October 3rd, 2005
The Truth About Today’s Hybrid Cars: They Don’t Save Money
By Alice Hill
RealTechNews
Gas prices in the US are hitting record levels most drivers are not enjoying, to say the least. This has prompted a lot of interest in Hybrids - an intriguing half-electric, half combustion engine auto technology I have been personally covering for years. First, we published a basic nuts and bolts piece on how hybrids work, to get us all up to speed. But we recently uncovered some more bracing news: today’s hybrid may not be the big money lifesaver you thought it was. Joe White, Detroit Bureau Chief for The Wall Street Journal did a cost test and concluded that hybrids today are no bargain. Read on:
“White first looked at trading in his Subaru for a Prius, and found that at roughly $3 per gallon for gas, he wouldn’t recover his financing costs. Joe figured that at his annual mileage, he’d save about $746 a year in fuel costs, but it would take too long to recover the premium he’d pay for the hybrid.
“Next he looked at the hypothetical situation of someone without a car looking to buy either a Honda Civic or the Prius. In this case, the fuel savings were roughly $506 per year, versus a purchase price difference of about $8,000. Without even considering cost-of-money issues, it would take nearly 16 years just to break even.” Source: Autoblog
Our Question: Do you have plans to buy or not buy a hybrid? And why? Discuss.
Stephen says:
Excuse the language but “No Sh-t Sherlock”. If you look at the 80’s you see cars doing 50 miles per gallon and even 65. These hybrids do about 35 sometimes, maybe. good grief I know of SUV’s that do that. On top of that, even though some places give lower interest rates, when you actually go to your totals you find after about five years you are paying 25 to 50 % more because of the inflated prices to begin with. Go ahead, do the math. Not only is there no savings money wise, if you do the math emmision-wsie [I.E. MPG} there is no saving of either money or the enviroment. So the hybrids are [to me] absolutely worthless. The responses should be intereting and may even have some facts too lol. But I doubt it.
October 3rd, 2005 at 1:12 am
Vinay says:
“if you do the math emmision-wsie [I.E. MPG}”
Emmisions are a completely different subject from MPG, and it really demonstrates ignorance to equate them.
It’s always been the case that one must pay a premium to own a hybrid. There are non-tangible benefits to owning one (using less gas pays benefits beyond the cash savings, as does emitting less pollution). It’s up to the car buyer to decide whether it’s worth the financial cost. Calling these benefits “absolutely worthless” misses the point completey.
October 3rd, 2005 at 1:38 am
Doug says:
Does anyone ask if a convertible saves money, or a V8? In my experience, people who pose the “it won’t save money” argument are ones who are biased against hybrid technology and are searching for a reason to back them up. They are missing the point.
There are many, very important, reasons to conserve gasoline. Health, environmental, and natural security are some key ones that are not directly economic. I find that it “feels good” to drive a hybrid, probably much like others enjoy convertibles or V8s, but unlike those features a hybrid drive more or less pays for itself over time.
Other important aspects of low fuel consumption are increased freedom to drive when and where you choose, and you’re less vulnerable to fluctuations in fuel prices. I have a friend who got a deal on an SUV recently but he hates to drive it because of the cost. The recent increases in fuel prices may pale in comparison to rises we’ll see in the near future.
October 3rd, 2005 at 3:57 am
ice weasel says:
Seriously, do you get paid to be this stupid?
Did even read the entire article in the WSJ befoer barfing up these inanities?
You misquote the story. You really take the slant of it and go in another direction besides which, you’re really not even saying anything new here, just babbling work some other writer did.
Get a real job and quit wasting people’s time.
October 3rd, 2005 at 5:01 am
David Johnston says:
I don’t see why this is stupid. This story only deals with the cost of owning and running a hybrid car. It doesn’t try to say that they aren’t cleaner for the environment or that you shouldn’t buy one for some other reason. I have personally heard a lot of people muse about getting hybrids to save money on gas, so this would be a useful article for many of them and give them something to think about.
“You really take the slant of it and go in another direction besides which, you’re really not even saying anything new here”
So, is the story factually incorrect or isn’t it? You seem to say that it is and then say that it isn’t (”you’re really not even saying anything new here”).
“people who pose the “it won’t save money” argument are ones who are biased against hybrid technology and are searching for a reason to back them up”
The article never said you shouldn’t buy a hybrid. It just said that you shouldn’t buy a hybrid to *save money*. There’s a difference.
October 3rd, 2005 at 6:23 am
crunch says:
Rather than not reading articles maybe I will quit reading the comments. Life is too short for the hostility, which is, by the way, wasting people’s time.
October 3rd, 2005 at 6:31 am
Hwyman says:
“Calling these benefits “absolutely worthless” misses the point completey.”
Here’s the point: Most people don’t care about conserving gas…they care about conserving their money. Conservation is only an indirect benefit when the commodity in question (i.e. gas) is perceived to be too expensive. I say indirect because most people are primarily concerned with the price of the commodity versus its supply. Repeat after me: “It will never be about the environment; it will always be about the bank account.” People are dumping SUVs for hybrids because they think they will save money. Obviously, that’s a myth.
October 3rd, 2005 at 6:40 am
Bob says:
Do yourself a favor and buy a 5+ year old honda civic or some similar car before you buy into the Hybrid frenzy. You will pay much less up front for a car with about the same mpg. Also, hybrid technology is new and could be very costly to repair in a few years.
October 3rd, 2005 at 6:55 am
Bob says:
By the way, the title, “The Truth About Today’s Hybrid Cars: They Don’t Save Money”, is right on target. You’ll never save money with one of these cars. A few years down the road when you think you’re getting ahead and might be getting the extra money back that you paid for the car, you have to buy another set of battries….OUCH!!
October 3rd, 2005 at 7:00 am
Omari says:
In the Northern Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C., hybrids can use the HOV lanes (even if there’s only one person in the car.) That alone seems to make them worth the expense to some people.
October 3rd, 2005 at 7:09 am
mikeb says:
Purchasing a Prius at first is a matter of money - people will save money in the long-run, but this varies from person-to-person. I’ve done the math from my standpoint.
I was in the market to purchase a $30K new or $25K leased car. I was prepared and wanted to spend that amount of money. Once you realize and accept that, it all comes down to MPG, technology and dealer willingness for me.
