It's an interesting article about how the car with a possible 100MPG+* rating come into being.
"It was the equivalent of an Apollo moon shot: The company was going to invent a propulsion system and design an entirely new vehicle at the same time. "We don't normally let people do that," notes GM CEO Rick Wagoner. But despite those misgivings, Wagoner and his team had now set a goal of unveiling a new design-not a fanciful concept car, but a real car that could go into production-at the January 2007 Detroit auto show, only nine or 10 months away. By the standards of the automotive industry, that would require blazing speed."
Full article:
formatting link
EPA Closer to Giving the Chevy Volt at Least a 100 mpg Rating:
My hat's off to GM if they can make it a success. The Volt, slated to be the first commercially available serial hybrid (an electric car with an on-board charger), could be a major landmark in automotive history.
The second article underscores the rapidly shifting ground our current fuel economy ratings are built on. They were intended to be "for comparison purposes only" but the public has come to expect precision. That was never possible - MPG is a calculation based on operation, not a design characteristic - and now the entire concept is becoming poorly defined.
You mean like Toyota, Honda and every other manufacture has been doing for the past ten years, selling the vehicles buyers wanted to buy? Honda even tried to make a "truck" out of a car, because THAT is what buyer wanted to buy LOL
Did you calculate how long you could have driven a Carolla, with the $5,000 premium you paid to buy your Pruis, before you would have spend any additional funds on gasoline? I seems to me you could have driven the Corolla for at least four years on that $5,000 before you spent ANY money for gas
Mike, selling is making someone want to buy. If they already want to buy, no selling is required. Historically, in the automotive industry, selling involves appealing to a prospect's self esteem. That's why they put names like Tundra and Yukon on large (mostly hollow) vehicles with large diameter exhaust pipes (think penis) and big tires (think tall). Americans have been played for suckers for years.
Sure, but that's not why this early adopter (engineer) bought the Prius. I quickly installed indicators on various system functions, and a ScanGauge, to make operating it more satisfying. It was years later that gas prices skyrocketed. Somewhere in there, the state provided HOV-lane stickers, which was a cherry on top of the cake. I could (and still can) drive by myself in the HOV lanes.
So calculating the five-year costs of the Prius vs. a Corolla would not influence the decision.
Back to your point, in my opinion the Prius is more comparable to the Camry than the Corolla, so the difference is much less. And, there were nifty features on the Prius that weren't on the Camry - at any price.
The Corolla is the most comparable Toyota model for the older Prius (we have two 2002s in the family), but it is hardly a straight-across comparison. The Prius comes standard with amenities like power mirrors and automatic climate control (not available even as options on the Corolla, as I read the specs) and power windows, power door locks, cruise control and ABS. In the last 40 years I have had a lot of cars. The Prius I now have is my second favorite, edged out by a Lotus Europa from my bachelor days. If you haven't driven a Prius long enough to get the feel of it you can be excused for wondering what the attraction is. The perfectly smooth and competent delivery of power is addictive - when I drive any other car I wonder what all the revving and shifting is about. I can't speak for the current model Prius, but my wife and I absolutely love the maneuverability of the sedan. I bought mine used a couple years ago with 103K miles on it, and the seller's wife (it had been her car, actually) got teary when they left it with me. I totally understand.
The Prius (applies to my wife's and to mine) is also the most reliable car I've ever owned, by a huge margin. Mine has 120K miles on it and my wife's has 95K on it, and each has needed a windshield (this is Arizona, after all!), tires and routine maintenance... nothing else. Neither is anywhere close to needing brakes.
So, over the average 95K miles of my wife's Prius it burned about 2000 gallons of gas (mostly city miles). A Corolla would have used somewhat more than twice that, especially since a lot of the driving has been short trips, but let's call it 4000 gallons. At an average price of $2.50 the extra gas would have cost... lessee, $5000. How 'bout that. Now we are paying half the amount for gasoline (it's like buying gasoline for $1 per gallon, in fact), are driving cars we absolutely love, not paying for repairs. Kbb.com says the base 2002 Corolla with auto tranny at 100K miles is worth $4300 as a trade-in in my zip code, while the base 2002 Prius is worth $6400, which puts us about $2000 ahead and increasing every day. What's not to like?
