Bogleheads Home Bogleheads
Investing Advice Inspired by Jack Bogle
 
  WikiWiki    FAQFAQ    SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Old Hybrid Cars

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bogleheads Forum Index -> Consumer and Recreation
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ruben1898



Joined: 23 Aug 2009
Posts: 53

PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 5:28 pm    Post subject: Old Hybrid Cars Reply with quote

I am just wondering how the oldest hybrid cars are holding up.

Put another way, if I buy a new Prius now, can I expect similar durability, reliability and longevity as if I bot a Corolla? Or do all of those attributes start to fall off sooner than with the conventional car?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cubsfan



Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 83

PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 5:41 pm    Post subject: Civic hybrid Reply with quote

I have a Civic hybrid with 165,000 miles on it and almost no unscheduled maintenance. Guys in the service department tell me that's pretty typical.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dpbsmith



Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 229

PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A good place to ask would be the Yahoo "Prius 2G forum." The "second generation" came out in 2004, but I believe there are people in the group who either own the first-generation models or can point you to people who do.

http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/....G/messages
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
fishndoc



Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 1260
Location: Kennesaw, GA

PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 5:48 pm    Post subject: Re: Civic hybrid Reply with quote

Cubsfan wrote:
I have a Civic hybrid with 165,000 miles on it and almost no unscheduled maintenance. Guys in the service department tell me that's pretty typical.

Cubsfan, I curious how well the batteries held up, and when you had to replace them and the cost?
Thanks,

Wayne
_________________
" Successful investing involves doing just a few things right, and avoiding serious mistakes." - J. Bogle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ryuns



Joined: 07 Aug 2007
Posts: 1939
Location: Santa Barbara. Age: 26

PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

From all the stories I've heard, it seems like the batteries are going longer than people expect. I'm thinking it could be a combination of factors:
-A lot of high mileage hybrids had a ton of highway miles which are easy on the batteries (though I hear cabbies with hybrids are seeing them hold up pretty well...?)
-Whole system is over-engineered, such that even a serious decline in charge capacity would not seriously affect the driveability.
-Honda and Toyota made all but the most recent generation of hybrids, and their quality control is second to none.
-Many batteries are replaced under warranty, so people are as likely to complain (or wait until absolutely necessary to replace them).

Poke around www.insightcentral.net for some stories about seriously high mileage Insight. 347,000 mileage on a 2000 Insight, getting ready to move to its third battery pack, first was changed under warranty.

Here's an interesting quote for a person who repairs/reconditions the batteries for a living:
Quote:
You do realize, don't you that the average battery repair is only $700? Shipping (2 round trips) and crate rental will cost about $175.

If you can get that battery for less than $400, then get it and ship it to me, I'll recondition/repair it for $300 and then send it back to you in tip-top condition. You then trade in your bad battery for the discount.

And FYI, I swapped out a 297K battery last week. This was a one owner 2000 vehicle and the guy has not been back to the dealer since he bought the car. He got 297K on ONE battery.

I have also repaired a battery for a NJ mechanic whose car has (coincidentally) 347K miles.

The majority of the batteries that I get in have either about 90K on them since the last battery change, or are the original batteries failing at the 170K mark. 90K or 170K. For some reason those numbers keep coming up.

_________________
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dpbsmith



Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 229

PostPosted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ryuns wrote:
From all the stories I've heard, it seems like the batteries are going longer than people expect. I'm thinking it could be a combination of factors
One factor may be that hybrids, or at least the Prius, baby their batteries. They can afford to because the range doesn't depend on the batteries, which just supply extra torque to make the car responsive and drivable with a small engine. The Prius won't go far on battery power alone; this guy is thrilled that he got three miles.

The Prius keeps the battery within the range of 50 to 85% charged; it never gets anywhere close to fully discharged or fully charged.