Accepting that I will pay the same amount of money for whatever car I chose, the fully-loaded Prius offered everything I wanted (except for AWD). What it lacked in high-performance options, it exceeded in the technology offerings. Integrated NAV system, smart-key (keyless) entry and driving, high MPG, Bluetooth cellphone integration, etc.
You can’t get these options on any other car in the market. What’s the sacrifice? Lower cost at the pump and fewer emisions.
So, I’ve done the math, and it makes sense.
Those individuals out there that rant about the math not making sense are probably the same individuals that shop for cars solely based on cost - they don’t think about engineering, technology and value. They’re out on the car lots looking for the cheapest car that meets their needs, buying cheap American made cars in our throw-away society.
Yes, I may pay more for my Prius up front, but I guarantee, my Prius will last longer than your Kia, Ford, GM, etc. In the long-run, I’ll buy fewer better quality vehicles, now, how’s that for savings. BTW - I’ll be the well-informed consumer at the same time, doing my small part to make my hybrid statement.
October 3rd, 2005 at 7:15 am
Wizard Prang says:
When I worked in Munich, I visited the BMW museum, where I saw a vehicle that carried four people and did 30MPG. It was built in 1938. Nearly seventy years later, a four-door sedan gets about… 30MPG. If you’re lucky.
During the oil shocks of the 1970s, Americans were driving two-ton tanks and were laughing at the little Japanese econoboxes.
Thirty years later, history is repeating itself; we have learned nothing.
Show an American a Smart Car (www.thesmart.co.uk) and they laugh. Tell them that it gets up to 60MPG and the laughing subsides… but only because Big Oil is putting them in the poorhouse.
So what went wrong? What happened was this: For every advance the geeks in engineering gave to us, the marketing boys made them add on a few more power-sapping gadgets and put smaller engines in bigger, heavier vehicles… then spent millions persuading us that this was what we really wanted.
It has become clear to me that most Americans are not concerned about fuel economy. Watch the ads for the new 2006 models and listen for the words “fuel economy”. You won’t hear them. The larger SUVs do not even have fuel economy requirements - at the behest of the automobile industry.
What Americans want is performance and safety; the former guzzles fuel while the latter is associated with size and weight… which guzzles fuel. They tend to see cheap gas and huge vehicles ars their divine right, and I don’t see this mentality changing anytime soon.
October 3rd, 2005 at 7:19 am
Ted says:
This is an interesting puzzle. On the one hand, the article takes a hard look at dollars in pocket, and on that basis you can read it as an article on the economics of hybrids. And if that was what it all boiled down to, I’d agree with the author and commentators.
But that’s not the problem I can see. Think about a few things. Hybrids either use the engine to charge the battery, or else use a power company’s grid to charge the battery. Either way, the electricity that’s put in came from fossil fuel being burned. So the pollution load is not much different than a comparable sized sedan. Full electric vehicles also have to have their batteries charged somehow - so they too aren’t the answer. Yet.
But. The hybrids are almost all small sedans not mid or wagon sized. The fact that people buy them now in preference to a larger vehicle means there will be a reduction in the overall pollution load because more people are using smaller vehicles.
And one day a lot of the electricity used to charge those hybrids and electric vehicles will be generated by something other than fossil fuels, and then the pollution load may go down a lot.
Also, if you choose a smaller vehicle with lower pollution figures, you can make more of a difference than you can by buying a hybrid. But just by buying a hybrid for your next car instead of a wagon or whatever, you can also make a difference.
So for the moment look for ZEV and PZEV (Zero Emission and Practically Zero Emission Vehicles) cars out there and do the planet a favour, and forget about your wallet. Look at the trouble that has gotten us into to date…
October 3rd, 2005 at 7:21 am
Ramsey says:
There is no doubt that it is difficult to recoup the up front cost of hybrids in at-the-pump savings. And I agree that if you can find a non-hybrid vehicle that gets similar mileage, that’s a great thing to do. Ted’s comment about considering emissions is also important to look at.
At some point we need to stop thinking only about how our choices affect us in a personal and immediate way. A guy I know complains all the time about gas prices, and he’s driving around in a Durango, which I think is EPA rated at 12 MPG. It’s that choice, aggregated across all the Durango’s and Hummer’s and other gas guzzlers that are out there that is raising the demand for gasoline. If those people had all bought a Prius instead, demand would be lower than it is now, and therefore so would gas prices.
We in this country use more than 25% of the oil produced in the world. Yet we insist on attacking the problem from the supply side. What happens when we run out of surface oil? The sooner we attack the problem from the demand side, the better.
To me this means that government has a respoonsibility to incentize businesses and consumers to look at any and all means of reducing oil consumption, both short term and long term. The problem is that this is never a politically expedient position to take. And for obvious reasons, that goes double for the current administration. We need to begin to demand that greater subsidies accompany the purchase of fuel-efficient, low-emissions vehicles. We need to demand that the production of these cars is also subsidized, and we need to demand that research into new, realistic (i.e. not ethanol from corn) energy alternatives is encouraged in every way possible. Any pain this costs us now will be multiplied several times over if we delay in this course of action. Just wait until we see a real shock in oil supply. We’ll all be screwed and completely unprepared if we continue down the present path.
October 3rd, 2005 at 8:00 am
Mel says:
Finally, someone with a sense of finance. Yeah, it is green, it is fuel miser but in the long run, nobody knows what it going to happen to those dead batteries and more importantly how much it is going to cost to replace them. I think a new Corolla or a Scion XA or XB is a better investment in the long run.
October 3rd, 2005 at 8:20 am
Mark says:
It depends on how much you’re going to be driving. It sounds like this guy doesn’t really drive that much. If someone is driving for their work (so called “road warriors”), or making a lot of cross country trips or even has 2 hour commutes to work, the Prius WILL end up paying for itself or justifying its higher cost. And as the price of gas goes up, which some analyists are predicting could go up as high as 5 to 6 dollars in the near future (its innevitable either way) the Prius you bit the bullet on right now will really start to pay for itself.
October 3rd, 2005 at 8:32 am
rocket455r says:
i have a hybrid civic, i get 51 mph, bought it in 2003, before the gas increases AND the premium you now pay on hybrids, the dealer called and would actually give me what i paid for it after 2 years of use. One thing besides the 2000$ tax deduction i got on my fed taxes everyone missed, large vehicles cause a huge amount of wear on the roadways. It would save a ton of money if everyone drove smaller cars. Less road wear means lower taxes.
