Until you're involved with a FATAL accident first, you'll learn Hybrid Isn't worth.

I'm surprised that anyone still believes that myth.

That's not the purpose; it's a side effect. The purpose is to reduce
pollution and extend the petroleum supply.

Nobody's buying any cars any more. So by your logic, cars never made
any sense.

In a smaller car, with fewer upscale features, and of course, a much
less safer car.

 

It happens to be true, sorry.

The primary purpose of the Prius was to capture sales and prestige from
people who like to wear their cars they way they do their Birkenstock
sandals. It's always been an "image" car for Toyota.

It appears even the Birkenstockers, however, are able to understand the
idea of economic efficiency. Actually, perhaps they understand this
better than most, since many of them are wealthier than the average.

The Prius is down worse than most. The Tundra might be lower, Im not
sure.

1988 "safety" is still awfully darn safe. The difference between then
and now is tiny.

In any case, you would make your money back just about instantly with
the HF, and there was no horrendously expensive battery replacement
lurking ten years down the road. Making your money back with the Prius,
at today's gas prices, is an impossibility.

 

A good catholic.

 

Not in London were petrol is about £4:50 a gallon and it cost about £6 a
day to drive in the city, a daily tax called the congestion charge which
hybrid owners are exempt from.

 

I don't know that they never made sense; they make perfect sense to me,
at least how Toyota did it,

What I don't understand is why people don't buy them. They drive just
like normal cars, but get significantly better gas mileage. I just
don't see the tradeoffs that others are claiming to see.

 

It happens to be true, sorry.[/QUOTE]

So provide a reference to prove it.

Yeah, like Toyota is trying to fight off bankruptcy, like GM is, and is
getting rid of an entire subsidiary like GM just did with Pontiac.

Not that anyone can say that there's going to be a need for a battery
replacement after ten years, and no one knows what the cost of batteries
will be at that time.

And as wrote before, the purpose is not to make one's money back.
However, I'm getting about double the gas mileage I did with my previous
car (an Acura) with gas that's twenty cents a gallon cheaper. That was
saving me about $1300 a year on gasoline when gas was four bucks a
gallon. Right now, it's saving me about $940 a year.

 

Whether driven regularly or not, the car clearly handled worse than (all)
the cars we had been driving (i30t, Acura TL, Honda Odyssey). The fact that
the Honda Odyssey, a big tub, could out corner it, says something.

I will agree that once you are forced to drive a car with sloppy handling,
you will learn to accommodate it (or die trying). That doesn't make it a
good car and that certainly doesn't make it handle any better.

 

So provide a reference to prove it.

Yeah, like Toyota is trying to fight off bankruptcy, like GM is, and is
getting rid of an entire subsidiary like GM just did with Pontiac.

Not that anyone can say that there's going to be a need for a battery
replacement after ten years, and no one knows what the cost of batteries
will be at that time.

And as wrote before, the purpose is not to make one's money back.
However, I'm getting about double the gas mileage I did with my previous
car (an Acura) with gas that's twenty cents a gallon cheaper. That was
saving me about $1300 a year on gasoline when gas was four bucks a
gallon. Right now, it's saving me about $940 a year.[/QUOTE]


No it's not... you haven't subtracted the pro-rata depreciation of the
hybrid battery from your estimated fuel savings.

Pro-rate is... replacement cost of new hybrid battery divided by the
number of years in battery warranty equals _added_ depreciation
per year to the hybrid car.

What is your REAL WORLD fuel economy in miles per U.S. gallons?

 

So provide a reference to prove it.[/QUOTE]




Your flinty-eyed skepticism has yielded success: I appear to be
out-of-date.

According to Forbes,
"Toyota's Prius came out in 1997 and did not break even until just before
the introduction of a second-generation car in model-year 2004."

This from the article
<http://www.forbes.com/2005/10/07/hybrids-cars-suvs-cx_dl_1011feat_ls.html>

Except that now Toyota dealers can't give Priuses away, so the implied
post-'04 profit has probably disappeared.

 

The auto manufactures are having a hard time giving anything away.
Contrary to what some media is trying to claim, hybrids and other
economical cars are doing relatively better, though not as good as
when gas was $4. The big SUVs and pickups are getting creamed.

 

Will I be able to buy one now for say $13500? That's about all I'd pay
for one today.

 

Which is the exact logic I apply to my owning ancient Civics only that
the year(s) are rolled back to 1980-83.

I can handle the "old school" engineering and ease of maintenance/repair
and not have to fess up with 'puters and other modern gadgets.

Besides that, parts as almost as cheap as dirt these days...

JT

 

Uh, that's why just over two hundred years ago, some people revolted...

JT

 

five years out of date, and referring to the previous model, which is
nothing like the 04 through 09 model.

Got a cite for that? Other than the fact that the entire auto industry
is in the tank, I mean.

Nothing implied about that profit. Furthermore, your conclusion does
not follow from the premise, regardless.

<http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/2009/03/2010-toyota-prius-sales-wi
ll-hit-100000-in-2009-toyota-says.html>

In these dismal economic times, no one likes to talk about annual
sales projections, but Bob Carter, group vice president and
general manager for Toyota Motor Sales USA, did just that at last
week's press launch for the 2010 Toyota Prius in California's Napa
Valley. Toyota expects to sell 100,000 examples of the 2010 Prius
from the time it goes on sale in May until the end of 2009.

Come 2010, the company hopes to return to its 2007 sales pace and
sell 180,000 Priuses. You'll recall that Prius sales fell 12.3
percent in 2008 (to 158,884) after a steep drop-off in demand in
the fourth quarter.

Yes, Prius sales have been down in the past few months, but that's most
likely because people are waiting for the 2010 model, due out next month.

 

I didn't know that the Toyota Prius and the London congestion charge
existed 200 years ago, I learn something new every day.

 

I'm one of those. Went to toyota.com's build-your-own routine today to find
it still configures a 2009.

 

He refers to our the revolution we fought over taxation without
representation. It must been have been a good way to raise money because we
sure do a lot of it ourselves today.

 

I'm one of those.[/QUOTE]

I have to wait until September at the earliest, which is after I get a
major bill paid off.

 

He refers to our the revolution we fought over taxation without
representation.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that's what he meant, but how would London's taxation with
representation in the 21st century have any relationship to the
colonies' taxation without representation in the 18th century?

What taxation without representation do we have today?

 

I have to wait until September at the earliest, which is after I get a
major bill paid off.
[/QUOTE]

A couple of months ago I was comparing 2009 Prius prices found on the 'net
with what my area dealer offers. A dealer in Mesa had several units with
leather, nav, etc. for $3000.00 less than I'd have to pay for the same unit
where I live in MN. Maybe I should wait until next January, fly to AZ, soak
up some rays for a couple weeks, and drive one back.