According to this article on Yahoo yesterday upgrading from a normal civic to the hybrid will take 12 years to pay off. Not quite worth the upgrade in my book.

www.autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/614/is-going-green-worth-it;_ylt=AoUPwFA5MZG_5CH02.LJcdsazJV4

They compared the Civic Hybrid to the Civic Base. Compare Apples to Apples if we're going to do cost analysts. Example, the Hybrid comes standard with whole lot more than the standard Civic.

If you cut through the optioning bullcrap, it's only about a $700 difference. And don't forget you don't necessarily loose the extra capital...hybrids are worth more in the UCM. It's like buying a boat with a big block...you make that money up when you sell it. With this considered, it does make financial sense assuming you want the options that are standard on the Hybrid.

I always get a kick out of these anti-hybrid articles. They never consider the full story.

And, as fuel prices CLIMB, the savings increase. 1 year ago, if an analyst said $4 gas in a year, everyone said they're nuts. Recalculate with $5 or $5+ gas and continue the attempt to argue an invalid point.

BTW: The Lexus and Honda Accord hybrid systems are NOT for ECONOMY purposes...they are for performance purposes so disregard from the above argument.

Perhaps - but the pro-hybrid articles often don't either.

I don't disagree.


I'm not a very smart person. But even I am smart enough to see through the smoke. It frustrating to hear of other smart people who refuse to see through the smoke or simply ignore the situation for other reasons.

If you want to nail hybrids, hammer home the "lack of options" creates a seller/manufacture profit situation. It's not good for consumers.

I agree that they don't take into consideration any escalation in fuel prices but at the same time they don't look at the fact that hybrid technology is realitively new and the chance of a high dollar repair such as battery replacement would also have a major impact in the break even point of ownership.

I have to wonder if hybrids are really going to be worth more in resale. Many are going to be concerned about the battery life. And if they aren't, they should be. From what I see, the Honda is the best fit for most drivers. They eliminated the weight of the larger electrical system which means that highway mileage will not suffer as much. I think the future use of hybrids has potential, but not in the way we are doing it now. Build a lightweight battery into the chassis that can be swapped out and rebuilt so that we do not add to our landfills. Make the drive all electric, and then have a high efficiency generator for charging the battery. And do it for less than 15K and you have a winner.

I am thinking of upgrading to a hybrid stable. One pure electric car for driving to work and around town, then a gasser for my longer trips and such. I just can't find an electric car, other than something like the GEM.

Except the battery's are warranted to 8 years, 80,000 miles in all states, except for 10/100,000 miles in CA,CT, MA, ME, NY or VT.

Seadog: I don't know what you're talking about when you say

"heavy battery decrease highway mileage".

All current hybrids on the market get 2+ mpg better on the highway than their non hybrid counterparts.

Manufactures are interested in making money. I don't think it's possible to build an efficient car for 15k. Crap! You can't hardly buy a cracker-box for 15k anymore! Chevy is already hot on your trail with the Volt and Equnoix hybrid. They use 3-cylinder gas engines, Li-ion battery's, and electrical motors as the drive train. You plug them into the electrical grid to fill up the battery for daily commuting purposes, up to 40 miles worth. Gas engine kicks in when battery is dead.

However, this requires a LARGEEEE battery. And there is energy wasted in converting the mechanical energy of the gas engine into electrical energy. But it sets the stage for dumping the gas engine and going with a hydrogen fuel cell.

While the Atkinson cycle engine works with a hybrid, I have to think that a Miller cycle would be the best option. Mazda had one in the late 1990s, and Subaru has a concept hybrid that uses it. Both engines work on the principle of avoiding the work of the compression stroke. The Atkinson does it by loss of low end power, the Miller uses a supercharger to replace the low end power. With a hybrid, the electric motor makes up for the lack of low end power, but I have to wonder if that is part of the cause of the rough transition.

Rough transition?????

And i've never heard of the Miller cycle. I'll have to look that one up.

Warranty of 8 years or 80k - I average 20k per year on my company car. So in 4 years no more battery warranty. Does not really help for most people. If you are in the market for a used car 4 years for now are you going to gamble on if the battery is going to need replacement? At what cost? Could be a major penalty to resale value & not again won't really help with recouping the upgrade in cost for hybrid.

Many batteries have already exceeded 150,000 miles without problems. I know of transmission issues that have needed replacement before 100,000 miles in come vehicles.

I agree it is another risk, but I don't think it's a "forget it" risk, especially if statistic show the odds of the battery lasting are in one's favor.

The efficiency of the hybrid comes from the following:

1. Smaller, more efficient gas engine - this is the biggest factor. If Americans would just go to smaller engines that shut off at stops, then you could get most of the benefit of a hybrid with almost none of the cost - and no batteries.

2. Regen braking - In city driving, the regenerative braking does recharge the battery a significant amount - it also saves the brake pads.

3. More efficient design - The Prius and Civic both have "efficiency tires" which run under higher pressure. I'm not sure, but I've been told the Toyota hybrids have some extra equipment that allows the engine to heat up to efficient temp much quicker. They also have electric assist steering (rather than hydraulic).

That's it. Notice I said nothing about the electric drive - it doesn't create efficiency - just acceleration.

Except that the electrical drive systems is used in reverse for regen braking...and being about to use energy stored from regen braking saves fuel on hills.

That's one thing I noticed in driving the Honda around Lawrence. Going up the hills, the motor was at max assist. In going down the hills, the regen braking was at max recharge. It helped eliminate the energy wasted on the hills.

The one thing I do question is, how do you handle the air conditioner if you have no battery (referring the point 1).

Also, the Civic and Camry have aerodynamic treatments, especially under the car, that help decrease the drag coefficient.

If I was going for maximum mileage & minimum cost right now it would be between a Corolla or Mini. Friend has a mini & says he avgs mid 30's all the time & loves to drive it. He also owns a C6 so he is used to driving performance cars and says the mini is almost as fun.