October 3rd, 2005 at 9:32 am
Jon says:
A few points from a new Prius owner:
1) The WSJ article did not compare apples to apples, i.e., a new prius against a new car in the same class and with like amenities. Forbes I believe compred several hybrids in those terms and found the Prius a good value.
2) Prius is rated 60 mpg by EPA; users generally report about 45 in real-world driving. No SUV gets that kind of mileage.
3) One comment above assumes that all the electric power in a Prius comes from a plug or the gas engine for no net savings in emissions/fuel. Untrue. No plug, and much of the electricity comes from capturing wasted kinetic energy from coasting, breaking, etc. Very smart and efficient.
4) The batteries on a Prius come with an 8-year 100k warrantee. The car has existed for 5+ years now in its current form and Toyota has not had to replace a single battery.
5) The Prius is consistenly ranked as an excellent value in mid-sized sedans (it has 4 doors, people), even leaving aside its hybrid engineering. It has good or excellent ratings for reliability (read lower repairs), safety, performance, and features.
6) All the dead batteries in a Prius go back to Toyota, if the owner disposes of his car responsibly (i.e., doesn’t dump it in the local creek bed). Toyota publishes the cost of replacement batteries so, yes, that is known. The cost is going down as production increases, of course. That’s how Toyota is now making a profit on the Prius.
7) There’s a reason you don’t see ads for Prius. They are unnecessary. They sell themselves.
Perhaps the best argument for buying a hybrid, even if it is not strictly the cheapest option, is contained in the “Tragedy of the Commons” metaphore. Hybrids internalize some of the true costs of car ownership that we previously have left for future generations to pay, in the fouler air and unnecessarily expensive future energy costs that are inevitable from our current wasteful use. It seems to me that one should be rooting for new efficient technologies, rather than dismissing them out of hand.
October 3rd, 2005 at 9:37 am
Matt says:
A comment was made that “Hybrids either use the engine to charge the battery, or else use a power company’s grid to charge the battery.” This isn’t true. All current Hybrids charge the batteries with regenerative braking only. This means that the power that is in the batteries was generated when you hit the brakes on the car, energy that would have otherwise been lost. Currently you can’t plug hybrids into the wall, but even if you could, It would be more efficient to use fossil fuels to generate electricity and use that to power the car than it is to run fossil fuels through an internal combustion engine where 80% of the energy is waited as a heat byproduct. Plus much of our electricity comes from cleaner resources than Fossil fuels.
Hybrids may not make fiscal sense for everyone right now, but they are a step in the right direction, and prices will come down. Get used to it because I predict it won’t be too many years before almost everyone is driving some sort of hybrid (likely a bio-diesel hybrid).
October 3rd, 2005 at 9:49 am
John says:
Looks like everyone who commented so far has missed the
point on the fuel problems we are having that cause the
price of gas to go up so fast. We have PLENTY of petroleum
in our own country, so paying extortion to the other oil
rich countries results in greed fed price hikes. Only the
oil companies are profiting from this mess.
October 3rd, 2005 at 10:00 am
Sergio Pereira says:
I know this is not totally related, but some countries like Brazil have had alcohol (ethanol, not methanol) -powerd vehicles for decades. It is a much cleaner fuel and, most importanltly, it’s virtually endless. They make it from sugar cane, but many other sources can be used. In the begining it was a little harder on the engines, but know the engines have developed and wear out just like a gasoline-powered car. They now have what they are calling Flex-powered engines, that you can use gasoline and/or alcohol, your choice (good when price fluctuates). I do not understand why the countries in the developed world do not have somnething like this.. actually I do understand a little but I do not want to be harassed by the “oil people” LOL!
By the way.. I understood the author’s point and I agree 100%… we are only talking about money here. If you feel better by helping out the environment, then by all means, cough up the extra bucks and get a hybrid.
October 3rd, 2005 at 10:15 am
James says:
I don’t think any body out there is thinking to save money from using a hybrid at this point in time. If they are, then they aren’t doing their research. Right now, getting a hybrid is about reducing dependency on oil.
FYI: if you are interested in reducing the US’s dependency on oil, check out: http://www.setamericafree.org/
October 3rd, 2005 at 10:18 am
David Johnston says:
I did read that 97% of the lead in the batteries for these cars is recycled. Of course, they do it in places like Africa…and one may wonder what happens to the other 3%. In any case, the batteries don’t seem like too big of a problem.
Also, I don’t think the article is focusing on a person who’s going to spend $30,000 on his or her car no matter what he or she gets. It’s geared more toward the person who’s wondering if spending the extra couple thousand for the hybrid versions is worth it economically.
And yes, there are also a lot of other things to factor in such as what kind of roads you’re driving on. If all you do is drive around a city, these things would be great because that’s where they get the best mileage (by turning the engine off at stop lights and when you press the brakes). However, if the majority of your driving is done on the highway they’re not actually that much different than any other compact car. Let’s also not forget that the auto industry inflates the MPG estimates and that hybrids are no exception
October 3rd, 2005 at 10:49 am
Dana Shields says:
I’d pay a $10,000 premium for my Prius if it didn’t funnel money straight into petroterrorism dysfunction and at the same time help the envirnoment. But it didn’t. It was about $3,000 above some cars in its class.
I consistently get 52 MPG in the city and about 64 MPG on the highway (And I’ve even gotten as high as 73 MPG on GA 400 commutes). And I could get this in ANYBODY’S Prius, because differences between Priuses’ MPG are about the driver, not the car. Drivers who’d pay the $3,000 premium and squash the gas pedal to the floor would be a rare breed. But for some reason, test drivers for Consumer Reports and other publications seem bent on testing the car to its absolute extremes.
And here’s the kicker: the more I drive, the more savings I achieve. Conversely, GM Expeditions with a big rebate are for people who want to buy a car, get some cash, and then hardly drive it (because the less you drive, the more you save). You can convert them into a lawn planter, and that’s about it.
I would not give up my hybrid.
Ever.
October 3rd, 2005 at 11:23 am
Jon says:
It is difficult to compare the value of the hybrid component alone, since there are few matches identical except for the hybrid system. The Accord hybrid, for instance, comes only in a fully loaded version. The Prius is not at all equivalent to the cheapest available Civic. Some of these analyses use misleading matches. According to CNN, the Prius actually comes out slightly cheaper than a Camry.
