Sobering News for the Volt - Production Shutdown

[lovcom]

Originally Posted By: Landrew
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: lovcom
But even if the battery does last "forever" or cost $50, buying a hybred SUV over it's gas version is STILL NOT COST EFFECTIVE. Guys that buy hybrid SUV's feel bette about it by lying to themselves: "Hunny, no worries...it saves $$ on gas, baby"...completly ignoring the total cost of ownership.


I doubt that less than 5% of new car buyers do a total cost of ownership in an honest manner.

If they did, and were honest, they'd be buying used off the other 95% of new car buyers who bought it because that's what they wanted to do/buy/drive/be seen in/talk about/show off...


So true. I love buying used. I honestly want to thank all the "depreciators" out there for keeping their brand new car in nice shape for me while they cut me a huge break. It almost feels like cheating the system.......


I only buy new, but I keep the vehicle until all it's depreciation is spent, and the car is dead.

Otherwise, I get what you say...lots of people replace their perfectly good cars ever other year or so, and not only is that great for guys like you that buy them, it's at the cost of financial health to the depreciators, but that's your your problem

People buy cars to stay in "fashion", show off, or in the case of most Luxury car buyers, to tell others "I'm better then you". And the dirty secret is this: Most luxury car buyers really cannot afford the purchase, although most will tell you that they easily can. They based that opinion on a bad metric: "After I make my Lexus pmt, I have more then zero $$ in the bank, so therefor I can afford it"....lol

 

[lovcom]

Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Originally Posted By: lovcom
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
I have to ask why some here feel that Hybrid SUV's are a bad idea?

There are families out there who's needs aren't met with a Prius so why shouldn't they be afforded some additional MPG's too?

A Tahoe/Yukon/Escalade Hybrid will give you 20-23 MPG in the City and 20-21 Highway. I have put over 8,000 miles on one and my average (according to DIC) is 21.6. This is more highway miles than city (hybrids do better in city than highway) and I don't exactly drive "easy", lol. This is also BETTER than what I get in my CTS, which is 18.9.


A family that needs an SUV that wants to "save on gas and get more MPG and save $$" would be exceedingly stupid to buy the hybrid version of their SUV of choice. If you care to do the "complete cost of ownership" calculations, you too will see that buying a hybrid SUV would cost tons more $$ over a gas only version. This is because the hybrid SUV's cost a LOT more then their gas only versions, the hybrid batteries are very expensive too (to replace).

Lots of idiots replace their gas cars with hybrids to "save gas and $$"...what idiots. Sometimes one can save $$ doing this, but mostly they end up spending a lot more $$ on the total operational cost of ownership.

So no, hybrid SUV's are only for idiots. Same for gas Camry vs. hybrid Camry, and same for gas vs hybrid Fusion, and many, many more combinations.



This is a big overgeneralization to say it mildly. Hybrids do make sense in certain situations and if you're buying a new car anyway, they can make sense. This is exactly the same as paying premium for a diesel version. If you just flipped your 3-5 year old SUV or a mid-size sedan for a Hybrid, then of course you're loosing money. But if you have a 15 year old beater that needs replacing, hybrids can make financial sense.

The reason I'm not a fan of hybrids and EVs is that the media made them look like this is the only way forward and that switching to a hybrid or EV makes financial sense for most situations, which isn't the case.


Your thinking is not valid.

It does not matter if you're replacing a 20 year old car, or if that car snorts a gallon of gas every mile...

A better metric is this:

Do the "cost of complete ownership" on model A and model B, both of which are new cars you could buy.

Then buy the one that has the lowest complete cost of ownership.

 

[KrisZ]

Originally Posted By: lovcom
Your thinking is not valid.

It does not matter if you're replacing a 20 year old car, or if that car snorts a gallon of gas every mile...

A better metric is this:

Do the "cost of complete ownership" on model A and model B, both of which are new cars you could buy.

Then buy the one that has the lowest complete cost of ownership.


You are ASSUMING that every hybrid car will need a battery replacement before its useful life is spent. But certain models already proved that the battery can indeed last just as long as the drivetrain. That is why I said in CERTAIN situations hybrid total cost of ownership can be less that an equivalent ICE only model.

 

[SteveSRT8]

he is also assuming a lot with statements like "or in the case of most Luxury car buyers, to tell others "I'm better then you". And the dirty secret is this: Most luxury car buyers really cannot afford the purchase...".

Most? Really?

Please tell us where you gleaned this market research. Sounds more like a form of envy to me.

 

[spasm3]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
he is also assuming a lot with statements like "or in the case of most Luxury car buyers, to tell others "I'm better then you". And the dirty secret is this: Most luxury car buyers really cannot afford the purchase...".

Most? Really?

Please tell us where you gleaned this market research. Sounds more like a form of envy to me.



Its another i'm more concerned with what the other guy has or is driving, he has more ice cream and does not need it, its not fair.
Just buy what you want and need and forget about what the other guy is driving.

 

[cchase]

Originally Posted By: lovcom
You conveniently FORGOT the Cost of the REPLACEMENT Battery...so much for your idea ;-) ...not to mention that the hybrid version will lose more depreciated dollars.

