Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Poll: Would you consider buying a hybrid or alternative-fuel car?

May 2, 2007 6:46AM PDT

Would you consider buying a hybrid or alternative-fuel car?

-- Yes (Which one?)
-- No (Why not?)
-- Maybe someday (What's holding you back now?)
-- I already own a hybrid or alternative-fuel car (Which one, and what do you think of it?)

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Poll: Would you consider buying a hybrid or alternative-fuel
May 3, 2007 8:26PM PDT

I would consider a hybrid, especially in light of gas prices going over $3.00 again. I would be much less likely to buy an alternative fuel car, at least of the biofuel variety. First, the net gain in energy over using only oil-based fuels is minimal. Second, I've read if all the corn and beans in the US were converted to biofuel, it would still only cover 10% or so of our fuel needs. Finally, although I appreciate the economic benefit farmers receive from increased grain prices, the higher food cost in food, particularly to Third World countries, may not be worth the trade off for such little gain in extra fuel.

- Collapse -
No not at this time.
May 4, 2007 1:10AM PDT

I need a mini-van or van that is converted for the handicap, to drive and be able use a rampr lift totally automatic.

- Collapse -
absoulty never ever !!!
May 4, 2007 1:13AM PDT

I refuse to own ANY "new" car. The inprovements in vehicles are pathetic at best! In 1976 you could buy a 3400+ pound car with a 3.7 liter inline 6cyl engine and a 4 speed overdrive, EPA rating 36mpg hwy. This was without computers, efi, check engine lights, or any of the other geegaws that "new" cars have. The models in question were the Dodge Dart Lite and the Plymouth Feather Duster. Many 70's compact cars got better mileage then todays cars. My old cars are MUCH easier and cheeper to fix and run. I know, I work on this new junk every day. I even had a 1971 Pinto (yes a Ford Pinto) that got over 40mpg when driven in a "sane" manner, never ever less then 30mpg.
As far as the new VW TDI cars getting 55mpg if driven gently, a buddy had a 82 VW rabbit diesel that always got 50+mpg. I work in a shop that works on all kinds of cars, hybrids get to pay 1.5 X the standard labor rate, mostly for putting up with the people who own them Happy

To all you hybrid owners posting here, thankyou for proving that the tv show South Park was right all along. You all do pollute worse then the worst gas engine.
GIVE ME SMOG OVER SMUG ANY DAY!
South Park episode info
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smug_Alert!

- Collapse -
Death Trap Pinto!!! YEAH!!
May 4, 2007 2:01AM PDT

Do you have any idea how much more those old vehicles pollute then today's machines?
Do you know how much safer new cars are to drive then the death traps you espouse?

- Collapse -
gee lets see
May 4, 2007 2:45AM PDT

First off, I don't care about pollution, it is not nearly as big of problem as people think! Remembere, the ocean floor has ozzed crude oil in to the oceans for eons, with no human help.

Second, death traps? I think not, I know many EMT's that are very scared of hybrids. Your house 220 volts, hybrids, much more. Im sure the EMT's will be rescuing me, while you wait for the specially trained hybrid EMT to show.

Third, any 70's car, take the Feather Duster for example, 3400 pounds of REAL STEEL vs whatever plastic new car you want, steel will crush plastic evertime. This is why my wife drives an 80's pick-up, untill I can either get her an 250 series Dodge van (the deadlyest vehicle ... for whatever it hits) or a 60's Chrysler Imperial, the very first car BANNED from demolition derby competition.

I would rather be even in a pinto then a new car. The explosions were a bunch of government hype. Ever seen a pinto postal vehicle? The government bought about 35000 in 1971 under the guise of using them as postal vehicles. Give me 35000 af ANY vehicle and I can figure out how to crash them and make bad things happen! The "government approved" fix? A piece of plastic less then 1/8" thick and about 18" long.

You enviromental wackos can't deal with talking to someone who actually knows cars, because most of you dont!

I cant beleive that you all are so arrogant as to beleive that humans could effect this planet in any way short of thermo nuclear war.

- Collapse -
Not even close.
May 4, 2007 12:39PM PDT

You are crazy. I have an 82 Buick. Hit twice. Both times, I drove away with ZERO damage. Both times the other cars were messed up. One was a Honda Civic. The entire front end of his car was bashed in like a bulldogs face. Not even a scratch on my chrome bumper. You think that guy in the plastic midget mobile is safer than me? ARE YOU NUTS?! HA! No no. I could get hit by a bus and survive. You can smell my gas for all I care, but as far as safety, trust me, metal cars are safer than plastic bannana midget mobiles.