About the batteries: “NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) is a benign substance. It can be recycled too. In fact, the guarantee for recycling is rather high, since nickel is a valuable metal. Misconceptions about rechargeable batteries stem from the obsolete NiCd (Nickel Cadmium) technology, which really was harmful.”
(http://john1701a.com/prius/prius-misconceptions.htm)
The EPA, not manufacturers, publishes MPG estimates. Manufacturers are prohibited by law from publishing estimates other than EPA’s.
October 3rd, 2005 at 11:49 am
Alice says:
Except for one rude and immature posting, I think this discussion covered the main issue I was hoping to raise. That many people think like this: Gas is expensive and sure to get worse, I think I need a more fuel efficient car, so what could be better for my pocketbook than a Hybrid?
That’s the group that needs to understand the issue more - that there are many factors that draw people to a hybrid that sometimes have less to do with money (as you can see in some of the great personal stories told here) and that if money is your *only* motivation, then it needs a little more looking into. There are a lot of factors that go into how you use a vehicle that can impact the bottom line: how often you drive it, if you live in a city, if you commute and so on - these factors can make a non-hybrid get better gas mileage or an H2 cost less to drive each year if you drive it only on the weekends and so on. But I think what the main point is: Hybrids are not an automatic slam dunk for your bank account no matter how great they are long term or for the environment. And that’s OK, but just felt that we needed to run the numbers too.
PREDICTION: I do think that we will soon see the return of those car commericals that happened in the late 70s early 80s that had two boxes at the bottom of the screen with highway and City mpg listed. That went away after the oil crisis, but I’ll bet “mpg” will be the new “airbag and safety” draw in commercials when the car companies retool and start to duke it out. Give it a year and let’s see if I’m right!
October 3rd, 2005 at 2:41 pm
Art McClure says:
My 1983 Rabbit Diesel consistently got 53 mpg on the highway. I could go from Washington,DC to NYC,NY and back on one tank of fuel. Where’s the new technology?
Art McClure
October 3rd, 2005 at 4:54 pm
Alice says:
My dad had a 1979 Datsun (in 70’s orange no less) that he claimed regularly did 56 mpg on his long communtes to and from work. He said he never had a car before or since that did as well, and that was over 25 years ago.
October 3rd, 2005 at 5:16 pm
Hank says:
Yeah, yeah…….my dad told the story for forty years about the carburator that could get 100 mpg on a garden variety Ford, until it got bought by the big oil companies and was never heard from again. But this is 2005 too many have bought into the SUV it’s a Hemi hype. I’ve driven a Honda Civic Hybrid for two years and my last tank got me 46 mpg-actual , not by the meter. I gave $20,000 for it at 1.9% and give up nothing in comfort.The worst actual mileage I’ve gotten was 40 mpg in the dead of an Illinois winter. And it is a ULEV. You whiners can justify your penis extensions all you want and I’ll laugh my ass off when I pass you at the pump. It will soon be for sale-when my new $22, 000 SULEV Prius comes in this December. I have to wait till January to take possession so I can get my $3,150 tax credit. Thanks taxpayers! Think I can sell my old Honda Hybrid???
October 3rd, 2005 at 6:23 pm
Jon says:
I agree with Alice. Strikes me, though, that this is a classic glass half full/half empty situation; an inkblot. What people are saying has as much to do with the attitudes and opinions they bring to the discussion as the facts on hand.
Seems the article brings the assumption that mileage is the only thing of interest about a hybrid. I just bought a Prius. Read about it. Mileage is just the start. It’s not a diesel Rabbit or a 79 Datsun. It’s one of the best mid-sized sedans being built today, forget the hybrid aspect. Add the hybrid aspect, and you have one hell of a cool car.
See you at the gas pump (rarely).
October 3rd, 2005 at 8:50 pm
Heather says:
Alice is right to cite a WSJ story to start out the interesting debate above, but in the end regular Joes and Joannes need to look to their friends, their cars, and their own angst at the gas pump–and then judge from their experience as to whether a hybrid car like the Prius is going to be their next big purchase. For instance, I know a large-animal vet in rural Long Island who made her practice profitable by switching to hybrid. I long to feel the joy she feels when she drives by a gas station.
PS–Love the neologism “petroterrorism” (that’s on our part, right?)–better than “completey” at least.
October 3rd, 2005 at 10:04 pm
ponyboy says:
Did you know that the US imports the largest percentage of its oil from Canada.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
October 4th, 2005 at 2:34 am
edc says:
I’ve had a 2005 Prius for 3 months. It’s a great car; very good milage and good handling. I’ve owned Subarus, Saabs, VWs, and Volvos — the Prius is as good or better than any. The $5 or $6K that I paid over say a Honda Civic was worth it to me — I’ve gotten a larger, more comfortable car, with all sorts of new features, like navigation, handless phone, and smart key. Although I can live without these feeatures, they make the experience much more pleasurable.
If you look at the Prius in total, it’s a hell of a value; I’m not going back to traditional cars anytime soon.
October 4th, 2005 at 4:26 am
Dan says:
Do a bit more math. WSJ was only considering 2005, not 2006. Also they did not take into account the lower maintenance of the Hybrids because of reduced engine wear (this is well documented, research before you rebut). As for 2006, the 3100 you get back in CASH from Uncle Sam takes the break even point from 16 years down to 10. Take into account the lower maintenance costs, and you could probably widdle that down to 9 years.
There are also the intangibles. HOV access, free parking, lowering dependency on foreign oil. Over the life of the car those are probably worth a few hundred as well. So that would bring your break even point between 8 and 9 years.
And yes… I do plan to drive it 10 years, it’s a Toyota. There are Prii (priuses) drivers (not employed by Toyota) that have logged 200,000 miles without any serious issues (including HV battery wear).
-Dan
October 4th, 2005 at 7:32 am
Howard says:
I’ve got a classic Prius (2002) and average just over 50 mpg with it. The car is great, and a lot of fun to drive. I am comparing it to my 7 series BMW too! The hybrid technology is great. What people fail to realize is that this is not an econobox car. Toyota did a great job combining the gas engine and electric motors. This car is fast off the line due to the high torque you can get from an electric motor at low speeds. Sure it is not a race car and the zero-sixty times are around 10 seconds but that is not an issue for most drivers. The car handles well and the gas mileage that most drivers that learn how to drive the car get matches or exceeds the EPA ratings.