I imagine this will not be the case with the plug-in hybrids like the Chevy Volt, or the full electrics like the Nissan Leaf. I imagine the engineers and the marketers are duking it out in conference rooms right now, with the engineers wanting to operate the batteries conservatively and the marketers wanting to be able to claim every single mile of range that can be squeezed out of them. So I suspect battery life will be more of a problem with the plug-ins and full electrics that are intended to go significant distances on battery power alone.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
englishgirl



Joined: 01 Mar 2007
Posts: 537
Location: FL

PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have a 2001 Prius, which is one of the most reliable cars I've ever had. I am at 94.5k miles. I am planning on buying a 2010 model sometime in the next 6 or so months, and expect it to be very reliable also.

I did have to replace the main battery in 2006 - luckily under warranty. In retrospect, there were some weird noises and rattlings for weeks before the battery cut out, so I suspect that the problem could have been caused by something else.
_________________
Sarah
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cubsfan



Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 83

PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:36 pm    Post subject: Re: Civic hybrid Reply with quote

fishndoc wrote:
Cubsfan wrote:
I have a Civic hybrid with 165,000 miles on it and almost no unscheduled maintenance. Guys in the service department tell me that's pretty typical.

Cubsfan, I curious how well the batteries held up, and when you had to replace them and the cost?
Thanks,

Wayne



Haven't replaced the batteries yet. Still going strong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fishndoc



Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 1260
Location: Kennesaw, GA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anyone with any experiences with the Toyota Highlander hybrid?
I drove a rental a couple of years ago and was really impressed - only thing out right now in a hybrid that has enough room for the kids/dogs/fishing grear.

Thanks,

Wayne
_________________
" Successful investing involves doing just a few things right, and avoiding serious mistakes." - J. Bogle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nisiprius



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 9741
Location: North America; Western Hemisphere; the Earth; the Solar System; the Universe; the Mind of God

PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 3:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think people worry way too much about the battery in a hybrid. The list price of a new battery is something like $3,000. So, what's the big deal? It's not something you want to fail, but just last month we ran over a big branch lying in the road that was too big to avoid, screwed up the front end, and had a $2,000 bill. The batteries in a hybrid are just like a transmission or a clutch or other important component: they'll almost certainly last five years, they'll probably last ten, if they don't it's just another "do I spend $3,000 to fix this aging car" decision.

Maybe a hybrid has more stuff in it to go wrong (two engines, after all). On the other hand, electric motors are practically immortal, and the gasoline engine in it probably has an easier job, isn't running all the time, and gets started in a very gentle way. Most likely the overall engineering and quality of construction is more important than anything in the general design.
_________________
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness; Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Valuethinker



Joined: 11 May 2007
Posts: 13393

PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:23 pm    Post subject: Re: Old Hybrid Cars Reply with quote

Ruben1898 wrote:
I am just wondering how the oldest hybrid cars are holding up.

Put another way, if I buy a new Prius now, can I expect similar durability, reliability and longevity as if I bot a Corolla? Or do all of those attributes start to fall off sooner than with the conventional car?


I don't know, but to reassure you, I believe the Toyota Prius and its ilk have been on the market for over 10 years in Japan.

One of the reasons the Japanese car companies did well in America was their domestic market, which is famously quality-conscious and competitive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Boris



Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 531
Location: CT

PostPosted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nisiprius wrote:
I think people worry way too much about the battery in a hybrid. The list price of a new battery is something like $3,000. So, what's the big deal? It's not something you want to fail, but just last month we ran over a big branch lying in the road that was too big to avoid, screwed up the front end, and had a $2,000 bill. The batteries in a hybrid are just like a transmission or a clutch or other important component: they'll almost certainly last five years, they'll probably last ten, if they don't it's just another "do I spend $3,000 to fix this aging car" decision.

Maybe a hybrid has more stuff in it to go wrong (two engines, after all). On the other hand, electric motors are practically immortal, and the gasoline engine in it probably has an easier job, isn't running all the time, and gets started in a very gentle way. Most likely the overall engineering and quality of construction is more important than anything in the general design.


The accident is covered by your insurance, batteries aren't. Battery is considered a 'wear item' similar to a clutch. It's expected to go, the question is when. This can be a very expensive wear item on top of all the others.

