Prius Smackdown: Cheap versus plug-in
Already too expensive?Let's pretend its some time in the near future. Lithium-ion battery technology is now powering some hybrid vehicles but, as will probably be the case at first, it is still expensive. Thus, the Toyota Prius now comes in multiple battery packages.
The base Prius continues to be NiMH powered, but more stripped down - a real base model. Years of NiMH production and less amenities results in a $17,000 price tag and an average 50 mpg. The second Prius comes in the same base package, but utilizes a lithium-powered battery. This lithium powered Prius achieves about 40 percent better fuel economy than the NiMH Prius, but begins at $22,000. That's $5000 more for an average of 70 mpg. Finally, the lithium-powered base plug-in Prius starts at $30,000 and achieves more than 100 mpg.
Which Prius would you purchase? Which Prius would most Prius buyers choose?
Labels: Hybrid Vehicles, toyota prius
posted by Dahcredyns at
10:06 AM
24 Comments:
After I made this post, I realized how hard it was for me to answer this question.
I really want a plug-in hybrid, but I don't drive much. I've built much of my commuting life around LA's light rail and subway system. So, why pay twice as much for a plug-in when you don't drive much?
Ultimately, I'd probably still buy the PHEV, even though it probably isn't the most cost-effective choice for my situation. But, I'd bet that for the average American, the cheap Prius would easily win.
I must commend you on being able to develop a lifestyle on LA's public transportation system...because I tried...and still do. And I find it royally sucks.
Middle model - better fuel economy but able to take advantage of gasoline refueling. I'd say most Prius buyers to date have shown they'll pay a premium for better mileage and lower emissions, so lithium hybrid makes sense. Like the Volt, the PHEV may have a limited range and longer recharge times may not be travel effective compared to gasoline refueling.
I want a PHEV with NiMH batteries and hopefully, Toyota will have this available very soon. Even if I can only get 20 miles in EV mode, that eliminates the IC engine for the majority of my traveling. Also, the NiMH battery is known to last a long time.
If Toyota and GM release their PHEV's at the same time, I would probably opt for the Toyota simply based on the much lower MSRP. I also feel that the majority of consumers will feel the same way and want the most economical vehicel. That is what worries me about a Volt, retailing for 40K,,,,it reduces its market significantly...
Personally I'd do what I can afford. As a whole, you'll have folks buying any of the three for the same reasons I suppose. I'd ideally like the PHEV, if I could swing it. It makes a statement, and I suppose I'd probably need the gas engine to fire up about twice a month. A choice is always good, but if you can build the same total cars, but just build the PHEV instead, maybe you lower the cost because of economies of scale getting it down to about $25k or less. I have same theory/dream about the drivetrains of each model. If you can make an Escape that works great using the Hybrid powertrain, why not put it in each vehicle? Basically. All models are hybrids. Economies of scale are now in full force.
noz-
I live right on the goldline, so im fortunate. still, it isn't easy. my world has gotten much smaller, but I try to reduce my hypocrisy as much as possible.
but, back to the point, which car would you choose?
kp-
the refueling is an interesting point. the supposed advantage of PHEVs is the fact that they can go without recharging and use regular fuel. But with the added weight of the batteries, what kind of fuel economy do they achieve if they don't recharge for a few days?
It would seem, obviously worse than non-plug-in hybrids, especially on the highway where regenerative braking wouldn't provide much need for extra batteries.
which car really is more cost effective? that seems very debatable.
I want the Plug in. Though we're gonna be drilling the Alaskan Wilderness here soon, so we can bring back the Hummers, so I guess we won't have to worry about it. That will solve all our problems. Whatever people want to believe I guess.
I have to watch CNBC all day, so sorry for the sarcasm. It's right up there with Fox for pro Republican. I voted Bush both times, but now I'd impeach him if I was given the choice. This country is going to fall so far behind the rest of the world soon, we're gonna look like the Middle East with plasma's in every home.
i watch CNBC all day as well, and i like the channel much better than fox, but today's coverage of the Republican VP pick made CNBC seem like Fox. I realize the business world is pro-Republican, but geez.
and some of the new contributors, such as carusso-cabrera, or whatever her name is, have become down right annoying and elitist. they act as if rich people are saving the world. as if the world would fall apart of we got rid of the rich people in the world. i think we could get along fine without them.
we have the technology to move beyond oil - the technologies of the future - but we'd rather drill for oil because if offers the most short term profit for the rich people. unfortunately, the poor people buy into this foolishness because high gas prices are killing them.
we are screwed. fat, dumb and screwed.