The car excels in suburban driving where you can fully make use of the mixed power capabilities. It is really nice that the engine does not run and waste fuel and cause pollution at a traffic light. I regularlly sit in stop and go traffic and watch my average miles per gallon go up, not down. The premium you pay for this car today, especially factoring in the upcoming tax credit for ‘06 is in the hundreds of dollars not the thousands.
If every single car in this country were a Prius the United States would be exporting rather than importing oil! Think about that.
October 4th, 2005 at 7:41 am
Metermax says:
Electric cars. If you truly care about the environment, don’t subsidize the oil companies through hybrid technology. The technology exists NOW for car companies to build viable all electric cars. I can plug in my car at night. I have the capability to remember to do this, and the cost is much less than gasoline. If you can plug in your phone, you can plug in your car.
Range of the ELECTRIC Rav 4 from 1997 (yes, this existed once) was around a hundred miles on a charge. If the car companies would sell a car with even half that range for commuting, it would work for a large number of people.
I’m totally frustrated about the big move to hybrids. Its twice as much technology to break and its still dragging around a gasoline engine to produce its power. Does anyone remember an electric VW rabbit from the 70’s? With all our advances in battery technology, there is no excuse for the lack of electrics in the US. Oh, but this is the country that went to the moon nearly 40 years ago, and can’t do it today.
October 4th, 2005 at 7:56 am
WRM says:
If everyone rode a motorcycle we would still import oil, but there would be less congestion during the morning commute.
October 4th, 2005 at 8:03 am
John says:
http://emercedesbenz.com/Sep05/13MercedesIntroducesHybridSClass.htm
If you are going to buy a Mercedes anyway, you might as well get one of these
October 4th, 2005 at 9:36 am
Alice says:
From a reader who cannot post online for some reason:
Alice, I tried once again to submit a comment, in “How Hybrid Cars Work”, and still got “Error: This file cannot be used on its own.” as a response when I clicked on Submit Comment. What I wanted to post was:
=======================================
“How the Prius works: The Prius is unique in that it employs two electric motor/generators (MGs) to take the place of a shifting transmission & clutch. The gas engine, MGs and car wheels are all interconnected, permanently, through two differentials (one of them being an unequal-ratio planetary gearset): no clutch, no shifting. Power to/from the wheels and/or the battery is modulated seamlessly by the MGs. I love my 2004!”
Ken Herrick
October 4th, 2005 at 9:55 am
jimsum says:
All these arguments about whether the Prius is worth buying or not depend on what you consider a comparable car. Normally, people compare cars by figuring out what’s the cheapest car that meets their needs. The problem is that choices about drivetrain and engine are not only personal preference, they also have a cost.
I suggest that car prices be standardized to 30 mpg for comparison purposes. If the car gets better mileage than 30, the price gets reduced; if it gets worse, the price is increased.
So let’s say the Prius gets a conservative 45 mpg. If we assume the car lasts 150,000 miles, it will save 1667 gallons of gas over the life of the car compared to a car that gets 30 mpg. I’ll assume $3 a gallon gas, so the Prius essentially costs $5000 less than a car that gets 30 mpg. After equalizing prices like this, it is easier to compare cars.
I think the best comparison to the Prius is actually a Toyota Matrix, since they are both 4-door hatchbacks of about the same size. A decently-equipped Matrix retails for about $20,000 and will probably sell for $18,000 with alloy wheels, cruise control and automatic. It is rated at 28/34, so let’s say it gets 31 mpg. Note I am comparing the EPA rating of the Matrix to the “real-world” rating of the Prius. The mileage is slightly higher than 30, so the Matrix gets a $500 mileage bonus.
So Prius costs: 21,000 - 5000 = $16000
Matrix costs 18,000 - 500 = $17500
I personally think that the Prius will have lower maintenance costs than a normal car, and I believe Toyota’s claim that the batteries will last the life of the car. If you don’t believe that, you can apply the $1500 savings to the anticipated repair costs.
I think this method will make it a lot easier to account for fuel economy between different cars without obscuring the other points of comparison, like how big it is and how fast it goes and whether it is used or new.
There are many cars out there that will cost less than the Prius to own and run; but I don’t think there are any new cars that are bigger or faster than the Prius that will cost less.
P.S. If you think the Prius is overpriced, you should see the price in Canada. Converting Canadian prices to U.S., the base Prius is about $26,000 or $5000 more than the U.S. price. What’s worse, other comparable cars like the Matrix cost about the same in Canada and the U.S. No wonder they sell a lot better in the U.S. than anywhere else.
October 4th, 2005 at 1:18 pm
tfpary says:
My take on the subject was to buy a 12 year old Geo Metro in good shape for $1500. It gets 46 mpg driving me to work and back. By the way my other car is a Suburban, so I have one of the smallest high mileage cars and one of the largest gas guzzlers (15 mpg hiway). So whats that make me politically? Very confused!
October 4th, 2005 at 5:21 pm
James Hall says:
I agree with many here that hybrids are far from being only about money (gas) savings. I am a recent Prius owner and for me it was also about the LOW emmissions, the great features that are available on NO other car out there, the smooth silent ride, the unique styling, the customer satisfaction rating (90% - the highest listed in Consumer Reports), and the Toyota reputation - for making a vehicle that lasts. Also there’s the 8yr - 160,000km warranty on all the hybrid parts.
Sure it was expensive, but like someone said here already, people do their homework before they buy one of these and know what they’re paying for up front… and it isn’t just gas savings.
Those who are running down the hybrids should really educate themselves a little more on all these other benefits, rather than just dismiss them because the gas savings aren’t as some percieve they should be.
And sure, the diesels get great gas mileage, but presently at the expense of spewing some of the worst emmissions around.
Less dependency on the big (price gauging) oil companies and cleaner air to breathe are two reasons alone to think about a hybrid!
October 4th, 2005 at 7:35 pm
David Johnston says:
I’m pretty sure that diesel fuel is generally “cleaner” than regular unleaded gasoline even though it may smell bad: http://trailer-bodybuilders.com/news/trucks_diesel_burn_cleaner_3/
October 4th, 2005 at 9:41 pm
Larry says:
Where did you come up with a price difference between Hybrid and non-hybrid of $8000 ?? First the Prius you mention only comes in a hybrid format, so there is no comparison. The Honda Civic comes in a hybrid and non-hybrid. The similarly equipped and identically sized Non-hybrid equivalent is the EX. MSRP of EX is $19060. MSRP of Hybrid is $21850. Difference about $2800, not $8000. Using the $746 a year fuel savings that is 4 year payback. But let’s not forget the tax credits that would offset all but about $700, so this is a one year payback. Oh, let’s not forget the 100’s of pounds of emissions that the non-hybrid produces.