- Collapse -
Reply
May 4, 2007 2:21AM PDT

Hey Lee

This sort of survey was exactly what I was driving on about last week. It categorises our responses perfectly.

- Collapse -
Some day
May 4, 2007 3:29AM PDT

For now I just bike to and from work and do not own a car but in the future I would like to get a type of car that is completely free of fossil fuels. It is nice that there are hybrids and other types of cars, it is a start. I just want to wait till we step beyond that. 100% electrical, assuming it is charged using earth-friendly sources, while not as fast as fossil fuel cars, is what I would like to see. NO MORE GAS!! :-P

- Collapse -
My favorite alternative fuel is compressed air
May 4, 2007 4:25AM PDT

We watched a two-part TV program on alternative fuel autos and saw a French company making a car that runs on compressed air, and includes its own compressor. It takes its fuel right out of the air (free) and replaces it with air emissions. They said the car only costs about $15,000. That's my alternative fuel choice. Of course, the oil companies will probably move mountains to keep it off the market.

Dee

- Collapse -
HUH?
May 4, 2007 7:23AM PDT

And what, pray tell, does the compressor run on? You can just say a car runs on compressed air without saying how the air gets compressed! There has to be SOME KIND of energy used to do that, doesn't there? HUH???

- Collapse -
You missed it
May 4, 2007 12:41PM PDT

There's a pipe under the drivers seat, and he eats alot of spicy food (taco bell, white castle).

- Collapse -
Hot Air
May 5, 2007 5:32AM PDT

The hot air here would run it. But a solar array on the roof could juice the compressor - or at least assist the pipe under the seat technology.

- Collapse -
Right....
May 6, 2007 1:45AM PDT

How much real power do you think a solar array will provide verses how much power is needed to run a compressor? I highly doubt, I am a skeptic, that a simple solar array would provide enough consistant power to run a compressor, not including sustained cloudy days that happen often here in ohio. New Mexico maybe, but not going to work here.

- Collapse -
Diesel Electric
May 4, 2007 10:55AM PDT

I would love to be able to buy an affordable hybrid vehicle. Why aren't more diesel electric vehicle out there. They offer almost every advantage from what I can see. The diesel engine is efficient and reliable. The infrastructure is already there and the diesel engines can be made to burn very clean.

I would love to replace my F350 4x4 with a diesel electric version. I think it would have awesome pulling power and off road ability, good road manners and would be cleaner.

- Collapse -
Yea, but...
May 5, 2007 7:05AM PDT

Diesel engines are very complex compared to gasoline engines. To make a hybrid version will increase complexity exponentially, increasing the total cost of the vehicle, making it less appealing due to its cost, and eventually less profilable for the company.

- Collapse -
I think you are in error.
May 5, 2007 8:12AM PDT

Diesels are less complex. That's one reason I support them. You do not have a coil, a distributer, spark plugs, a throttle plate, spark plug wires.

Plus a gas car has to maintain a 14 to 1 air to fuel ratio. This requires the computer to know how much air is going in and how much fuel is going in, at all times.

Diesel does not control air flow, it merely control fuel flow. More fuel, faster run, less fuel slower run.

A Diesel is far simpler. You don't have to worry about ignition timing because it's compression ignition. No knocks or pings. There is really only 3 things that can really break. Fuel pump, glow plugs (IF your diesel has them) and the fuel injectors.

- Collapse -
plug in hubrid
May 5, 2007 1:07AM PDT

Yes i would consider it but only as a plug in hybrid. My average driving distance is 30 miles a day and with todays batteries, it's possible to drive on electric mode only. I will be able to drive for weeks without using any gasoline and to not visit a gas station for weeks,I'll be a happy camper.

- Collapse -
Bicycles and diesel until something better comes along
May 5, 2007 1:15AM PDT

Our 27-year-old MB is still getting 32-36 mpg,now with cleaner diesel,"white diesel" and the option to use biodiesel or grease. Disposable car ownership creates waste as well. I drove a 2003 Prius for two weeks that year, a fun car to drive but cooling the interior with that big back window used as much energy as the motor. Add the cost of batteries exploding or leaking when disposed. Electricity is not being generated from renewable sources sufficient to curb the growing call for nuclear power, hydrogen filling stations are rare and the long-term effect in our atmosphere is still to be determined. We need urban design for walkers and bikers.

- Collapse -
already own one
May 5, 2007 12:03PM PDT

I've had my 06 Prius for a little over a year.

"Add the cost of batteries exploding or leaking when disposed" is misinformation. The batteries are almot totally recycled. See http://www.toyota.com/about/environment/technology/2004/hybrid.html.

"Is there a recycling plan in place for nickel-metal hydride batteries?

