil drilled in the US must stay in the US, we will never be oil independent.


RE: Saving money?
By masher2 (blog) on 8/13/2008 10:44:31 PM , Rating: 2
> "They can drill all they want, and even build new refineries - it isn't going to matter one bit because it is all going to go to China, Japan or Europe"

Eh? Oil is a world commodity; the laws of supply and demand still apply. If the US -- or any other nation -- increases production, it will reduce prices. This is inescapable. Furthermore, oil is fungible, meaning each barrel of new production has essentially the same effect, no matter where its produced.

Now, if demand is escalating extremely quickly, prices may continue to rise despite supply increases. However that's irrelevant. Without that new supply, prices would have risen even further...so the new production did in fact lower prices as compared to what they would have otherwise been.


RE: Saving money?
By bpurkapi on 8/13/2008 11:57:54 PM , Rating: 2
You supply more oil and the price goes down a little and suddenly more people are once again using more oil. This is a never ending cycle, when you look at the millions of Chinese and Indians just buying their first cars you can see how the supply of oil will never be able to truly match demand. A small price decrease due to new supplies is quickly gobbled up by a very hungry world.


RE: Saving money?
By masher2 (blog) on 8/14/2008 1:17:21 AM , Rating: 1
To correct two fallacies in your post, demand always equals supply. It's a commmon misconception that demand can perpetually be larger than supply. If this were true, the gas pumps would soon be running dry...world stocks are generally only a couple months worth.

The larger fallacy is that a small supply increase can't have a large effect on prices. Oil prices follow a relatively inelastic curve. Just as a small decrease in supply can cause prices to skyrocket, a small increase can cause a huge decrease.

Take a look at recent US consumption data, for instance. A doubling of gasoline prices resulted in only a 4% drop in consumption. By corollary, a 4% increase in supply would -- holding all other factors constant -- result in close to a 50% drop in prices.


RE: Saving money?
By jabber on 8/14/2008 5:54:26 AM , Rating: 1
Supply always equals demand?

Nintendo Wii?


RE: Saving money?
By Alexstarfire on 8/14/2008 8:35:49 AM , Rating: 2
Well, he's not exactly wrong. You can't buy more than there already is; therefore, you can't ever exceed the supply, but he's still wrong. Demand doesn't always equal supply. Just look at the ET game on the Atari and tell me that line again. How many were put into landfills because they didn't sell..... 2.5 million or so of the 4 million produced. Yea, that's close enough to be equal.


RE: Saving money?
By masher2 (blog) on 8/14/2008 9:08:47 AM , Rating: 2
> "Supply always equals demand? Nintendo Wii?"

You didn't read the entire post. Supply always equals demand in a situation (such as gasoline) where stocks aren't increasing or decreasing.

The Wii makes the point. Demand outstripped supply...and the shelves quickly ran empty, preventing people from buying product.

Until you see gas pumps running dry (or the converse, gasoline being dumped because all the storage tanks are full), supply equals demand.


RE: Saving money?
By Alexstarfire on 8/14/2008 8:47:07 AM , Rating: 3
The first part of your comparison is pretty accurate. Large increase in price didn't take much off of the supply. A lot of that comes from that fact that we HAVE to get to work. Many people live far away from where they work. I know at my parent's work place they have a couple people who drive 2 hours on the HIGHWAY to get to work. They live something like 50+ miles away. That's just stupid, but far from the point.

If you honestly believe a 4% increase in supply would result in a 50% drop in price... then you are smoking some of the good stuff my friend. No doubt the price would drop.... but you forget that the demand will just increase to pick up the slack. Increases in price don't hurt demand that much. The same can't be said about big decreases in price. Big decreases in price... all at once... just means that demand is going to kick in because people think..."what a deal." They rush to buy it before the price goes back up. As a result... the price goes up. Maybe not back to normal... but still increases... and rather quickly.


RE: Saving money?
By masher2 (blog) on 8/14/2008 9:14:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you honestly believe a 4% increase in supply would result in a 50% drop in price... then you are smoking some of the good stuff my friend. No doubt the price would drop.... but you forget that the demand will just increase to pick up the slack
I don't forget that at all; it's an essential part of the analysis. Demand *always* equals supply. How much of a price drop does it take to force us to use 4% more gasoline? 50% -- according to the most recent US usage data.