October 11th, 2005 at 8:00 pm
Majlogon says:
Speaking from a mechanics ponit of view, let’s consider the Hybrid Issue: 1)Do they save energy?
Having been involved in the disassembly of cars for some time, it seemed pertinent to explore how much energy and money it takes to build and repair a hybrid vs. a conventional car of the same type. The added complexity and weight of the electrics included in the hybrid powertrain requires more energy and therfore more resources expended to bring these into existence. These greater expenditures require more money, leading to the eventual price premium paid by the consumer. Further, After the first 5-7 years of service, these same powertrains will begin to wear.
That brings us to #2) Who will repair them?
Now, before anyone begins to rave about Toyota’s or Honda’s reliability, it has been my experience, and those of many others in the automotive field, that it truly doesn’t matter who make the vehicle; they all break. Either in an accident or because of mileage or neglect all vehicle retailers *without exception* have a service department. Even Rolls Royce does. So who will fix these cars when the warranty runs out? We are talking about drive by wire here, folks. Plan on paying $150.00 to $200.00+ an hour JUST FOR A DIAG. Most other cars? About $85.00. A tune up? We are talking about vehicles that channel power company levels of electricity from either a large central battery complex or from capacitors capable of shocking Frankenstien to life. Not this guy. No way. You will have to pay me a BUNCH to touch that thing.
So, What have we learned? Yes, hybrids are efficient when new. They leave the air cleaner than they found it. They cost less at the pump.
But so is a ten year old Camry. Or a Fifteen year old Accord. Or (gasp) a 20 year old Volvo. Anyone with two years worth of trade school training can build them and rebuild them indefinitely. Parts for them are cheap, even the Volvo. You can buy a battery for any of them at Pep Boys.
As far as mileage/cost ratios are concerned, If the numbers matter so much, buy a motorcycle. 50+ MPG. Cheap to build and buy. Most are faster than your neighbor’s Camaro.
Enjoy!
October 18th, 2005 at 7:35 pm
ericatruth says:
weird. never realized this
November 8th, 2005 at 4:14 pm
RUBYRED says:
First off, hybrids are a good idea, but the ones out today are utter crap. Not only is the guy who wrote this article right on the pricing concept, but the engineering of the car will also come back and bite you in the arse.
Eventually the batteries in these cars will go bad, (wonder how enviromentally friendly it is gunna be when we have to dispose of them) but thats not the point, people will take their cars in to the shop and find out that batteries are Hella expensive. Because they cant afford/justify getting new batteries, they run the car on the slow gas engine only. Not only is it slow, but it is worn out way more than a normal gas engine. Why you ask? Because it was constantly being started and turned off its entire life. It will need a rebuild too. So what do you have left? You have a pig underpowered heavy a$$ car hauling around heavy batteries and getting terrible gas milage, polluting more, and slowing down traffic.
i really wish they would just focus on building a lightweight gasoline engined car. the 80s honda crxs got 65mpg on 80s technology fuel injection and engine management.
November 8th, 2005 at 10:05 pm
Nim says:
If the rest of the world gave out carbon emissions and used the earth’s resources as the US does we would need 5 earths!
That is enough reason to buy an environmentally friendly car.
February 22nd, 2006 at 2:19 pm
James says:
Here it is…..COST PER MILE…..TOTAL…
Say you buy a new car…drive it until it dies or needs MAJOR repair engine/tranny/cells….say 200,000 or 250,000 miles….take the cost of the car and tires,taxes (road fees based on weight ect),oil,brakes,GAS or kilowatts used to fuel it ect..ect ect….to find your cost per mile….How much it actualy cost you per mile to drive the car….THAT is your true cost….it is much more than “How much for a gallon?” “Whats the MPG?”
Wait until the preus dies and needs a $MEGABUCK$ part replaced (that the local shop is clueless about….forcing dealer service/hi prices)….any and all savings will go right back into the green car….And think the overseas sweatshop making these parts cares about its pollution levels?….HA ….all our epa has done here is run industry out of the US to places where on a Global scale they pollute MORE now than ever!
July 18th, 2006 at 2:27 pm
RSE says:
I love the comments, and I love the fact that a few of them are truthfull and intelligent! And just to let you all know where I am coming from; I will tell you that yes I am educated, spent some time working in aerospace and other engineering settings, and have done a lot of research into the hybrid technology, as well as other options for futuristic transportation needs.
Here are some interesting facts and points that some of you really take time to consider:
1) The arguement over the true cost of a repair and replacement scenario with a hybrid vehicle is in all truth moot, and foolish. Tell me good people, what would a complete automatic transmission rebuild cost to repair on a-for example-a newer modern Dodge Ram diesel? I can guarantee that it cost more that a set of batteries for any of the hybrids. Which by the way is the accepted #1 entity to go sour. And do keep this in mind, the prices are getting lower, and even the third world sweat shops are getting better and more conscious about modern manufacturing and environmental issues and needs.
2) The question about the initial cost, and the break even point of the (higher) cost of a hybrid over a lesser type vehicle (an example here is the Dodge Neon, or something similar). There is a shred of truth here, but a point that most of you missed, I did see one or two people comment on it thou, is this: after 5 years that Dodge Neon isn’t going to be worth $50.00, even in prime shape. Where the hybrid, any hybrid, will have a very good resale value. Related to this point is another fact that was (again) missed by most of you; all vehicles now days have a maintenance cost factor to some degree that begs serious research.
I will not bore anyone here by throwing out more examples, for I do have many. And I do not have a hybrid vehicle, but I know a handfull of folks who do, and they all seem very, very happy to have them. I will say that my wife and I have been seriously considering one for over a year, but have been waiting for more competition and choices, which ultimately makes the prices a little friendlier, and the vehicles even better. I will also admit that when they first came out, which by the way was in Europe back in the late 70’s. (Didn’t know that? Better do some more researching then, before you write another reather ridiculous response.) Well since they first came out, and especially since they have been ut here via Japan for the past couple of years, the maintenance factors, training of service personnal and servicing in general, and the so called quirks and problems, including the road hazzard needs for an accident (batteries leaking toxic material, and high voltage, etc.) have been showing as much improvement, if not more, than the rest of the pack of vehicles for sale.
