Saw this article this morning:

http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/27/auto...ries/index.htm

Pretty good and accurate points for people looking to buy a hybrid. Personally, I didnt worry about #4 (payback) and #6 (resale) at all, but had some concern for #5 (performance - although that was based on one rougue article I cant seem to locate again..)

 

Other than the mixed answer on resale value. It sure is hard to talk about used hybrids when the earliest ones in any sort of quanties are:

1) Insights -- what are their resale values?
2) Gen I Civics -- what are their resale values?
3) Gen I Prius -- the only one mentioned

The Lexus, Ford Escape, Highlander and Camry hybrids really didn't come out until last year and this year. Yet on one hand, the Prius seems to have resale values like the Mini-Cooper but on the other, the 'look a like' hybrids are claimed to not hold their resale value.

For me, this may someday good news because it means a nice Camry hybrid should be very affordable in 3-4 years . . . if it is true. But the absence of a significant 'used' market except for the three mentioned makes this claim at best dubious.

BTW, I'm not going to dispute them. For me, a 'soft' used market is my opportunity to upgrade. <GRINS>

Bob Wilson

 

I thought it was a fairly reasonable article, with the exception of the resale issue. First of all, because they haven't been on the market too long there is very little resale data for most hybrids. I also think that resale value will depend more upon brand than anything else. Fords don't hold their value as well as Honda, Toyota or Lexus. So I'd expect the Escape to not hold its value as well as the hybrids from the Japanese auto makers.

 

Good article- I see the same concerns others have expressed, but generally this is far more fair and certainly structured in a smarter way than most press coverage on hybrids and their drawbacks. Just getting the acknowledgment that a lot of people worry needlessly about these 'hybrid drawbacks' is a big step in the right direction, IMO.

 

This is probably the most balanced article I've seen.
They still cling to the hyrid-lack-of-resale-value without much empirical evidence. We'll need a few more years to know this for sure.

 

Not bad - I give it a B-. Here's why:
Can people still be that uninformed after all this time? I mean really. No amount of gentle treatment of my 1995 G20 was going to make it get 45 mpg. Oh, and I save $80 every two months, not a year. Just for once, I wish I could read an article that actually puts some thought into a payback analysis.

 

Tim, maybe it is plausible that people could save $80/year by accelerating and braking more gently in non-hybrids. However, I definitely agree with you that we hybrid drivers can and often do save much more than that. I won't quibble with someone for telling people without hybrid cars to accelerate and brake gently, though. Sounds like good advice to me. The problem is the comparison- not the advice.

 

Leah - yes I agree. $80/year is a reasonable expectation for anyone driving more conservatively, so it's good advice. The phrase in the article sounded like that even the Prius and Civic would only save that much. Maybe in a Civic vs. HCH comparison that would be true, so I'll give them that.

I just really dislike sound-bite journalism in the first place, and this is a good example. Just push a random fact out of the univerasal Pez-dispenser of lazy journalism and poof! Instant article. However it was mostly well-written, so I'll cut them some slack. :-)

 

No one is ever going to get 75 mpg in their vehicle like I did today. No matter how light their acceleration/braking is! How about they buy a hybrid and be gentle?