Oh, and one more thing....your calculations don't reflect the constant increase in gas prices into the future...lets say gas goes up an average of 50 cents a year, and then your 4 years break even turns into much more...


Most of the batteries in these hybrids are warrantied for 10 years/150,000 miles. It's really not going to be a problem for most owners, especially when the payback is 4 years or less.

As far as increasing gas prices, higher gas prices only make the payback come more quickly. At $4/gallon, payback is in about 4 years. At $10/gallon, payback would occur in 1 year.

It's clear you are pushing an agenda. As they say, "don't let the facts cloud your opinions". Further, I'm staggered to see that a 5 year member of the boards could behave so inappropriately as to openly insult other members and resort to name-calling to push said agenda.

 

[spasm3]

Originally Posted By: cchase
.


Most of the batteries in these hybrids are warrantied for 10 years/150,000 miles. It's really not going to be a problem for most owners, especially when the payback is 4 years or less.

As far as increasing gas prices, higher gas prices only make the payback come more quickly. At $4/gallon, payback is in about 4 years. At $10/gallon, payback would occur in 1 year.



Did you buy a Volt? or a hybrid? if noy why?

 

[lovcom]

Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Originally Posted By: lovcom
Your thinking is not valid.

It does not matter if you're replacing a 20 year old car, or if that car snorts a gallon of gas every mile...

A better metric is this:

Do the "cost of complete ownership" on model A and model B, both of which are new cars you could buy.

Then buy the one that has the lowest complete cost of ownership.


You are ASSUMING that every hybrid car will need a battery replacement before its useful life is spent. But certain models already proved that the battery can indeed last just as long as the drivetrain. That is why I said in CERTAIN situations hybrid total cost of ownership can be less that an equivalent ICE only model.


Not so.

Even if you never need to replace the battery, nearly all hybrids are not as cost effective as a corresponding gas only model. The exception might be a Prius agaist most other same sized models.

 

[lovcom]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
he is also assuming a lot with statements like "or in the case of most Luxury car buyers, to tell others "I'm better then you". And the dirty secret is this: Most luxury car buyers really cannot afford the purchase...".

Most? Really?

Please tell us where you gleaned this market research. Sounds more like a form of envy to me.


Jealous?

No, I have lots of rentals...I prefer to put my money in things that pay me back...ever see a Lexus that pays you back? They tend to drop in value the second you drive it off the new car lot.

I would think that you'd be jealous of me! I have several rentals...you, by all means go drive a nice BMW

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: lovcom
A better metric is this:

Do the "cost of complete ownership" on model A and model B, both of which are new cars you could buy.

Then buy the one that has the lowest complete cost of ownership.



Hybrid SUV's and extennded range electric cars like the Volt seem reasonable to me.

Iy seems unreasonable to suggest they should be the same price as a regular car - they have substantial additional powertrain components and engineering costs. Progess and economy are not always companion concepts.

If you look at the "cost of complete ownership" of something like a car, no one in their right mind would ever buy anything more than the crummiest econobox. And what a dismal, static, world that would be.

Make a Prius run 40 miles on electricity and see what that would cost. About as much as a Volt would be my WAG, if you could even do it on a NiMH battery. And the Prius would still be ugly - you can't fix that.

 

[cchase]

Originally Posted By: spasm3
Originally Posted By: cchase
.


Most of the batteries in these hybrids are warrantied for 10 years/150,000 miles. It's really not going to be a problem for most owners, especially when the payback is 4 years or less.

As far as increasing gas prices, higher gas prices only make the payback come more quickly. At $4/gallon, payback is in about 4 years. At $10/gallon, payback would occur in 1 year.



Did you buy a Volt? or a hybrid? if noy why?


I like performance cars and that is what I have bought so far. They don't make a hybrid performance car as of yet and if they did I would have to analyze it to see if it was worth it financially.

If I was in the market for an SUV, a hybrid SUV would likely be on my short list due to the short break-even point.

 

[ffxfina3]

Originally Posted By: cchase
They don't make a hybrid performance car as of yet


Honda CR-Z

-Bryan

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: Bryan K. Walton
Originally Posted By: cchase
They don't make a hybrid performance car as of yet


Honda CR-Z

-Bryan


CR-Z is neither a good hybrid or sports car. It's slow and gets lousy mileage.

 

[subiedriver]

Infinity has the "M" hybrid out, 360 hp and 32 mpg, that's a hybrid I could drive!

 

[strongt]

Lexus GS 450h sedan 0-60: 5.6 sec 34 mpg hwy

Available May 2012

If you got some real money:

Porsche 918

 

[MarkM66]

Originally Posted By: Smokescreen
I don't understand why the two most inexpensive options are not pursued and they have proven results:

1) The first is the easiest..Aerodynamics. You could almost double any cars fuel economy by changing its shape.

2) Second, perfect the gasoline engine. They are making small strides all the time...gradually. 'If' they put a man on the moon or make a rail gun...why not use a fraction of that brain power to greatly improve on the gasoline engine?

Until you exhaust all the possibilities of improving on existing technologies before you...you aren't really serious.