The bottom line I am trying to state here is this: hybrids are one of the serious choices we have at the moment to break away from the antiquated means of transportation that we have become dependant on. Hell we, and even the government, cannot make up its mind on what direction to go with alternative fuels (biodiesel as an example) and what to use as a base (grass or canola oil). Another thing I really wish that some of you would consider is the item I repeatedely saw about the cost factor; there really is no differential of a substantial nature here; I have a Hyundai Sonota, year 2004. I paid just undr $18,000.00 (V6, sunroof, wow!); but it was not too long ago that that very same type of vehicle would go for about half, if not less. Cars and trucks are not exactly cheap now days anyway; and neither is the maintenance for most of them. To me, an extra $5,000.00 (approx.) for a hybrid, which will immediately start to pay for itself, is not really a dabatorial thought. They will become more efficient, both in maintenance and price, just like everything else (remember when computers first came out?). And, not speaking for the frills and in-crowd people; but why not drive in the HOV lanes and beat the crowd?
People, do some research here, and some thinking; after all, is gas really going to come down in price?
July 31st, 2006 at 10:38 pm
creditrepair says:
creditrepair creditrepair
August 6th, 2006 at 12:20 pm
Alice Hill’s Real Tech News - Independent Tech» Blog Archive » “American Father of the Prius” Killed in Plane Crash says:
[…] Despite the arguments about the Prius and its ability to save money … and there have been plenty (here and here for example) … there’s no denying the Prius has changed automaking. Although the Insight was first, the Prius is still the most popular, and one needs only peer into the carpool lane in California to see tons of them. […]
November 27th, 2006 at 8:12 am
Dave says:
The technology that goes into hybrids is great stuff. However, the truth is they are just politically correct vehicles, that require government subsidies and gimmics (allowed in HOV lanes) to sell them. Build a viable electric car for city driving and a high milage gas powered vehicle for out of city use.
December 5th, 2006 at 6:59 am
Eric says:
wow for someone to be arguing with another person over the difference of MPG and Emissions is pretty stupid. the fact of the matter is that there is a direct correlation between gas milage and emissions. Think about it! if you are using less gas then you aren’t putting out as much pollutants in the air. I’m 15 years old and know that. Its pretty simple to make a car look like it pollutes less my favorite example is the air pump or smog pump. This has been around for years and the government still allows it. what it does is pump air from the atmosphere right in the the exhast pipes to make it look like the air coming out of them is cleaner then it really is. So before you go off and yell at people think about what you are saying.
January 29th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
Roger says:
Hunh Show me an SUV that does 3 5 MPG
The argument above makes no sense.
It says the price is inflated ok so when you go to sell it will STILL be inflated so you lost the same amount in depretiation as you do on a non-hybrid car.
Then you say the hybrids only do 35 MPG ahhhh ok might want to go back and check your facts.
One poster says back in the 80s cars were getting 50 - 60 MPG once again ahh ok show me cause they didn’t get 60 MPG
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:24 am
Patrick Chin says:
When the fox cant get the grapes, the grapes are always bitter. cant put a price on clean air; everyone should be gratefull , Toyota started the ball rolling in the right direction, they are basically ten years ahead of everyone, in this technology, but at least, everyone has started to come around and start putting there systems into motion, and that is definately a winner for the environment, and who benefits from this example move? We all do.
May 20th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
Everitt Chase says:
Ok, there is some misinformation at play here. The fundementals of the story leave some important facts out of play.
1) DEPRECIATION
Historically the prius has one of the lowest depreciation rates of any vehicle, so if the author compares the resale value of his civic in five years to that of his prius he will see several thousand dollars less depreciation on the Prius.
2. VEHICLE CLASS
The Civic is a compact, economy/midclass car, the Prius is a Midsize semi-luxury vehicle, this comparison is really Apples to Oranges. Don’t beleive me? Go for a test drive. (I did, and purchased the Prius, for $8000 more)
3) RISING COST OF FUEL
Ok, this is speculation. Perhaps Exxon miraculessly gets Iraq under control, and fuel costs will drop in the future. If history, science and economics are any indicator, fuel will be substantially more than $3/gallon within five years.
4) Prestige
Ok, it’s kindof an intangible, but it’s hard to get respect in a civic. It’s a quality automobile, but nothng special. The Prius, besides bieng an outstanding vehicle makes a statement.
5) MISINFORMATION IN COMMENTS
Somone stated you are lucky to get 35MPG in a Prius, this is pure BS. I have driven 10,000 miles on mine, averaging 56.3 mpg, to date. Another comment was made about batteries bieng a costly replacement in a short time, and this is also false. My Toyota service department, has NEVER had to replace a worn out battery. (Replaced one damaged in an accident, but never a worn out one). There are taxi fleets with oer 100,000 miles on the vehicles still getting the same excelent mileage, without battery replacements. The prius computer does an outstanding job of maximizing hte battery performance, by only using about 40% of the batteries capacity. The battery guage on the dash shows this band of charge, so even when the car tells you the batteries are empty they still have over a 40% charge. Similarly the computer prevents them from ever bieng overcharged. This means the battery pack should last _at least_ 10 years before capacity is severely reduced. (Unlike your computer, or cellphone which deep cycles it’s batteries routenely).
Once again, if history is any indicator, in 10 years the cost of the batteries will be significantly reduced, while thier capacity will be significantly increased.
The Prius rocks. Don’t buy into the propaganda.
June 2nd, 2007 at 8:09 pm
» Solarize Your Hybrid with the SEV Solar System » Blog Archive Alice Hill’s Real Tech News - Independent Tech says:
[…] Lots and lots of arguments over whether or not hybrids save money, or even come out even. Most say no. Many say the “green” benefits, the quality or even the fun of “playing the center console video game” make it worthwhile. At any rate, if you’re in the “green” crowd, here’s something I’ve wondered about for some time … a solar panel kit that goes on the roof of your Prius. […]
June 4th, 2007 at 11:13 am
me here says:
You can’t blame the automakers for putting hybrid tech into upscale models. They are in business to make money and there are consumers who will pay up for the hybrid.
It is too bad that GM killed off the Metro, and the other conventional cars listed above that got 50+.
My sister bought a Prius for $22k, with interest cost it will run about $29k (not counting missed opportunity of future investments). From her old 22mpg to a recent 50mpg, she will have the ENTIRE car paid for within 13 years. Mind you the car may not make it that long at 30k a year, but it might and gas could jump up from $3 making the payback quicker.
