On my way to the St. Ignace car show a couple weeks back, my father and I took a 2000MY Buick LeSabre off the lot with 100,000 miles on it. We were talking about the hybrid hype currently going on and we figured we'd try an expiriment. For your money, what is a better value: a new Buick LeSabre or a new Toyota Prius?

http://www.buick.com/comparator/dele...u&trimID=14818
EDIT: Link won't work until you plug in LeSabre and Prius first.

Here's some stats to go off of. But lets get real for a second. We know that the Prius is going for sticker everywhere and in a lot of places well over (up to $4000). Not only is this stupid, but why?

The other point is all of the incentives on Buicks and the fact that I would likely, at least around here, have to sell the car at invoice or little over. On the LeSabre I have in the comparo ($26,000 MSRP), you could buy that car (minus tax, plate fee, ect.) for under $20,000. Another neat little tidbit of info is that on our trip to the car show, we averaged 33mpg. Yes, 100,000 miles on the clock and still 33mpg. And this is no rarity.

So the point of this is that why spend nearly $6,000 MORE (for comparable equipment) for a cramped cracker box that will need expensive battery replacement in the future, gets only 10mpg better on the highway (see Motor Trend's latest comparo between the VW and Prius), funds a foreign country, and looks like a space alien, imo.

If you ask me, I'll take the comfy fuel sipping LeSabre anyday.

 

There really is no advantage in buying a hyrbid over an already capable compact economy car. Consider this:

Honda Civic Sedan Hybrid, $20140, 46/51 mpg (48.5 avg)
Honda Civic Sedan DX , $13500, 32/38 mpg (35.0 avg)

Driving 15,000 miles in a year with an average gas price of $2.00/gallon yields these annual totals:

Hybrid, $618.56
DX, $857.14

Over a five-year period of ownership with these same averages:

Hybrid, $3092.78
DX, $4285.71

This means you spent $6640 more initially to save $1193 on gas over five years. Okay, okay. You drive a lot you argue--25,000 a year. And gas prices have soared to $4.00/gallon.

Five-year fuel costs:

Hybrid, $10309.30
DX, $14285.70

Under even these conditions you still paid $2663.60 too much up front (assuming you achieved an average of what Honda said you could for gas mileage, a problem owners are experiencing). And you're now due for an expensive battery replacement, etc.

The government may still be giving a one-time $2000 tax break on new hybrid purchases, but that still does not even things out in the long run. It seems the only reason to buy a hybrid at this point is to look at the neat display and brag to your friends about how green you think you are.

 

Hybrids excel in the city, where many of these cars are being purchased. A GM car that gets 28-32 mpg on the highway gets 18-22 mpg in the city.

The Prius in the latest Automobile mag test got 52 mpg in the city, 44 on the highway. Getting over 30 mpg less in situations where you are twice a day, five days a week changes things around a bit.

-B

 

The real question is how long at those MPG levels would it take you to break even on the higher cost of the hybrid.

If you are talking 20 mpg vs 40mpg (just for simplicity of the math), At $1.75/gal and assuming 35 miles per day.

That's $3.06 in gas per day vs. $1.53 per day for the hybrid.

If you are talking a $6,000 difference in price, it would take you 10.7 years to just break even on fuel savings. Are you even going to keep the car that long? And that does not include the higher repair costs the hybrid will surely have.

If your out to save the planet that's one thing, but if you are making intelligent money choices as a consumer its a totally different situation.

 

Even if the Hybrid averages 50mpg and you drive 50 miles per day it would still take 6.3 years to break even on the $6000 higher price.

 

Great comparison. Now if the magazines were not funded by hybrid automakers to publish such honest info (as MT did boldly recently), the public would be better informed.

VW's TDI engines make very competitive milage. Plus they can be modded easily ( TURBO diesel ) and still get great milage. There was a Cummins Dodge truck making mid 14-second passes at the drag strip about a year ago. Talk about neat stuff!

 

a low-sulfur TDI diesel combined with electric motor and capacitors...

-B

 

Wow, what an amazingly biased comparison that was.