Toyota has a comprehensive battery recycling program in place and has been recycling nickel-metal hydride batteries since the RAV4 Electric Vehicle was introduced in 1998. Every part of the battery, from the precious metals to the plastic, plates, steel case and the wiring, is recycled. To ensure that batteries come back to Toyota, each battery has a phone number on it to call for recycling information and dealers are paid a $200 "bounty" for each battery. "

- Collapse -
Interesting.
May 7, 2007 1:23PM PDT

Almost totally recycled is correct. The important word being "almost". I have no doubt that Toyota does recycle as much of the old batter as possible. However, just from what I know of Ni-Cad batteries, that isn't going to be possible the majority of the time.

Regardless of Toyota's promotional material, there's a simple matter of physics that indicates the chemical reactions that occure during discharge and recharge, will render some plates un-reuseable. Disposal of these plates and the chemicals used in the battery, will be far more damaging to the evironment than any lead-acid battery.

What's even more interesting is how Toyota claims pluging in a hybrid will cause premature failure of the batteries. This is logical given the nature of the hybrid system. I wonder if the people promoting plug-in hybrids know this, and are ready to fork out the money for new batteries that Toyota will not pay for.

- Collapse -
You are incorrect ... again ...
May 7, 2007 10:53PM PDT

Andy77e,

Okay, I tried to stay on the sidelines, but I just can't help myself ...

First and foremost, you have several times in this thread used the term "Ni-Cad" when referring to hybrid (and Toyota hybrid in particular) batteries when they are in fact Ni-MH (as correctly stated by your intended ridiculee) and therefore do not present nearly the "danger" to the environment (even if not recycled, which they are) that Ni-Cad's would ...

Second, even if the batteries were Ni-Cad, your statement that they "will be far more damaging to the evironment than any lead-acid battery" is also not correct ... Lead is certainly no slouch (even compared to Cadmium) as something that we don't want disposed of in our landfills, etc. ...

I've enjoyed reading your comments in this thread (even when they were directed - or sometimes mis-directed - at me) ... but you've got plenty of good points to make without incorrectly haranguing people who are just trading some opinions and information ...

Regards,
Greg

- Collapse -
I stand corrected.
May 8, 2007 1:58PM PDT

A, you should have to help yourself. If you have good valid point, speak it. If not, don't.

B, I was under the impression from previous information that the batteries used were nickel-cadmium. If in fact the batteries are nickel metal hydride, then I am wrong, and I question whether this is a step up or step down. NiMH has a high self-discharge rate, and is more prone to overcharge damage. (which also would make converting to a plug-in hybrid very unhealth for the battery. Likely why Toyota doesn't support plug-in mods)

C, My point about Lead Acid is thus: In a regular batter, the acid when discharged completely, is turned to water. Meanwhile, the lead can easily be melted down and reused. Cadmium, and in some cases the Nickel, is rendered completely un-reuseable. It must be discarded. As to this, I am unsure of NiMH at this time, so I'll not comment further. But be assured I will look into it.

With that said, let make this clear. I realize it's difficult to decern a persons manor through typed text, but I can promise you there is no ridicule. For me, it is simple. Something is either correct, or incorrect. Right or wrong. If it is correct, I am for it. If it is not correct, I am against it. If I think something is wrong, when it is in fact right, someone will let me know, and I will change to reflect the new information. (provided I verify it is right)

To me, that page seemed like big business promotional material (still does) because it didn't seem to conform to other information I had. Thus I deemed it to be wrong.

Normaly I try to not to sink into pure satire, but it does happen. Like someone who mentioned that there's enough hydrogen in 1 sq/Km of water to run the world for 7 years. For me to go through why that's neat but impossible, I'd have to do a college grade physics course. Since no one will pay me for that, I did a short satire post while trying to hint at pratical issue with it. I can only hope someone learned something from it.

- Collapse -
Score one for me.
May 8, 2007 2:02PM PDT

Point "A" was supposed to be "you should *not* have to help yourself" So much for avoiding satire. Doh.

- Collapse -
cost
May 5, 2007 5:28AM PDT

Almost bought a Toyota Highlander hybrid when they first came out a few years ago, but the hybrid was $3-4000 more than a regular Highlander. The wife drived and loved it, but when I calculated the extra initial cost, the increased mileage - even when I used $3/gallon - would have taken too long to recoup. Hybrids were rare then and the dealers all were profiteering. I refused to line their pockets. We've just learned to stay home more and be more efficient in our errand running and driving techniques, and we walk more. Too bad current public mentality can't mirror that of several decades ago when Oregon's Tom McCall pioneered 55 mph speed limits. People complain about fuel cost, but still want to go 65-75 everywhere. People complain about gridlock, but still get in their car every day, and stubbornly refuse to modify their lifestyle. When hybrids become cost efficient, we'll reconsider the option; and doubly benefit because we've learned in the meantime to be more efficient ourselves.