Price exerts little influence on how much US drivers use their vehicles. Over the past year, prices doubled...and we only cut our driving by 4%. The inescapable corollary of that is that prices would have to drop back to the same level to force us to return to that same level of consumption.

Hence, a 4% increase in supply would (again, holding all other factors constant) result in a 50% drop in prices. Plain and simple.


RE: Saving money?
By JustTom on 8/14/2008 10:53:34 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Take a look at recent US consumption data, for instance. A doubling of gasoline prices resulted in only a 4% drop in consumption. By corollary, a 4% increase in supply would -- holding all other factors constant -- result in close to a 50% drop in prices.


This is not necessarily true. Shifting supply 4%, increasing the amount of gasoline available at any given price point by 4%, has no effect on the demand curve. The inelasticity of the demand curve demonstrated by a decrease of only 4% after doubling of prices indicates an increase of 4% in supplies would do little to lower prices. The actual decrease in price would be determined on how elastic the supply curve is. It is highly unlikely the inelasticity of the demand curve is matched by the supply curve. If you draw the curves you can easily visualize this. If a doubling in price brought about a 4% decrease in demand the resultant demand curve is highly inelastic. The highly inelastic nature of the demand curve argues against small changes in the supply curve creating large price changes.
Drillings primary benefit to the U.S. is not lower gasoline prices, although it would certainly help, but lower trade deficits.


RE: Saving money?
By BZDTemp on 8/14/2008 7:29:02 AM , Rating: 1
In your dreams.

The US is drilling all ready and actually started the whole "drill for oil" thing. For a long time the US production has been going down and new drilling will have to be very substantial to even do more than slightly slow down the drop in production.

Face it - the US uses so much oil more than a few fields will make any real difference. Plus it is a global market and I can't see India, China or Russia doing anything but needing more in the coming years. After all they are far behind the US in comsumption (Which btw. uses twice the energy of anyone else).

What could make a difference in the US is going away from those trucks and start running real compact cars with high mpg. Still even that is just a token - just try googling "peak oil". Be warned though it is grim reading!


RE: Saving money?
By Solandri on 8/14/2008 1:51:44 PM , Rating: 2
Comparing raw energy use across countries is stupid, like comparing the gas mileage of a bus vs. a car and declaring the car is the more efficient choice. Each country has different populations and different levels of economic productivity.

Of developed nations, Canada, Iceland, and Norway all use more energy per capita than the U.S. (Singapore too, but they're a city-state.) Iceland splurges on energy because they get so much of it free from geothermal and hydro (99.9%). Canada and Norway are major oil producing nations, and go figure it takes a lot of energy to extract energy.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_pri_ene_con_...

In terms of Energy Intensity (energy consumed per $ GDP generated), the U.S. is only slightly above the world average.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_...


RE: Saving money?
By FliGuyRyan on 8/13/2008 9:11:53 PM , Rating: 4
Ha, this displays the boatloads of ignorance of you and your comment. Our Prius now has high-performance (and no, I don't mean F1 racing either) tires and I'm getting 45 miles a gallon. My car handles almost (slightly less - for those less intelligent) as well as my other car with Toyos and low profiles.

We bought our Prius for $17K with 40k miles on it and it was pristine. I wouldn't have done it any other way considering it will hold almost the cubic feet of a Chevy S10 with a hard-shell over the bed.

I'll take my Prius...
-RC


RE: Saving money?
By lightfoot on 8/13/2008 9:22:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
We bought our Prius for $17K with 40k miles on it and it was pristine.


That is a great deal for you - but the question remains, was it a great deal for the original owner - the one who paid the premium and only drove it $40,000 miles during which time it depreciated $7,000.

Also how would that compare with other used vehicles?


RE: Saving money?
By Alexstarfire on 8/14/2008 9:33:35 AM , Rating: 2
It wouldn't. It'd be horrible. You can get quite a few domestic sedans for under $10k and only a few years old. The thing is... I wouldn't want a used domestic car. New ones are iffy enough.


RE: Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/14/2008 12:15:01 AM , Rating: 1
So what. I have a friend that bought an 2002 Prius for $1200 because it had a bad inverter. Fixed the inverter for $200. Discovered that gas engine was on it's way out and bought one from Japan for $400. $1800 total with all the work done by himself and he has a perfectly good car.