I wouldn't be looking at the high-mileage cars to determine how long a battery lasts. The more a car is driven the better the condition of the battery should be, especially when you consider that most high-mileage cars are typically highways miles (no battery usage) and the computer keeps the batteries in tip-top shape. What batteries hate isn't use... they hate non-use. In fact, if you don't put on enough miles in a year the battery manufacturers will deny warranty coverage. I know, it seems backwards.

Anyone who owns a boat can attest to this... Smile
_________________
Short term moves in the market are like "a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing."
- John C. Bogle quoting Shakespeare
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cubsfan



Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 83

PostPosted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:55 am    Post subject: Different hybrid technologies Reply with quote

We should keep in mind that Toyota hybrids and Honda hybrids use very different hybrid technology. In a Honda, the battery gets a lot of use in highway driving. In a Prius, not so much.

Another thing to consider is that people who drive the most miles probably have the most incentive to go with a hybrid (or the Jetta TDI for those who don't mind diesel).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Valuethinker



Joined: 11 May 2007
Posts: 13393

PostPosted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:52 am    Post subject: Re: Different hybrid technologies Reply with quote

Cubsfan wrote:
We should keep in mind that Toyota hybrids and Honda hybrids use very different hybrid technology. In a Honda, the battery gets a lot of use in highway driving. In a Prius, not so much.

Another thing to consider is that people who drive the most miles probably have the most incentive to go with a hybrid (or the Jetta TDI for those who don't mind diesel).


I should be interested in the technical detail behind this as AFAIK they use essentially the same technology?

The Chevy Volt, when and if, will use a different technology, where the gasoline engine will never directly drive the wheels, I don't think (similarly diesel-electric locomotives, the diesel is always converted to electricity-- electric motors have much higher torque than direct ICE, hence can higher steeper grades).

On the hybrid point, if you do a lot of city, slow stop and go sub 25mph, you get the full benefit (regenerative braking etc.).

Another factor with the hybrid is that mpg in the middle of the dash-- it alters driver behaviour (as does a home electricity monitor).

On the highway, you have the benefit of a very low drag coefficient (one of the few cars below 0.3 I believe, where an SUV is closer to 0.5 ie 50% more drag).

But I don't think the fuel economy advantage is as compelling.

The TDI will give you very good fuel economy-- the Polo version here is actually better fuel economy (3 cylinder engine) than the Prius. Some concerns as always with total cost of ownership with VW. And I think their US emission controls are a different, newer, technology than their European ones?

You do not want to be a beta-tester for a new VW technology.

Where you really win with a diesel is on SUV and pickup type vehicles. Going from 10 mpg there to 20mpg, is the mathematical equivalent of 20mpg to 40mpg on a car in terms of fuel consumption.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KyleAAA



Joined: 01 Jul 2009
Posts: 1448

PostPosted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dpbsmith wrote:

I imagine this will not be the case with the plug-in hybrids like the Chevy Volt, or the full electrics like the Nissan Leaf. I imagine the engineers and the marketers are duking it out in conference rooms right now, with the engineers wanting to operate the batteries conservatively and the marketers wanting to be able to claim every single mile of range that can be squeezed out of them. So I suspect battery life will be more of a problem with the plug-ins and full electrics that are intended to go significant distances on battery power alone.


This is exactly my feeling. The marketers will undoubtedly win.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
LikeYouImagine



Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Posts: 90

PostPosted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't know if anyone knows the answer to this, but I've always wondered if your gas mileage goes down as the battery ages. I know the Prius never runs at a full charge, but what happens when the batteries chemistry can only retain say a 60% charge?

My thinking is the gas mileage should go down. Or is it that the Prius only uses such a limited amount of charge to begin with, it doesn't matter.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fishndoc



Joined: 11 Apr 2007
Posts: 1260
Location: Kennesaw, GA

PostPosted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Going from 10 mpg there to 20mpg, is the mathematical equivalent of 20mpg to 40mpg on a car in terms of fuel consumption.


Percentage wise, yes, but in actual savings of fuel, no.