I agree. Mario Bartiromo was just talking to a crony and stated she's 'not on either side here'. Oh b.s. Just say it. I understand why, don't patronize me by saying you are neutral. I wish I could afford to just remove myself from all that. Add solar panels and afford the Tesla, or one of the Phoenix vehicles. I'd love to just say, I haven't used gas for a decade, and I've cut my local power usage by 90% (even in Nebraska, we get a lot of sun and wind!). Otherwise, I feel we're just going to have to basically hit rock bottom. My wife and I probably won't be here, maybe my newborn son won't either. But it's coming. All because some wealthy don't want their portfolio to drop a few points. That's America. We have a God Given right to consume everything and anything we want.
i hear you brother. as corny as 'keep hope alive' sounds. we must. we owe that to our kids. we just have to do the best we can do and never give up.
Which would I choose?
It really depends..on how much more expensive the plug in really is. I have a limit to what I will pay for any car...hybrid/plug-in/what have you.
It also depends on what the car has to offer. These new generation of cars need to seperate themselves from current vehicles in more ways than just fuel economy. They need to be engineered well...designed efficiently, be innovative, have decent technology in them, feel like they are an upgrade.
Now, you are wondering....this will cost more right? Right. But so does a 2008 Civic versus a 2004 Civic. Price bumps are inevitable but they should be for good reason and you should get something for it.
If a cheap vehicle costs $15K, I'll be willing to pay $20-25K MAX for a plug in with bells and whistles...anything more than that I'll walk, take the bus, train whatever...and the car companies can kiss my ass.
ANON:
I voted Bush both times, but now I'd impeach him if I was given the choice.
What the HELL would possibly possess you to do that? I mean seriously....
check out these sites
www.howmuchenergydoesmycaruse.com
www.themanhattanprojectof2009.com
manhattenproject2009-
Thanks for adding nothing to the conversation. Should I now go to these sites and post as many links as possible back to my site?
Link spamming is no better than comment spamming. Show some ethics. Don't be a spammer.
I am not getting you, why the prices? Are they releasing three versions now?
its theoretical, although toyota has discussed such a possibility.
the buzz in the auto world is focused on plug-ins, except for Honda. so, i was just contemplating what is it that consumers really want?
sure they probably want plug-ins, but i bet they want those plug-ins to cost only a little more than a conventional vehicle. so, if consumers had a choice between cheaper conventional hybrids or significantly more expensive plug-in hybrids, which would they choose? Which offers the most impact amongst the average American consumer.
While I'm an advocate for plug-in technology, I really believe the quickest way to affect American fuel economy has to be driven by price and that price, it seems to me, has to be under $20,000 if you want to convert a significant percent of americans.
I am living in apartments (and not going to change my life-style if possible), so plug-ins don't make much sense for me. Perhaps, some buildings will have underground parkings with electrical plugs, but that won't happen soon, because they will have to count for that electricity too. This is not a rocket science, but not quite trivial.
and i think that's a key point.
there are many whom think hybrids are a waste of time and the evs offer a complete solution. perhaps in a few decades if the grid can be extended, well, everywhere.
thus, until then, hybrid cars seem every bit as important as plug-in hybrid cars and EVs. plug-in hybrids and EVs shouldn't be an excuse against hybrids.
in fact, in the next decade conventional hybrid technology probably provides a much greater opportunity to move consumers away from gas than do EVs, while also helping to develop better batteries for all hybrids and EVs.
and for those whom claim today's hybrids aren't profitable. toyota is absolute proof such a contention is incorrect. by just 2010, hybrids are expected to account for up to 10 percent of toyota's operating profits. by 2020 that number will easily be over 50 percent, perhaps even far more.
lol im going to cheat here and just say i'll convert my existing prius to PHEV :).
This is a tough post... honestly if I was splitting the payments over 0% (i wish) for 5 years, I'd probably get the lithium ion plug-in. imagine the plug-in mods you would be able to pull with that platform!
maybe that is cheating, but it makes me wonder if toyota would ever partner with 3rd party companies on prius into prius plug-in conversions.
I'm with Jabroni. I'd much prefer lower price with few amenities and a bit less capacity, as long as it's a PLUG-IN hybrid. I only need 20 miles between charges, so NiMH would work fine if they'd just build it. If it was really $17,000 I'd buy one tomorrow, literally, but I don't think this is realistic.
i don't think it's realistic either. minimally, you'd probably have to triple the battery size, which would obviously increase costs and it would probably eat into seating capacity, or force a larger vehicle.
still, i think instead of trying to find the perfect EV for everyone, there needs to be lots of options to fit needs - that will be more cost effective for consumers, although it might not be for automakers.
Why aren't the hybred and Electric vehicles putting on solar skins?
Most of them are parked in parking lots out in the sun while thier owners are at work or shoping all day. Wouldn't this give them more range on their batteries?
A hybred driver.
Post a Comment
<< Home