- Collapse -
Which one?
May 5, 2007 10:09AM PDT

Honda Accord, mine delivers on it's promises

- Collapse -
Hybrids are the wave of the future
May 6, 2007 2:34AM PDT

I own two hybrid vehicles, a 2005 Prius and a 2007 Camry and love them both. Have not had any problems with either vehicle. Some Prius owners like to brag at how they get 60-70 miles/gallon. They must driving down hill all the time. I get about 45 miles to the gallon in highway /town driving and about 50 on long highway trips with the Prius. With my Camry I'm getting about 38-40 miles/gallon.

In buying my Camry last July 4, I did compare the Camry Hybrid against an equivalent gasoline Camry and figured that at most I was paying a $2000 premium. You have to compare apples with apples. GM apologists will compare the Camry Hybrid with a bottom line Camry like the 4 cylinder CE or LE. This is not a correct comparison since the Hybrid delivers v6 (2006) performance, has electronic stability control as standard, plus other luxury interior/exterior standard features. With the $2600 tax credit I was able to get from the government, there was really no premium that I paid.

I was able to get one quickly here in Maryland by buying online here and paid $1000 under MSRP. This dealer has sold cars online as far away as Texas with registration in your state. So you can deal, especially now that the car market has softened.

For those who are addicted to premium gasoline guzzlers, I quess oil will have to go to $100-200 a barrel. They haven't read about Peak Oil or care about the planet.

Pzev

- Collapse -
Um, some issues here.
May 8, 2007 2:44PM PDT

First, let me say I'm glad you got the tax break. I am for anyone keeping more of their money out of the hands of the utterly useless government. Further, I will say that if the tax credit really did save you $2600 then perhaps, for you, a hybrid would be worth it.

Last I heard the tax credits only applied to the first sum of cars made. So consider yourself lucky to get it.

That said, I dispute your claim that comparing a Camry to a Camry Hybrid is not valid. A hybrid Camry at 187 HP only has 29 more horses than a regular Camry at 158. Further, hybrid horse power at 187, is nowhere even close to Camry V6 performance at 268 HP. Even worse the Torque is even further off at hybrids 138 foot lbs, to the V6s 248 foot lbs. That might be close to a V6 of the 80s, but nothing close to a V6 of today.

According to the information I looked up, Electronic stability control was not listed for the hybrid, but was on non-hybrid. Beats me.

Lastly, try to not be so arrogant in your assumption that the Husband and wife with three or four kids and a dog, and doesn't buy a Honda Insight must not care about the planet. That sort of pride will lead to your down fall, and is ugly to see.

- Collapse -
regarding the tax credit; it's got nothing to do with luck
May 8, 2007 4:10PM PDT

The tax credit for hybrids, it applied to the first 60K hybrids sold by a manufacturer starting in 1/1/06. After they hit 60K, the phaseout begins. Toyota/Lexus is in their last phase. Honda is the next one to begin phaseout. Everyone else has a long ways to go.

I got the full $3150 tax credit on my 06 Prius that I bought in 1/06. See below if you want to know the details.

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=157557,00.html
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/tax_hybrid.shtml
http://www.aceee.org/transportation/hybtaxcred.htm

- Collapse -
Well done ...
May 8, 2007 11:24PM PDT

I have a friend who bought one last summer at the full credit also ... alas, I only got half of that because I bought my 07 Prius about 5 weeks ago ... and that was just a couple of days before the Prius credit was cut in half again (to $787.50), so it is certainly at a bit of a competitive disadvantage versus some of the other hybrids right now, especially the Escape and Mariner 2WD models (we looked at both, but the Escape back seat was too small, the Mariner was pricey and wasn't readily available in our area) ...

For me, a $1,575 tax credit (equal to about $6k-$10k of itemized deduction, depending on one's marginal tax bracket) was a significant enough credit (especially coupled with 2.9% financing) to make it worth my while ...

Regards,
Greg

- Collapse -
Interesting.
May 9, 2007 11:27AM PDT

I learned something new again. I had thought... hoped, that tax credits were the first 60K of each model. But it's just the first 60K of all hybrid models the maker sells.

I can actually mathmaticaly come up with a situation where you might save money on a hybrid, if you really get $3,150 back from taxes. Of course I wouldn't because I'm in a lower tax bracket.

Once again, never trust government. Tax credits are a far cry from tax cuts. We need to cut taxes, not put a bandaid on it that falls off after 60K cars.