Example:
1. You drive 10,000 mile/yr; @ 10 mpg you burn 1000 gal, @ 20 mpg you burn 500 gal, a savings of 500 gal per year of fuel.
2. You still drive 10,000 miles, but increase your milage from 20 to 40 mpg; you use 250 gal of fuel per year, for a savings of 250 gal/yr, or exactly half the benefit of going from 10 to 20 mpg.

What this means, is, the effect of Corolla owners switching to hybrids is fairly minimal; if we want to make a meaningful dent in our oil consumption, we need to concentrate on trucks and low milage passenger vehicles and pickups.

Wayne
_________________
" Successful investing involves doing just a few things right, and avoiding serious mistakes." - J. Bogle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Valuethinker



Joined: 11 May 2007
Posts: 13393

PostPosted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 5:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

fishndoc wrote:
Quote:
Going from 10 mpg there to 20mpg, is the mathematical equivalent of 20mpg to 40mpg on a car in terms of fuel consumption.


Percentage wise, yes, but in actual savings of fuel, no.

Example:
1. You drive 10,000 mile/yr; @ 10 mpg you burn 1000 gal, @ 20 mpg you burn 500 gal, a savings of 500 gal per year of fuel.
2. You still drive 10,000 miles, but increase your milage from 20 to 40 mpg; you use 250 gal of fuel per year, for a savings of 250 gal/yr, or exactly half the benefit of going from 10 to 20 mpg.

What this means, is, the effect of Corolla owners switching to hybrids is fairly minimal; if we want to make a meaningful dent in our oil consumption, we need to concentrate on trucks and low milage passenger vehicles and pickups.

Wayne


You said what I meant to say but I didn't stop and work it out correctly!

And your conclusion is absolutely right (or at least I agree with it Wink.

it's the left hand tail of the distribution of car fuel economies that is where the 'sweet spot' is.

Note we've made one assumption though. It could (easily) be the case that those low mpg SUVs and trucks are not driven as much as those high mpg Corollas-- that would be rational by their owners. At the very least, they probably don't sit in traffic as much at 20mph, guzzling gas.

Those Corollas could easily be going 20 or 30k miles per year. Driven by people who are sensitive to their gas budget.

Anecdotally here in the UK, I know many salesmen types who switched to diesels. But our gas is c. $6-7/gallon. (£1.05 X 1.6 $/£ X 3.8l/ US gal)

The first (not driven as much) I am not sure-- after all, it will be in the more rural and suburban areas that people drive further, and that's where the pickups and SUV class vehicles will be. And many will be used for small business purposes (ie driven all the time).

The second though, probably is more true. More smaller cars in New York and LA, say, than in rural Georgia or Idaho.

Dallas has bad traffic and big cars-- best of both worlds Wink.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MWCA



Joined: 30 Nov 2007
Posts: 1631
Location: Golden State

PostPosted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Valuethinker wrote:
fishndoc wrote:
Quote:
Going from 10 mpg there to 20mpg, is the mathematical equivalent of 20mpg to 40mpg on a car in terms of fuel consumption.


Percentage wise, yes, but in actual savings of fuel, no.

Example:
1. You drive 10,000 mile/yr; @ 10 mpg you burn 1000 gal, @ 20 mpg you burn 500 gal, a savings of 500 gal per year of fuel.
2. You still drive 10,000 miles, but increase your milage from 20 to 40 mpg; you use 250 gal of fuel per year, for a savings of 250 gal/yr, or exactly half the benefit of going from 10 to 20 mpg.

What this means, is, the effect of Corolla owners switching to hybrids is fairly minimal; if we want to make a meaningful dent in our oil consumption, we need to concentrate on trucks and low milage passenger vehicles and pickups.

Wayne


You said what I meant to say but I didn't stop and work it out correctly!

And your conclusion is absolutely right (or at least I agree with it Wink.

it's the left hand tail of the distribution of car fuel economies that is where the 'sweet spot' is.