First off, if your going to compare two cars, compare them down the middle, don't give a little extra here and take away here then compare. No. Thats not how an objective comparison works. Look at MSRP, thats what you compare. I might give you the incentives, but thats it. In return you gotta give me the tax rebate. SO really, the hybrid will cost about $2K more...

Now, lets look at what Hybrids were made for, IN CITY DRIVING. Compare those figures and you get a hellaciously different result. 60 MPG for the Prius against the La Sabre's 20?!

Say you only drive in the city most of the time 12,000 miles a year...with gas prices at 1.70. You've spent $340 this year on gas in the Prius against the La Sabre's $1020. In three years you will have paid off the difference.

SO really, all it comes down to is personal preference on whether you really care about the environment and you'll spend the extra $1K in the long run if you do mostly highway driving, but whats that break down to? An extra $15/month on your car payment on a 5 year loan. Or if you do mostly city driving and care about your environment enough, you'll actually be saving money at the same time.

The End.

 

How do you figure the Prius gets 60 in the city when the EPA rates it at 52 city?

Besides, still does not discount my point...the up front costs are higher and even super impressive MPG figures don't actually save you anything until year 4 of ownership.

Toyota's hybrids are sure impressive, but how much impact do they really have? I like GM's approach, which is to put fuel saving technologies in the highest volume sellers, where it will do the most good, rather than a razzle dazzle overpriced niche car Toyota will only sell 25,000 of. The difference in impact on consumption between the two approaches is more than significant.

 

The MSRPs for those Civic models are exactly as obtained from Edmunds.com and include destination. No manufacturer rebates are available. Include the $2000 tax rebate and it still does not affect the outcome.

There was no bias in the comparison.

My point is the compact economy cars already on the market provide next to no emissions and cost thousands less. The amount of "environment saving" from a hybrid is negligible, especially considering the popularity of SUVs which come nowhere close to the same emissions.

And that is where hybrids make more sense: bringing trucks and SUVs back into the pack with cars to obtain better gas mileage and emissions. I believe Bob Lutz was even quoted on this topic, specifically why GM wasn't producing a hybrid compact. There's no point.

 

Here in California, the DCA (Dept. of Consumer Affairs) is considering legistration that will make hybrids smog exempt AND there is also been discussion about allowing hybrids to use HOV lanes.

The current cost for a biannual smog test under SMOG CHECK II is about $100. HOV's also currently don't pay a toll on Bay Area bridges (currently set at $3). If these ideas become law, you could see additional savings that would make hybrids even more attractive. (At least here in the Bay Area.)

However, I do agree they need to work out the bugs in the EPA testing that establishes City/Highway Est. Fuel Mileage to make a proper comparison.

What will be real interesting is what happens when DoD comes into the mix.

 

Further, this is a tax deduction - not a "rebate" you get to add a $2,000 deduction on your tax form - it's not $2,000 in your pocket - could be $150 bucks depending on your bracket, other deductions, itemization and variables.

And the clean-burning fuel deduction will be reduced by $500 each year, starting in 2004, until it expires. (So it's $1,500 now) No deduction will be allowed for vehicles placed in service after December 31, 2006.

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/...107766,00.html

 

That's what I was thinking. The general rule of thumb is for every $3 you deduct you get $1 actually off or back from your taxes.

THat's only IF you have enough total deductions to exceed the standard deduction. So if you don't own a home for example, you probably wouldn't get a dime from the deduction.

 

ok, sure, while you're at it throw throtleless induction, an aluminum block and 30k lb injectors into the mix.

 

Bam!



Wrong, theres about 1 or 2 compacts on the market that produce next to no emissions. One is called a Focus, which (last I checked) is the cleanest burning car sold by an american manufacturer right now and its a PZEV (Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle). So the Prius is helping there to, also being a PZEV vehicle, I don't see why your holding that against it? How many midsize sedans do you see on the market right now that are PZEV? Virtually none besides the Prius...negligable? I don't think so...

I agree, I love GM's approach right now. Improving emissions and gas milage on city buses, commercial trucks, etc. Its great, very smart and probably more cost effective.

But I also admire Toyota actually aiming for the consumer market, to indroduce people to the technology that will probably be pretty ordinary in 10 years and starting with the saturation process. Baby steps people...