If EVERY car had the Prius MPG readout, and drivers could see how A/C, speeding, and jackrabit starts eat away at MPG people would at least think about altering driving habits to max MPG.
It is FUN to see the readout hit 99 MPG.
June 17th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
me here says:
BTW using cruise jacks up mileage on the Prius, now using cruise on my conventional gas car as much as possible (hoping it does the same)
June 17th, 2007 at 7:11 pm
Alternative Fuel Vehicles, Are They Sustainable? (part 1) | TechnoVerde says:
[…] AGAINST: The booers say that “Hybrid Cars Don’t Save You Money.” Hybrids are priced 20% higher that conventional counterparts and even if you could save on gasoline, it could take up to 16 years to recover the premium one has to pay for a hybrid. […]
June 21st, 2007 at 12:30 pm
ClapekDodki says:
bizarro
July 16th, 2007 at 5:52 am
ClapekDodki says:
eros-amatoriali 2007-07
July 17th, 2007 at 2:48 am
Aware says:
People open your eyes!
Hybrids are coming, and the are only intermediate steps toward entirely electiric cars.
The technology is already there and it has been here for years The only real enemy is oil industry who would be the biggest looser. They do everything to stop the trend.
But the truth is: electric cars are not only cleaner, thy are faster, virtually silent and less complicated technologically. Look at Tesla Motors, see the movie “Who killed an electric car” and do not let yourself by disguided by advocates of oil producers.
Having said that I have to agree that transition to all electric cars will have to happen gradually not to create potentially dangerous economical impact if oil usage would decrease to fast. This is like curing a drug addict - must be done gradually.
August 5th, 2007 at 8:20 am
Greg E says:
I did the math. The Toyota PPrius is a total waste of money and horrible for the US and bad for the air as well. Hands the technology is a BUZZ and on the highway you will get plenty of BUZZ.
In 10 years it will save you 2000 dollars in fuel over 35-MPG ford focus, or Honda civic or any other good small car. You can get a ford focus used for like 6k too???
AT 30k new price where 90% of the money goes to a country that is not US does not re-invest any money back to the USA. The Adverts are very deceptive that Toyota launches to trick people saying there cars are made in the USA where only 1000 dollars per car goes back into our economy. This causes the US to become DUMB and turn our society to basic assemblers who do not produce or engineer and basically is hurting us, just look at the economy now. So people are selling out on their country to be in style that’s horrible.
To build one new car a huge amount of energy is wasted natural resources are depleted causing major amount of green to be lost.
Keeping your old car is much better for the environment.
Henry fords wife drove an all-electric car the 1918 Detroit electric used no gas at all and went 40 miles on a charge. So much for Prius being advanced.
So there you have it this Wonder Car the Prius is causing a huge amount of damage.
I am waiting for the GM volt.
August 19th, 2007 at 6:59 pm
Ken Bloom says:
I recently sold my last Toyota, yes last. I owned three, all leaked oil off the front of the engine. The best mpg was 32 for a 1.6L 1985 (rust bucket). Fuel pump cost me $550 four years ago for it and the dealership screwed it up three times and I am lucky I did not have a fuel fire. So much for qualified mechanics at Toyota dealership. The 95 Camry only got 23 mpg highway with a 2.3L. It was so slow at accelerating it felt like it had a ton of lead in it. IMHO as far as Toyota quality it is not much better than I seen in the early 70s (broken door handles, etc. Engines do wear out faster starting and stopping that running continouos unless they incorporate a electric oil pump.
I had a 96 Sentra that had a 1.6L that got 38 mph highway but they don’t make that car since 1999. It had a lot of zip.
I use to run VW diesels that averaged 47 mpg year round. I had a 89 Jetta (gas) that got 39 mpg highway and would do over 125mph. VW lost the recipe and their mileage has been low since and their repair costs have soared to Toyota levels.
I now drive a 96 Caprice with a 4.3L that gets 28 mpg highway and if I slow to 55 mph it gets 31 mpg.
How long would it take me to recoup the $13000 if I traded in for a Prius? If I only drive 12000 miles a year (I live one mile from work), Try 25 years. I will be long retired before then. Oh, I forgot the luxury tax would eat that up for the first five years so make that 30 years.
Push the CAFE and get the European cars that GM, Ford, etc have there and we will put the Prius in for a run.
I would rather wait for the next model of the Tesla Car. Current model gets 135 mpg equivalent.
August 21st, 2007 at 12:22 pm
thomas reaston says:
i am doing a assignment on hybrid cars and would like to know how much energy it takes to produce a hybrid car.
October 16th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
shaun says:
bunch of geeks..wow
March 3rd, 2008 at 6:57 am
1fd6f41ae32c says:
1fd6f41ae32c…
1fd6f41ae32c3e6c81b4…
May 11th, 2008 at 7:58 am
alysia says:
Hybrid cars might get a little better gas milege but it doesnt mean they are better. People say that they are better cause they dont use gasoline. Yet there batteries use coal. Just to point out Hybrids batteries use coal powered electricity. Coal pollutes more then gasoline. That’ll give you a run fo ryour money
May 14th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Stephen Benton says:
wat car are u tlkin bout in the 1980’s that did 50 or 65? the 1980s were all about who had the biggest engine and all about horsepower, all the cars were gass gizzlers. if your gonna agrue about the hybrid, next time get your facts straight
October 13th, 2008 at 8:41 am
bob says:
Man such a bunch of fools, you dont buy a car to save money, EVER. you buy a car to drive, Prius- overpriced? your kidding right? 23K? get a grip. I bought a prius because i needed a car to drive everyday driving and they are huge inside, go sit in the backseat of one fool. I have an SUV to pull my boat, i parked it. I bought a new car to drive to work and why the hell wouldnt i want to get one that gets ggreat gas mileage?? i was born in the 50’s and im here to tell you cars never got any better mileage that they do today, all those stories above about old cars that got 50mpg, bull… i had some that got 20, never saw ont that got 30. Maybe some old 40’s chrysler that could only do 50 got it, i never saw them.
Pull your head out of you ass and save some gas, and gas money. i would have spent more for just about new car that i would drive.
the prius is fun:)
October 27th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Puyo says:
do you guys have any more information rather than your quick numbers crunched out on a calculator
February 25th, 2009 at 3:01 pm