I could even justify this. Even if he had to drop $4000 on new batteries, that's still less than $6000 total invested. Now THAT'S a good deal. You got hosed in comparison.


RE: Saving money?
By Alexstarfire on 8/14/2008 8:39:14 AM , Rating: 2
Well.... whoever sold that car was a moron then. You just got lucky. That's by and far not what you're going to find most of the time.


RE: Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/14/2008 12:04:54 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't buy the car. It was a co-worker. Hey, it can happen. People aren't mechanics and it is a 6 year old car. The guy probably wanted a new one. The cheapest I've found were in the $8000 range but they were in running condition. I don't know how much one would cost that's not running.


RE: Saving money?
By FITCamaro on 8/13/2008 3:08:02 PM , Rating: 3
Exactly. You're going to spend $6-12,000 to save an extra few hundred dollars a year on gas? Let's say you saved an extra $400 a year on gas, it take you 15 years to make up that difference. So even at $800 a year, that's 7 and a half years to make up the difference. Then if you get the lithium ion battery those time periods are doubled. It's doubtful you'll keep the car 7 and a half years much less 15. And 30 years...yeah I doubt it. Plus the battery wouldn't last that long anyway and you'd have to pay to replace it. That's another $4-5,000.


RE: Saving money?
By kamel5547 on 8/13/2008 4:18:03 PM , Rating: 2
Hmmm... I don't agree with pretty much any of your figures. I rounded my calculations the worse way possible for my calculations.

My car (Camry) is 10 years old, 180,000+ miles. That makes roughly 18,000 miles per year. (I know its higher than average, but even at 12000 miles per year and 3.50 per gallon you save $770 per year.) Compared to the current Camry its 1 MPG less, so there isn't much difference there.

Assuming I would keep my next vehicle as long and maintain my current driving habits (and buy new) here are how the numbers would stack up for me based on gas averaging at $3.50 for the period (based on current government estimates).

(model,MSRP,combined EPA mileage,total gas usuage, fuel costs lifetime/cost per yer)
2008 Camry LE
21795 MSRP
25 MPG
7200 Gallons
$25200/$2520

2008 Prius + options
23595 MSRP
46 MPG
3913 Gallons
$13685/$1368

I won't ever make the argument that buying a hybrid (or pretty much any other vehicle) for the sole sake of saving money makes sense, but if you are in the market for a new vehicle, then it may not be any more expensive assuming you don't get a new car every 3 years.


RE: Saving money?
By TomZ on 8/13/2008 5:30:17 PM , Rating: 1
That's an invalid comparison because the Prius is a smaller car compared to a Camry. If you want an apples-to-apples comparison, you should compare the Camry to the Camry Hybrid.

Assuming your mileage is 80% highway, then the two models get:

Camry LE: 21*20% + 31*80% = 29MPG
Camry Hybrid: 33*20% + 34*80% = 33.8MPG

So at 18,000/year adn $3.50/gallon, that works out to $2172/year for the LE and $1864/year for the hybrid. The difference is about $300/year.

The cost difference between the two models is about $26,150 - $21,650 = $4500. Dividing that by $300/year is a 15-year breakeven, which exceeds the usable lifetime of the car.

And of course that assumes zero inflation...

So I agree with you that buying a hybrid, at today's prices, probably makes no sense for most people economically. A hybrid only really makes sense if you've got "money to burn."


RE: Saving money?
By Alexstarfire on 8/14/2008 9:08:55 AM , Rating: 2
Well, if you're going to compare a regular crap to it's crappy hybrid couterpart then yes, it's never going to look good. People compare it to the Prius because it's a hybrid from the ground up, not just tacked on. It gets better mileage as a result.

BTW, both the Camry and Prius are in the same vehicle class, mid-size. And looking at actual sizes the Camry is 6 cubic ft bigger, 110.6 compared to 116.4. That's not much difference. Most of it is in the passenger compartment. The truck is only .6 cubic feet bigger.


RE: Saving money?
By TomZ on 8/14/2008 10:10:11 AM , Rating: 2
It's not just the size of the cars that is different, but also the aerodynamics, rolling resistance, weight, etc. The Prius is fully optimized for high MPG. The Camry is more of a compromize design that gives you a slightly larger car with nicer styling and uses normal tires while still giving decent fuel economy.

