is hybrid better than normal car?

is hybrid better than normal car?

 

Yes. What is the criteria that would make it better?

 

What's normal?

 

The opposite of abnormal, of course. And abnormal is the opposite of
normal.

 

It's not better for saving money, that's for sure.

Hybrids are an awfully expensive way to save money. Forbes Magazine's Jerry
Flint has calculated in the current issue that a Prius will take 12 years
to break-even compared to a Corolla. And a Lexus RX450h will take 7 years
to break-even compared to the non-hybrid version.

 

....unless you need some feature of the Prius that's not in the
Corolla...like the extra room...in which case, buying the Corolla is a
$15K waste of money.

 

It depends on your situation. If you do mainly city driving but need
a family-sized car, a hybrid is better. If you drive mostly in the city
and don't mind owning a very small car, a subcompact is a better buy. If
you drive mostly highway miles a hybrid is not worth the extra cost,
because it's advantage comes from recovering and storing the energy lost
during lots of slowing and stopping.

 

except, try to find a modern car of similar size and comfort as the
Prius that gets 50+ mpg.

There's more to the Prius than just managing kinetic energy. No car of
similar size and feature set is capable of getting over 50mpg on the
highway, or anywhere near 50mpg.

 

i was going to respond to leftie, but you've pointed out what i was
going to say. reason is the prius's cvt. it's a great system. the
civic hx used to have it and can get very good freeway gas mileage -
high 40's.

many euro and asian market vehicles have cvt, but they're
extraordinarily scarce here, and gas consumption correspondingly higher.
"part of our great american gas guzzler conspiracy".

 

No, but there are cars of similar size that will get 40mpg highway
and are substantially cheaper (like a Jetta diesel), so there is no
payback of the difference.

I support using hybrids. I just don't want people mislead about the
advantages.

 

No, but there are cars of similar size that will get 40mpg highway
and are substantially cheaper (like a Jetta diesel), so there is no
payback of the difference.[/QUOTE]

Have you ever owned a VW?

'Nuff said. They're absolute pieces of junk. I wouldn't drive one if
you gave it to me and paid for all gas, maintenance, insurance, and
repairs.

 

I can attest to that.

My '83 Civic FE got low 40's city and 55+ highway in real tests and my
current one has an '81 engine (which is substantially different than the
'83) but uses the tall gears of the FE and even with today's lousy gas
gets in the mid to high 40mpg range highway.

Best part is the complexity compared to today's tin is greatly
simplified. Most of it is "old school" and easy to maintain/repair.

JT

 

You can get CVT transmissions on Nissans here. Keep in mind too that
the Prius isn't really a midsize car: it qualifies as one because they
managed to stretch the interior space out just enough to earn the
designation. The same could be done with a non-hybrid.

 

Have you ever owned a VW?

'Nuff said. They're absolute pieces of junk. I wouldn't drive one if
you gave it to me and paid for all gas, maintenance, insurance, and
repairs.[/QUOTE]


Ok, I have a '95 Civic EX sedan that isn't as roomy as a Prius, but
gets 55mpg on the highway. It isn't rocket science: cars got better fuel
economy in the '80's, before they started to make them larger and faster
than necessary. The Prius is in some ways just a return to '80's design
philosophy: efficiency and quality over acceleration.

 

US miles per US gallon?

I had a 92 Civic that got 35mpg on the highway; several years into
owning that, I discovered that the speedeometer was wrong, and as a
result the odometer was wrong.

 

So, keep in mind that the Prius isn't really a midsize car; it qualifies
as one only because it fits the size criteria for a midsize car???

What are you smoking? It fits the criteria for a midsize car, therefore
it's a midsize car.

What you're saying is that YOU disagree on the criteria for midsize
cars. What YOU think is midsize is way different than how the
manufacturers and governing bodies define midsize.

 

Economically, generally no.
I compute the number of years it would take to
pay off the difference between hybrid and
non-bybrid economy car. With my habits
I'd save 150 gallons a year. Thats a payoff
of $400 to $600 per year or 6-10 years
for the price difference.

The Prius III in two years is supposed have better
economics.

 

No, I'm saying that it's lighter than a typical midsize car.[/QUOTE]

Weight is not a criterion for the definition, therefore you can't say
"it doesn't fit the defintion".

So what if it "just squeaks in"? There have to be limits; either it
fits within those limits, or it doesn't.

You appear to be saying that "yeah, well, it's at the lower end of those
size limits, plus it doesn't weigh as much as what a traditional midsize
car always has, therefore it's not really midsize".

In other words, you disagree with the criteria that define "midsize".

 

Yes, US MPG, and the speedometer is within 1.5MPH.

 

No, I'm saying that it's lighter than a typical midsize car. Did you
know that the defining criterion is interior room and nothing else? It
just squeaks in with enough interior space to be defined as "midsize."
IIRC, the old Volvo 240, with its larger size but smaller interior, was
a "compact."