Cars won't get any more aerodynamic. If they did, it would start to cut into head room, trunk room, etc. That would kill sales, so no one is going there. And double it's mileage? I'm not buying that.

Perfect the gasoline engine. You think "dumb" people are designing engines? Come on...

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: lovcom
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
I have to ask why some here feel that Hybrid SUV's are a bad idea?

There are families out there who's needs aren't met with a Prius so why shouldn't they be afforded some additional MPG's too?

A Tahoe/Yukon/Escalade Hybrid will give you 20-23 MPG in the City and 20-21 Highway. I have put over 8,000 miles on one and my average (according to DIC) is 21.6. This is more highway miles than city (hybrids do better in city than highway) and I don't exactly drive "easy", lol. This is also BETTER than what I get in my CTS, which is 18.9.


A family that needs an SUV that wants to "save on gas and get more MPG and save $$" would be exceedingly stupid to buy the hybrid version of their SUV of choice. If you care to do the "complete cost of ownership" calculations, you too will see that buying a hybrid SUV would cost tons more $$ over a gas only version. This is because the hybrid SUV's cost a LOT more then their gas only versions, the hybrid batteries are very expensive too (to replace).

Lots of idiots replace their gas cars with hybrids to "save gas and $$"...what idiots. Sometimes one can save $$ doing this, but mostly they end up spending a lot more $$ on the total operational cost of ownership.

So no, hybrid SUV's are only for idiots. Same for gas Camry vs. hybrid Camry, and same for gas vs hybrid Fusion, and many, many more combinations.






Granted, the whole Hybrid issue may not be the best economical choice with some makes/models but a Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid (which comes fully loaded) costs almost the same as regular Tahoe optioned the same way:

http://www.chevrolet.com/tahoe-family/

The GAS Tahoe LTZ as shown is $56,530...the Hybrid below it is $51,745...now the only option in the Hybrid is the sun/soound package at about $2000 so there you are at $53,000 with Hybrid...both trucks equipped the same.

Since I see these trucks coming off the line all day long, I've read a lot of window stickers and the Hybrid GM SUV's are cost effective compared to the non-hybrids. My only question is why GM doesn't offer a less equipped model priced out like the gas Tahoes #38,000 entry price.

 

[cchase]

Originally Posted By: Bryan K. Walton
Originally Posted By: cchase
They don't make a hybrid performance car as of yet


Honda CR-Z

-Bryan


Sorry but 140 hp a performance car does not make.

 

[Smokescreen]

Originally Posted By: MarkM66
Originally Posted By: Smokescreen
I don't understand why the two most inexpensive options are not pursued and they have proven results:

1) The first is the easiest..Aerodynamics. You could almost double any cars fuel economy by changing its shape.

2) Second, perfect the gasoline engine. They are making small strides all the time...gradually. 'If' they put a man on the moon or make a rail gun...why not use a fraction of that brain power to greatly improve on the gasoline engine?

Until you exhaust all the possibilities of improving on existing technologies before you...you aren't really serious.



Cars won't get any more aerodynamic. If they did, it would start to cut into head room, trunk room, etc. That would kill sales, so no one is going there. And double it's mileage? I'm not buying that.

Perfect the gasoline engine. You think "dumb" people are designing engines? Come on...

Apparently there is a very limited concept of aerodynamics out there. I have one word for you Aerocivic. Look it up, he has doubled his mileage...and then some, out of an old 1992 civic. sure it doesn't look pretty, but it cost him only $400. Aerodynamics is an old old concept, pre 1930's for cars. It comes and goes as concepts all the time and then a dumbed down brick version gets produced...Headroom, trunk space has little if anything to do with it. You can make a semi-truck trailer more aerodynamically efficient, cars are a piece of cake.

No, I don't think dumb people are designing engines. I am simply saying the results aren't matching up with the R&D involved and passage of time. There are cars from the 70's... loads of them that have as good or better mpgs specs than we have today. Besides that, do you actually believe that the gas engine is at its peak efficiency? Public "buy in" to better fuel economy, cooperation with oil companies and economics all play in development.

On the subject of electric cars...There are countless projects of ordinary "Joes" cobbling together their own pure electric vehicles in their own garages out of old car batteries and used electric motors driving them every day. Sure they aren't perfect, but these guys aren't rocket scientists either. You have go to ask yourself...Why can't the mega rich car companies do a project equal to their funding? Once again...Public "buy in" to better fuel economy, cooperation with oil companies and economics all play in development.

Google: Super Cheap High MPG Cars: 1978-1981, Aerocivic, Aerodynamic Seven Electric Car Achieves Super Efficient 207.5 MPG, DIY Electric cars, A $672 electric car, built by two DIYers

 

[Vikas]

Originally Posted By: lovcom
Oh, and one more thing....your calculations don't reflect the constant increase in gas prices into the future...lets say gas goes up an average of 50 cents a year, and then your 4 years break even turns into much more...


I sincerely hope your job does not require any mathematical abilities!

If the gas price goes up, the break even point comes EARLIER. I sure hope you are man enough to say "oops".

- Vikas