Conversely, if you put a conventional IC powertrain into the Prius, you'd see pretty high gas mileage due to the chassis improvements.

So it's not that the Camry hybrid is "crappy" - it's just not totally optimized for efficiency like the Prius is. And it targets a different kind of buyer than Prius.


RE: Saving money?
By FITCamaro on 8/13/2008 6:03:56 PM , Rating: 2
I wasn't talking about hybrid vs. non-hybrid. I was talking about spending the money for the conversion kit to improve the hybrids mileage.


RE: Saving money?
By walk2k on 8/13/2008 3:41:27 PM , Rating: 2
Why would it be dumped in 5 years??

Sure you can make up a bunch of scenarios that don't make sense. "DURR I only drive 25 miles a year and get a new car every 2 months tHIS SUXXX!!!!1"

Yeah ok, how about a scenario that DOES make sense?

If you drive 50k miles a year, getting 40mpg in a Prius, that's 1250 gallons of gas, at $4.50 a gallon (average around here) that's over $5600 a year in gas, this thing would pay for itself in less than 2 years.

You also aren't funding terrorism or destroying the planet... if those are things that matter to you.


RE: Saving money?
By thornburg on 8/13/2008 3:49:14 PM , Rating: 2
You are both being extreme. 5 year life span in a car is very short-sighted. Toyota warranties the battery pack in a Prius for something like 8 years, so you figure at LEAST 8 years life on the car. 10 seems reasonable.

OTOH, driving 50,000 miles a year would be a minute portion of the population. However, lots of people do drive 20,000 miles in a year, so saving $1500+ per year is a reasonable assumption, especially if they are gambling that the price of gas will go back up, and keep rising. If the average cost of a gallon of gas over the next 8 years is $7, then hybrids and other very-high-efficiency vehicles will have paid off nicely. OTOH, if gas drops to $3.00 and stays there for a while, only creeping up slowly, say, averaging $4.25 over the next 8 years, then the hybrids are an OK choice, but something like a Yaris or Cobalt XFE would be a more economically sound choice.


RE: Saving money?
By masher2 (blog) on 8/13/2008 3:56:49 PM , Rating: 1
> "If the average cost of a gallon of gas over the next 8 years is $7..."

I'll lay any sum of money anyone cares to wager that the average price of gasoline over the next 8 years won't break $5, much less $7.


RE: Saving money?
By lightfoot on 8/13/2008 7:28:49 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I'll lay any sum of money anyone cares to wager that the average price of gasoline over the next 8 years won't break $5, much less $7.

Not if Obama has his way. Cap and Tax (I mean trade) could easily drive gas prices up to $8 per gallon, if not higher.

Europe already pays $7-8 per gallon and most of that is in tax.


RE: Saving money?
By jabber on 8/14/2008 5:57:40 AM , Rating: 2
We wish!

Make it $10+

You guys are still living in the early 1990's, enjoy it.

If I moved to the US your gas is still so cheap to what I'm used to paying I'd drive a 68 Dodge Charger everywhere and still think it cheap.


RE: Saving money?
By Alexstarfire on 8/14/2008 8:51:06 AM , Rating: 2
I'd stake all the money I'll ever make in my lifetime on that one. If you asked me 4 years ago if the average gas price would come close to $4 a gallon I'd have looked at your funny and just laughed. Yet look at where we are today. It's not as high as it was, like $3.50 a gallon on average now... but I don't forsee it going any lower.


RE: Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/14/2008 12:27:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
$4 a gallon I'd have looked at your funny and just laughed.
I wouldn't have laughed. I expected it but not this soon. I figured another couple of years yet.


RE: Saving money?
By futrtrubl on 8/13/2008 4:11:41 PM , Rating: 3
Has nobody thought about the cost of the electricity in all this? The energy to get you those 40 miles has to come from somewhere. I don't know the price of electricity in the USA and I don't know the amount of energy required to recharge the batteries for a 40 mile journey (not the same as the amount of energy required to do the journey due to inefficiency in charging) but it will make it less cost effective and environmentally friendly (electricity must be produced, mostly from fossil fuels), almost definitely significantly less.