Note we've made one assumption though. It could (easily) be the case that those low mpg SUVs and trucks are not driven as much as those high mpg Corollas-- that would be rational by their owners. At the very least, they probably don't sit in traffic as much at 20mph, guzzling gas.

Those Corollas could easily be going 20 or 30k miles per year. Driven by people who are sensitive to their gas budget.

Anecdotally here in the UK, I know many salesmen types who switched to diesels. But our gas is c. $6-7/gallon. (£1.05 X 1.6 $/£ X 3.8l/ US gal)

The first (not driven as much) I am not sure-- after all, it will be in the more rural and suburban areas that people drive further, and that's where the pickups and SUV class vehicles will be. And many will be used for small business purposes (ie driven all the time).

The second though, probably is more true. More smaller cars in New York and LA, say, than in rural Georgia or Idaho.

Dallas has bad traffic and big cars-- best of both worlds Wink.


Didn't you know? Everything is bigger in Texas? Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dagwood



Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 738
Location: MD

PostPosted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:07 pm    Post subject: Re: Old Hybrid Cars Reply with quote

Ruben1898 wrote:
I am just wondering how the oldest hybrid cars are holding up.

Put another way, if I buy a new Prius now, can I expect similar durability, reliability and longevity as if I bot a Corolla? Or do all of those attributes start to fall off sooner than with the conventional car?


I believe that they are holding up quite well. Fyi, Toyota and Honda put their production hybrids into taxi cab use in southeast asia about 10 or so years ago, maybe longer now. Most have accumulated a few hundred thousand miles with reliability records comparable to gasoline powered vehicles.

That being said, if I were considering a Corolla, I don't know if the hybrid Toyota is worth the additional money given that the Corolla is already an efficient car. You'd have to do some quick calculations about how far you drive, and make some estimates about the future cost of gasoline.

As regards the long term reliability of hybrids from Toyota and Honda versus, high efficiency diesels from VW or other European manufacturers, I'd take bet on the hybrids. Most of the high efficiency diesels are turbo diesels, and turbos can head south, plus a variety of other issues that could prove costly given the host of new technology they have. These new diesels are not, in any sense, the run forever Mercedes Benz five cylinder "oil motors" that could easily do 300k plus miles with decent maintenance, for better and worse.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dkdoy



Joined: 13 Jun 2009
Posts: 338
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We just bought a new Camry Hybrid, I did lots of research prior to purchase. Talked with Prius and Camry owners all seem very happy with the cars. Toyota really is the leader in this technology good luck in whatever you pick
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Valuethinker



Joined: 11 May 2007
Posts: 13393

PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 2:49 am    Post subject: Re: Old Hybrid Cars Reply with quote

raymondalombardo wrote:


As regards the long term reliability of hybrids from Toyota and Honda versus, high efficiency diesels from VW or other European manufacturers, I'd take bet on the hybrids. Most of the high efficiency diesels are turbo diesels, and turbos can head south, plus a variety of other issues that could prove costly given the host of new technology they have. These new diesels are not, in any sense, the run forever Mercedes Benz five cylinder "oil motors" that could easily do 300k plus miles with decent maintenance, for better and worse.


There have not been any issues, so far, with diesel cars-- of which I am aware. And this generation of diesels have been big in Europe for at least 10 years (France, especially) so are not 'new technology' in that sense.

However:

- I believe the US sold diesels are actually using a different emission control technology - ie newer? US emission standards are generally tougher than European on diesels

- I take your point about turbochargers, generally

- climate is not as harsh in most of Europe as most of North America

- I agree these are more 'highly strung' than the old Mercedes Benz diesel engines. Mind you that is true of all cars pretty much: much more complex than they were (electronics, airbags etc.)

- generally Toyota and Honda have better reliability than even Mercedes (declined in recent years, relatively at least), BMW let alone VW

I agree with your earlier point about the tendency of VWs and new technology to turn into 'beta tests' for customers.

