Nope the numbers I quoted for MMH is combined Horse power. Engine horsepower for the MMH is only 133 HP not including the addition of the electric motor.

http://www.mercuryvehicles.com/marin...ifications.asp

I agree, but 155 HP vehicle which weighs more than a 200HP vehicle will not have improved performance regardless. I tried to find 0-60 times for the MMH, but was unable to. I would be willing to wager that this is closer to the 4-cyl version than the V6 version though.

Not if you are simply discussing "How long does it take for me to recoupe my increased cost in gas savings?"

I am not disagree that the Hybrid premium is justified. There are numerous other reasons to pay the extra cost of a hybrid. I was simply pointing out why the media is constantly discussing hybrids in terms of gas savings. From a gas savings point ONLY. Hybrids must be owned around 5 years to break even. This doesn't mean I don't think people should own hybrids. It just means if your only purpose for buying a hybrid is to save money on gas, then there are other alternatives which make more cents (pun intended) on the pocket book.

 

In terms of cargo room, amenities, comfort (or lack thereof), and performance, I would expect the Echo to compare favorably to an Insight. There is not a non-hybrid version of the Insight. What's your point? If it cost $1,000,000 to build the Insight you could still just say "Hey, that's not apples to apples". I don't care. It costs a lot more and that means there isn't going to be a payback, and that's what is being discussed.

To the person who said they have no incentive for putting the hybrid system in the cheaper models because they can't build them fast enough and they all sell.... that's a good point.

 

It's going to be interesting to see if Capt Obvious cares to explain how the Toyota Echo's weight, drive train, aerodynamics, interior space, etc. is even more similar to the Insight than the Honda CRX HF. Of course there is not a non-hybrid version of the Insight, but if you believe Capt. Obvious arguements, the Insight's DNA is more like the Toyota Echo than the Honda CRX HF.

As someone like Bob Wilson could testify, electric drive trains need far less maintainence than gas engines. I've had less repairs on my Insight vs. the CRX.


The intent of www.greenhybrid.com was to be a place for hybrid enthuasists and to aid in picking a hybrid - not for skeptics to irrationally argue indefinitely. Capt. Obvious, you have been here about six months. Where are you in your hybrid searching process? That's what nearly everyone here does - discuss their hybrids or search for one.

 

The thread is about payback. If you can buy an Echo to do everything a Insight does (or more frankly) for $10k, then there will never be a payback. You're only bolstering my position by pointing out that Echo has much less technology than the Insight. What exactly did they accomplish with the Insight? And let's not pretend that it's a luxury vehicle. I wouldn't compare a Echo to a Camry for example.

Would you spend $5,000 extra on a new casement window that is U .1 so you can save $20 a year on utilities? NO. Should you? NO.

You aren't saving money Delta. And the truth is, your car has been more harmful to the planet than an Echo. So stop patting yourself on the back.

If you bought your Insight to save the planet or save money, well you miscalculated. If you bought it because you think it's cool and you like the car, then great. I hope you like your car. I like mine too.

 

Therein lies the problem with your argument CO.....
You CANNOT buy an Echo and do everything an Insight does:

Echo is dirtier exhaustwise.
No one has ever gotten 94 MPG out of an Echo. (Even 50 MPG?)
Insight will be recycled more fully per Honda.
Insight "paved the way" for the hybrid movement and proved the technology is viable for USA drivers.

Echo will be a vague "barely blip" in the history of automobiles.

Insight will be remembered FOREVER as a trailblazer which led to the saving of Billions of gallons of gas.

 

You avoided this question because you had no answer, resorting to your MO - attack, attack, attack. It does not hide that your arguements are weak.

Some of your reasoning is even more twisted than a number of past and present totalitarian regimes. It just highlights that you came here solely to bash hybrids. Which is why you never answered the question of where you were in your search for a hybrid - no intent of doing so.

 

You just don't get it. The weight, drive train, aerodynamics etc are pointless because the car still costs more to own. Those things are meaningless if they cost $1 to implement for every 25 cents saved over the life of the car.

Do you have more interior room than an Echo? More passenger carrying capability? More acceleration? More luxury? Safety? How would an Echo be a step down from the Insight?

You are the one with absolutely no argument. Your "logic rules, not ego" is the most hillarious thing you could possibly have under your name. You refuse to accept reality.

I can just see the scenario where diesel could take off and battery manufacturing goes up in cost to the point the Honda and Toyota decide to can hybrid system development. Imagine the conspiracy theories.

Again, you don't spend a dollar to save 50 cents. There needs to be a real payback, not a payback only if there is a subsidy that all your other countrymen have to pay for. They either have to lower production costs, or gasoline has to go higher. At this point you might assume you would be close to breaking even, but reliability and battery replacement costs can easily put you in the red. Hybrids are more complex... you have to expect more problems. Ask a HCH1 owner who had to replace their CVT how much money they've saved.

And another ironic thing here is that the people who drive the most miles are the ones who could see the most savings from hybrids. I'm supposed to reward people with 100 mile commutes with a tax credit? BS.

 

CO,

Sorry you hate the math on my Insight the past six years vs my run-down 250,000-mile, 35mpg CRX HF if it had survived (paid $12K - new). I did not cash in on a tax break as that would be a year later (2001). While simpler, the CRX HF is not as durable as this Insight. Why do a number of people get the feeling that any pro-hybrid resonse will get a predictable negative response from you, regardless?

Why did you join GH back in Feb? To shop for a hybrid? To find comradie with other hybrid drivers? Somehow your comradie with the other members is underwhelming.....and I'm not sure that "Active Enthuasist" exactly fits you....

 

I'm not saying those numbers aren't true but I do have a couple of comments.

One, I find it hard to believe that the exact same engine in the 4cyl produces 153HP whereas in the Hybrid it only produces 133HP?

Two, I don't think that HP numbers are that important. Especially considering those are PEAK HP numbers. I'd be much more interested in comparing their HP and Torque curves, especially at LOW RPM's not HIGH.

Finally, the 0-60's I have seen are something like 8.1 for the 6cyl, 8.9 for the Hybrid, and 9.1 for the 4 cyl. But again, we aren't comparing race cars or sports cars.

 

Here are the links to the specs.
MMH
http://www.mercuryvehicles.com/marin...ifications.asp
MM
http://www.mercuryvehicles.com/mariner/models.asp



No but we are trying to give a fair comparison of vehicles, inorder to determine how long it will take to recoup the cost with gas savings. So comparing HP and acceleration times gives you a better indication of which model to compare the MMH to.

I believe the numbers above support my arguement.

The MMH has much closer performance numbers (8.9 secs) to the 4 cyl (9.1 sec) than to the V6 (8.1 sec).

The fact that the hybrid only adds .2 secs to the acceleration of the vehicle, along with the HP numbers, validates that the MMH performance is more comparable to the 4 cyl model, which is why those two models should be compared together if you are ONLY trying to determine the question of cost savings in gas.

Don't get me wrong. My goal is not to bash hybrid technology. It is simply to point out that Hybrids don't save money on gas unless you own them for around 5 years at today's prices. I believe this is a fair statement and the numbers back me up. The problem is that manufacturers have heavily marketed the improved mpg for hybrids (and neglected, IMO, the more important aspect of emmissions) which is why you see all the comparisons regarding gas savings in the media.