Edward


RE: Saving money?
By masher2 (blog) on 8/13/2008 4:22:13 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
"I don't know the amount of energy required to recharge the batteries for a 40 mile journey (not the same as the amount of energy required to do the journey due to inefficiency in charging
NiMH batteries used in current hybrids have a rather poor coulumetric charging efficiency -- generally around 66%. Li-Ion batteries, however, are nearly perfectly efficient here, as high as 99%.

The real benefit is that electric power plants, even those operating from fossil fuels, have efficies much higher than a typical ICE. Over its entire RPM range, most car engines average arond 25% efficiency, whereas many coal plants approach 50%.


RE: Saving money?
By walk2k on 8/13/2008 4:19:51 PM , Rating: 2
It's extreme maybe but my friend drives over 50k a year. As I said gas is already well over $4.25, its over $4.50 even, and that's DOWN from a few weeks ago. It's only going to go UP from here, don't kid yourself. In Europe they have been paying $7-8 for YEARS.

The Prius batteries are warranted for 10 years I believe.

UC Davis did a study that figured a plugin car costs about 75 cents per gallon equiv. That's roughly $1 savings per 10 miles driven - at 20k a year that's $2000, this will pay for itself in 5 years and that's with an expensive aftermarket kit, when Toyota/etc start mass producing them it won't be a $10k premium, more like the $2-3k of hybrids now.


RE: Saving money?
By Solandri on 8/13/2008 7:52:07 PM , Rating: 3
50k miles/yr is a moot point since you can't do it on all-electric with this vehicle, at least not realistically at this point in time. It has a 40 mile range with an 8 hour recharge time. If you lived 40 miles from work, your work place allowed you recharge at work, and you worked 250 days/yr (50 weeks, 5 days/wk), you'd only rack up 20,000 miles. If you drove 40 miles each weekend day, that would add another 4,160 miles. Well short of 50,000 miles. Heck, you can't even achieve 20k miles unless you recharge at work. Charging overnight (when electric rates are cheapest and there's the most excess capacity) will only get you 14,600 miles/yr if you drive the max 40 miles every day.

Maybe in the future when every supermarket and Kwik-E-Mart has a high amperage quick recharge station, you'll be able to drive 50k miles/yr in one of these vehicles. But my bet is on battery technology increasing the range long before that happens.


RE: Saving money?
By Zoomer on 8/13/2008 8:39:22 PM , Rating: 2
"It's only going to go UP from here, don't kid yourself. In Europe they have been paying $7-8 for YEARS."

Unless US excise tax policy on gasoline changes, this is highly impossible.


RE: Saving money?
By lightfoot on 8/13/2008 8:58:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
...tax policy on gasoline changes, this is highly impossible.


That would take a politician who threatens to raise taxes on the middle class and wealthy, one who pushes Cap and Trade as a solution to our wealth problem (I mean "pollution" problem,) someone who threatens to INCREASE taxes on oil (called a "windfall" tax, but we all know who ends up paying,) and someone who refuses to invest in domestic production of oil. Good thing we only have one candidate like that running for president - what are the odds that he will win? At best 65-70%. Clearly impossible.


RE: Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/13/2008 5:15:28 PM , Rating: 2
LOL! I'm extreme? Ok. I guess no one buys a new car every 5 years, right? The car companies just refresh cars every 5 years for the hell of it, right?. Statistics showing people buying new cars every 5 years are BS too, right?

Why is it that people here think that their niche views are the norm? I mean I buy a car every 10 years so everyone else must do that too. Nope. It's every 5 years.


RE: Saving money?
By mindless1 on 8/13/2008 9:54:57 PM , Rating: 2
Actually no, statistics tend to show averages closer to 9 years. http://www.wheels.ca/article/191892

Realize this doesn't even count those people who don't get out and around much so they weren't participating in such surveys but would tend to have older than average automobiles.

Remember a lot of cars younger than that weren't even deliberately retired but were instead totalled, though that would still have to be considered a factor with a hybrid.

Yes, it's a bit extreme for a environmentally conscious tree hugger to replace their car frequently, though with a hybrid there is a reasonable counter argument in selling it while the battery has enough life left in it to be useful to the next owner, a lot of people wouldn't buy a used 10 year old car expecting to have to spend $10K to replace the battery. I suspect a lot of hybrids will be retrofitted with SLA in a few years if Li-Ion prices don't plummet.