If I wanted a high end car like an SUV and I drove it a lot, then a car like the BMW 3 or 5 series SUV with a diesel engine would be an appropriate choice. Not a cheap choice, but an appropriate one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dagwood



Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 738
Location: MD

PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

VT-

I don't disagree with you -- my points about the diesels sold here relate to the new (US only I believe) "adblue" technology diesels. I am not concerned about the need to add "adblue" every 10k miles or so -- that's a maintenance item certainly but not really a reliability concern unless you are neglectful -- but rather that the vehicles sold here with adblue technology have a series of "filters" downstream of the motor -- typically a diesel particulate filter and an oxidation cat. Having owned older gasoline cars in the past, and having purchased the original (as compared to aftermarket) cats for them (to make sure they run as clean as they should), the factory cats are prohibitively expensive and they generally last 100k miles or so, depending on usage. Given that at least in this country, the companies selling the clean diesels are Mercedes, BMW, VW, and Audi -- all cars known in this country for expensive repairs and parts -- if I were looking at a clean diesel, and looking to keep the car for how long I usually try to keep a car -- 100k to 200k miles (I am a Boglehead after all) -- I would be concerned, and would want to get some real world experience and stories, regarding how long these exhaust system components last and what the replacement components cost.

The other area of concern I have with the clean diesels is the injectors. The direct injectors used in these cars are extraordinarily precise and they operate at extremely high pressure. Again, having owned older cars, I have seen and dealt with injector deterioration due to age, and diesel injectors generally cannot be rebuilt. And from a friend of mine who works in the industry, a Mercedes diesel injector of the type used in the current v-6 sells for about $800 retail. Given that all injectors will deteriorate over time due to fuel impurities and simple age, again, I'd be concerned about owning one of these cars out of warranty at, say 125k miles, when the injectors start to show signs of wear. And it would be very difficult to replace just one given how precise these motors are.

Then as you note there are always issues with turbos. Free power is never quite free. Turbo wear, oil leaks, etc have always been and will always remain a concern as these cars age.

So it's not that I dislike the new diesels. I actually think they are pretty cool. But to the extent that any car has a great deal of precise technology in it, and it's your wallet on the line when that technology heads south, your chances of taking a hit go up. It's why I think that for the average person concerned about fuel economy, the simpler way to go is to pick a car that's not bigger than what you need, and focus on a straightforward four cylinder gas engine of the type you'd see in a Camry, Accord, Civic, Corolla, etc.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Valuethinker



Joined: 11 May 2007
Posts: 13393

PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

raymondalombardo wrote:
VT-

I don't disagree with you -- my points about the diesels sold here relate to the new (US only I believe) "adblue" technology diesels.

..........

So it's not that I dislike the new diesels. I actually think they are pretty cool. But to the extent that any car has a great deal of precise technology in it, and it's your wallet on the line when that technology heads south, your chances of taking a hit go up. It's why I think that for the average person concerned about fuel economy, the simpler way to go is to pick a car that's not bigger than what you need, and focus on a straightforward four cylinder gas engine of the type you'd see in a Camry, Accord, Civic, Corolla, etc.


Ray

We are on a page. For the average Boglehead, who probably does *not* drive 20,000 miles a year, probably keeps a car more than 8 years (10-12 perhaps?) the diesels are high risk.

Yes the aftermarket on German spares are very expensive-- even here in the UK.

So your advice is sound.

I think where a Boglehead might consider a diesel, if available, is in the SUV or pickup truck type vehicle, especially if such a vehicle sees heavy mileage. There, the gains in ownership could be quite significant (although diesel sells for a premium in the US? In the UK up to 10p a litre (38pence aka c. 60 cents a US gallon)).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pshonore



Joined: 28 Jun 2009
Posts: 879

PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 10:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

raymondalombardo wrote:
VT-

I don't disagree with you -- my points about the diesels sold here relate to the new (US only I believe) "adblue" technology diesels. I am not concerned about the need to add "adblue" every 10k miles or so -- that's a maintenance item certainly but not really a reliability concern unless you are neglectful -- but rather that the vehicles sold here with adblue technology have a series of "filters" downstream of the motor -- typically a diesel particulate filter and an oxidation cat. Having owned older gasoline cars in the past, and having purchased the original (as compared to aftermarket) cats for them (to make sure they run as clean as they should), the factory cats are prohibitively expensive and they generally last 100k miles or so, depending on usage. Given that at least in this country, the companies selling the clean diesels are Mercedes, BMW, VW, and Audi -- all cars known in this country for expensive repairs and parts -- if I were looking at a clean diesel, and looking to keep the car for how long I usually try to keep a car -- 100k to 200k miles (I am a Boglehead after all) -- I would be concerned, and would want to get some real world experience and stories, regarding how long these exhaust system components last and what the replacement components cost.

