livvie, I don't understand your persistence in this issue...

I don't intend to offend, just to present a different point of view, than the one you continue to post here. Don't you love differing opinions?

With that said, I believe that one can justify any kind of rationale for buying the TCH.

As I see it, (and I am open to being convinced otherwise, or flat out being proven wrong) people have basically 3 choices, when thinking about the purchase of the TCH, and comparing costs...if that is the rationale for the buying decision.

It is many people's belief that the turly cheapest way to own and drive a car is to buy a car, and drive it till the "wheels fall off." This is not everybody's cup of tea, as some can afford to have the latest technology, and safety features, and don't have the time or patience for breakdowns.


The 3 choices:

1. Keep their current car (gas guzzling super heavy duty Ford truck, or 1997 Camry 4cyl, or 1995 Civic)

2. Only choose to consider and buy the TCH.

3. Consider any other vehicle currently marketed, new or used.

Each choice will then determine his/her economic results.

As I understand your posts, the only valid comparison is based on choice #3...that one MUST compare the economic results only after comparing the costs associated with every other vehicle available. Each persons decision to purchase the TCH is very specific to that persons situation, needs, desires, economic position, risk tolerance, spousal/partner interaction..etc etc etc.

livvie, again, thanks for considering my thoughts,

And thanks for everyones opinions.

 

Hmmm, putting words in my mouth. I am not saying to buy anything. Why would it matter to me what you drive? How about I compare my pedal bike to buying a hybrid. My fuel efficiency would go way down. Or, ****, I could have bought a good pair of walking shoes for the amount of money I spent to fill up my hybrid. Better yet, I could just quit my job and live as a hermit and reduce my carbon output to zero.

I was putting my two cents in. What about you? What do you drive most? Why did you get the vehicle you ended up with?

For me, hybrid = better fuel efficiency than "gas guzzling truck." Guess what, I bought a frickin hybrid. I don't really care what the cost difference is from a non hybrid. When gas prices go down, maybe I'll buy the M1 tank.

What a wonderful perspective you have on here. Have a great day.
Jason

 

apples to apples is all i'm saying. apples to oranges doesn't make sense. that's all. i know what you guys are saying but it's an apples to orange comparison which to people not knowing any better would be fooled.

 

Well, some folks insist on always comparing apples. For others, there are times when it is appropriate to compare apples to oranges. An orange has more Vitamin C. Orange is a fruit AND a color. An orange comes in convenient slices beneath the "wrapper". That said, an apple a day keeps the doctor away....

In the end, the comparisons made entirely depend upon the purpose of the comparison.

 

By the above logic, since my commute prior to owning a hybrid was 2 miles and I could walk to work (cost was 0). Now with the hybrid and a 70 mile commute, my cost is several grand a year. Therefore hybrid's really do not save a lot of money. Makes sense to me.

 

Multiple choice test:

Hybrids save a lot of money compared to [most conventional cars]. True
Hybrids save a lot of money compared to [walking]. False
Hybrids save a lot of money compared to [eating green eggs and ham]. Inconclusive data
Hybrids save a lot of money compared to [talking to a good friend]. False
Hybrids save a lot of money compared to [watching Seinfeld reruns]. False

Single choice test:

Some hybrids save more money than [other hybrids]. True

Why complicate these issues?

 

Wow, Livvie. You've got yourself really tangled up in your own logic. Controlling out the other variables (commute distance, gas prices, comfort, quality, etc...) we can compare fuel savings for transit in Vehicle X with like transit in Vehicle Y. This is as apples to apples as a comparison gets.

Whether Vehicle X and Y are both new cars, one old and one new, one a bus and one a bicycle, it matters little. The original poster chose as his vehices his two likely transit options - his minivan and his TCH. This creates for him the most relevant (while still entirely apples to apples) comparison for his purposes - namely to evaluate if he's realizing any savings by using his TCH rather than his minivan.

If he finds that Vehicle X results in 10% less fuel costs than Vehicle Y, and considers those his two real transit options, why do you suggest that he's be putting on rosy colored glasses by saying "I enjoy that I am choosing Vehicle X and am reaping a 10% fuel savings compared to Vehicle Y."? This is just a calculation of opportunity cost (or benefit, as it were). He didn't pick a tank a his car because those don't produce a meaningful comparison for him - he picked his real driving options.

I don't personally care whether I save money or not (to a degree) - the TCH satisfies my desires about what I want to use my discretionary income for, so I'm ok losing or gaining a bit. But for those using fuel savings as another reason to feel good about their purchase, why the rainy day from you? The original comparison is meaningful to the original poster (and plenty of others). If it isn't to you, that's fine (it isn't to me either, as I've noted), but why the attempt to diminish their analysis of their choices by suggesting they're deceiving themselves?

 

Well said, Turk!

 

Yikes. Please read the whole thread. I want an apple to apples comparison. Said person above is comparing mpg from prior vehicle (A) to hybrid (B) mpg numbers. Comparing A to B is meaningless. You need to take (B)'s number and compare those to a comparable vehicle. For example an HCH and a Civic EX.

So if original car (A) was an SUV getting 15mpg.
And new car is HCH getting 45 mpg.

You could jump to the conclusion that your hybrid is netting you 30 mpg gain. This conclusion would be incomplete is all that I'm saying. You could have just as easily bought a Civic EX and still be saving on gas. Let's say civic ex gets 32 mpg.

SUV @15mpg vs. HCH @45mpg = 30mpg in net gain
SUV @15mpg vs. Civic EX @32mpg = 17mpg in net gain
-----------------
Difference 13mpg

So your hybrid compared to a comparable car is netting you 13mpg in savings. This number doesn't sound all that impressive and it's a number often ignored by members of this forum. Granted you saved by switching from an SUV to a hybrid but you save NO MATTER what you do by going to a economical car comparable to a hybrid. This is the point that is being MISSED.

Actually the complete picture requires that you bring in the cost of owning each vehicle (hybrid vs. comparable car) into the equation. For example purchase price. A HCH cost more than an EX and you get similar features, granted you do get a tax credit but that's going away soon. Anyway, you get the picture.

 

I understand that you're seeking a different comparison, livvie - it's the part where you're telling other people that their comparisons are invalid that's unfortunate.

It's perfectly fine that you feel its more relevant to you to see savings compared to comparable new cars - you can pick whatever vehicles you want for X and Y to suit your needs. But the fact that you find other comparisons more suitable for your purposes doesn't correlate to how relevant the original poster's comparison is.

That's the point being missed, I feel.

Its absolutely valid for the original poster to make the comparison the way he has - by calculating the opportunity cost of his TCH vs. his Odyssey as those are the vehicles he has at his disposal when his choice is made. After all, he's not posting to provide a comprehensive analysis of optimal vehicles to drive - he's just relating the payoffs from the choice he makes every morning.

Just like when I decide whether to eat a chicken sandwich or a cheeseburger, I don't compare the chicken sandwich to a salad - I compare it to the cheeseburger!