As for car refresh rates they have a need to produce and have 3rd party support for compatible parts and constantlly retooling and redesigning wouldn't have a good financial return so they make more sweeping changes when they have enough technology or public style change perceptions to be worthwhile breaking the former compatibility of a model.


RE: Saving money?
By masher2 (blog) on 8/13/2008 10:16:48 PM , Rating: 2
> "Actually no, statistics tend to show averages closer to 9 years. "

Oops, you've confused the average age of the US fleet with the average time a car buyer keeps their new car. They're two wholly different statistics.

Yes, the 'average' car on the road is 9 years old...but by then, its usually been sold at least once.

> "Realize this doesn't even count those people who don't get out and around much "

Eh? The survey wasn't done by eyeballing cars on the road; its done by analyzing registration data from all 50 states. If your car is registered, it's counted.


RE: Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/14/2008 12:25:11 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Oops, you've confused the average age of the US fleet with the average time a car buyer keeps their new car.
Yep he did. CNW Marketing Research says that the average buyer keeps their car 59 months.


RE: Saving money?
By porkpie on 8/14/2008 12:01:09 PM , Rating: 2
I haven't kept a car 59 months ever. I buy a new one every 4 years like clockwork.


RE: Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/14/2008 12:31:50 PM , Rating: 2
Me either. My wife's cars have been leases and we've turned them in every 3 years. With one exception, I've kept my cars 4 years, sold them and bought a new one (no negative equity here). The exception was a car I kept for 12 years because I really liked it. I like my present car even more and have no idea when I'll get rid of it.


RE: Saving money?
By Solandri on 8/14/2008 1:57:53 PM , Rating: 2
Stats like this really need to be based on the median, not the mean. If you take the mean, one guy holding onto his car for 20 years can really skew the figure upwards.

A median is like one person, one vote. A mean is like your vote is proportional in size to whatever you're measuring. So it's like the folks keeping their car 4 years get 4 votes, while the guy keeping his car 20 years gets 20 votes.


RE: Saving money?
By Nik00117 on 8/13/2008 3:56:46 PM , Rating: 4
I'm a car sales man and I have crunched the figures and done the math several times over.

At the end of the day, get a car that suits your needs. I had a guy come in the other day and save over 12,000 off sticker price on his brand new truck. Granted it was the end of the year model, and his situation was perfect in every sense of the word. But $12,000 savings? If you want a great vechilie at cheap, don't look for fuel effiencey. Look at something that serves your needs and you may just end up with a kick ass deal.

I meanthe idea of offering nay serious rebates/discounts on anything like a focus, calibar or hybird escape at my dealership is laughable those cars are rolling off the lot left and right. Now if you want a Ford-350 hey, I can get you a kick ass deal on that without a question.

Honsetly the answer isn't in "hybirds" its in diesel. I've seen the clean european diesels and quite frankly they are brilliant. Regular mid size sedans crushing focus MPG numbers. At the same cost too!


RE: Saving money?
By masher2 (blog) on 8/13/2008 4:38:51 PM , Rating: 3
> "Honsetly the answer isn't in "hybirds" its in diesel. I've seen the clean european diesels and quite frankly they are brilliant. Regular mid size sedans crushing focus MPG numbers. At the same cost too!"

Diesel engines are more expensive than gas, even before you add in the prodigous amounts of plumbing required to meet emissions standards.

And diesel and hybrid aren't mutually exclusive concepts. Hybrid diesel technology is already prevalent for trains, seagoing ships, and other areas....at some point, I expect that to trickle down to personal autos.


RE: Saving money?
By jabber on 8/14/2008 6:05:22 AM , Rating: 2
They are not that much more then the petrol engines.

Usually its around £1000 difference in the UK and you can adjust that if you cut back on the useless extras one it tempted to load onto a car.

In fact if you try car configurators for a lot of the euro car sites the diesel option comes in at around the same price now. The fact folks want them has brought them into line with the petrol versions.

A lot lot better then the hybrid way.

Though I'm still waiting for more 1000cc, high efficiency twin turbo engines with around 80hp+ to catch on. Thats where I'd spend my money as a city driver.


RE: Saving money?
By Spuke on 8/14/2008 12:38:12 PM , Rating: 2
Here in the US, the price difference is usually $5k or more. The diesels are usually on the premium models too.


RE: Saving money?