Originally Posted By: madRiver
Originally Posted By: Phishin
Originally Posted By: madRiver
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
I agree on an LX MT, though at 30k/year, hybrid may be a good choice.
300k is likely the break even point for price premium for hybrid vs base model/stick and fuel savings. The risk is a bit higher for expensive drivetrain related repairs vs a simple 2.4L motor coupled to manual gear box.
I agree.
A new Honda Sport is $24,200. The Hybrid is $29,300. ......
So, the different is $5,100. The Hybrid will get 48-50 mpg's all day. I have 3 good friends who have these and drive the wheels off them. I have several friends, including myself, who have base model Accords, and we get 28-32 mpg's with our non-hybrid Accords. So, giving you the biggest margin in your favor, the Hybrid will get 48 mpg's and the regular sedan will get 32. That's 16 mpg's difference.
Assume you drive in 100,000 miles, at $2.50/gallon, the hybrid fuel cost would be $5,208/100k miles. The non-hybrid would be: $7,813/100k. So, the cost savings would be: $2605/100k miles.
So, theoretically, it would take you about 200k miles to break even....but oh yeah, electricity isn't free. The cost of power here in Indiana is cheap. So, I suspect the break even point would be around 250k miles.
The base LX with manual is 2k cheaper then Sport. So the price difference between cars is actually $7100. 2k buys a lot of fuel!
Um, my hybrid was a hair over $25k including destination, and before any trades or anything else.
And what's to say that the OP who is given a nice stipend wants the base car, which has undersized rotors amongst other means of pulling out cost (not as nice fabric, etc)?