I even picked up a so called eco car owner once, -35C west of Brandon Manitoba in my nice warm and safe V8 4x4. He was sure glad to see me.
Nope, many buy them for the way they can be used, year around and pulling trailers or boats. The fact you have a poor safety record in many a small sized crap boxes does not make it the truck drivers fault. I am sure hitting a deer with a semi or F150 has a much better survivability rate than a eco box. Your choice is not our problem.
Since driving a truck, smaller cars are often the nuisance. Especially red ones, don't ask me why, it is just an observation. They zip in and out, can't even see their rear plate on some cuttoffs and seen more that one with a semi up their rear. Not a pretty sight.
If this is a hard sell for a Volt, will not ever buy one. It can't do what I need out of a vehicle, so it might as well be junk. In fact, I don't know of an eco box that can meet my needs, the stupidity of paying so much for two power plants (Volt) exceeds the cost of the gas makes no sense. Why not
100% electric?
For example, are you telling me I should buy a Volt (POC) and have a truck? I only need one depreciating asset. So the cost of gasoline would have to be about $20/gallon before it made sense. Seriously, if I had 2, one depreciates without use. Spend $40K on a Volt, at least $5K/year in depreciation, added insurances, added maintenance, garage clutter... who needs it to save $1000 annually on fuel?
Yes, I drive my V8 4x4 to work, nothing in the back or in tow. Come weekends and vacations hitch up the boat or trailer and go. Haul stuff to the dump in spring avoiding a $250 pickup charge, pickup fridges, stoves, sofas, do this also for 1/2 my relatives. Even haul lumber and building supplied on handiman projects but you will not see that when I am in 7am rush hour M-F.
Don't be a presumptious ass when thinking what people use these vehicles for. Many might even have them so they can go skiing 3-8 times a year without renting a safe winter vehicle at $100+/day each time. You don't see SmartCars at ski hills unless being pushed in 2" of snow going down hill. You don't know what people use them for. Just a scared and pissed rabbit in an little unsafe POC.
Rocks being flung up from the road are a fact of life here - the state is mostly rock covered. My work truck averages a windshield every two years or so, but I put 25K per year on it and most of that is highway and freeway driving.
Nowhere did I say there isn't a place for larger vehicles. That's you imagining things in my post that weren't there.
Again, nothing to do with my post.
...and I suppose you've never seen an SUV or pickup speeding, cutting in and out of traffic.
Then why are you even reading and responding to a post about the Volt? Just to troll?
The short answer is yes. If you have a legitimate need for an oversized gas guzzler, then the socially responsible thing to do would be to get a vehicle for that, and something fuel efficient for your rush hour commutes. It doesn't have to be a Volt.
It's not just about the $$ that you save paying for gas. It's the fact that you're using less of a limited resource, as well as spewing less pollution into the atmosphere.
Yup, you are definitely a candidate for a second car.
And replacement batteries. They don't last that long. All that cadmium, lithium, mercury, nickel or whatever they use. A $4000 battery pack pays for a lot of gasoline.
You are correct, depreciation is part of the cost of ownership, in the end the financial costs are about TCO including repairs, batteries, gasoline, tune-ups, cost of electricity, insurance etc. Not simply a flat mpg calculation. Even costs in renting alternative vehicles should be included if your lifestyle needs it (towing/hauling).
It is why GM and others need a full line of vehciles, as one size does not fit all.
Speaking of the Toyota Venza, I looked at one at the Philadelphia auto show the other day. If the driver is long legged and has the seat back, the seat is around three inches from the rear seat. Even a child could not sit behind the driver. LOL
I am not too sure this is true. Son has both an Insight and a Civic Hybrid. The Insight is some 5-6 years old, and the Civic is older than that. Neither has had to be re-batteried. Neither of these is an all electric, but you get the analogy.
I believe he told me it would cost $1500 to rebattery the Insight, but dont quote me on that.( I have slept since that conversation).
His wife gets about 45-48 mpg with the Civic, and he claims up to 60-65 with the Insight. He mainly wanted the Insight so that he could use the HOV lanes in California, where they live.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.