The other area of concern I have with the clean diesels is the injectors. The direct injectors used in these cars are extraordinarily precise and they operate at extremely high pressure. Again, having owned older cars, I have seen and dealt with injector deterioration due to age, and diesel injectors generally cannot be rebuilt. And from a friend of mine who works in the industry, a Mercedes diesel injector of the type used in the current v-6 sells for about $800 retail. Given that all injectors will deteriorate over time due to fuel impurities and simple age, again, I'd be concerned about owning one of these cars out of warranty at, say 125k miles, when the injectors start to show signs of wear. And it would be very difficult to replace just one given how precise these motors are.

Then as you note there are always issues with turbos. Free power is never quite free. Turbo wear, oil leaks, etc have always been and will always remain a concern as these cars age.

So it's not that I dislike the new diesels. I actually think they are pretty cool. But to the extent that any car has a great deal of precise technology in it, and it's your wallet on the line when that technology heads south, your chances of taking a hit go up. It's why I think that for the average person concerned about fuel economy, the simpler way to go is to pick a car that's not bigger than what you need, and focus on a straightforward four cylinder gas engine of the type you'd see in a Camry, Accord, Civic, Corolla, etc.

I've had a VW Passat TDI for about 5 years. Approx 75K on it. No problems so far; just change the oil every 10K. Gets in the low 40's on a trip - mid 30s around town. I'll just keep my fingers crossed for the future. Never heard of "adblue". Think I have one of the first generation TDIs. The newer ones are much less polluting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dagwood



Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 738
Location: MD

PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Valuethinker wrote:

We are on a page. For the average Boglehead, who probably does *not* drive 20,000 miles a year, probably keeps a car more than 8 years (10-12 perhaps?) the diesels are high risk.

Yes the aftermarket on German spares are very expensive-- even here in the UK.

So your advice is sound.

I think where a Boglehead might consider a diesel, if available, is in the SUV or pickup truck type vehicle, especially if such a vehicle sees heavy mileage. There, the gains in ownership could be quite significant (although diesel sells for a premium in the US? In the UK up to 10p a litre (38pence aka c. 60 cents a US gallon)).


I agree with you. The thing that is very annoying in this country with respect to the SUVs that have either diesel or hybrid powertrain offerings is that they are being made for higher performance. It's not that they are not much better on fuel compared to the gasoline counterpart, but rather that we don't get the really efficient versions that you all get over there. Toyotas hybrids are tuned for performance certainly -- I think the hybrid Highlander is even faster than the six cylinder gasoline variant, and Mercedes and BMWs don't send us their super high efficiency diesels. Mercedes has the terrific new four cylinder turbo mill that would work fine in the ML (not sold here), and BMW has equivalent engines that would also work very well in the X3 and the X5 (not sold here). Instead we get diesels that are focused on performance, plus "better" economy, at a significant price premium (that has been lessened with incentives given the current economy and price of fuel). So right now, a diesel here for an SUV is a more efficient novelty of sorts, not as efficient as it could be but certainly better than the fuel hog alternatives that are sold.

But certainly there's no question that this end of the market is where the alternative powertrains can reap huge fuel efficiency benefits. One of the downsides of lower, more stable fuel prices here (diesel is about $2.60 -$2.70 a gallon in my neck of the woods) is we are no longer seeing the powetrain innovation we were seeing 18 months ago. Although GM has a newer four cylinder gas / six speed auto combination that gives the small SUVs 30 or so mpg highway. Not sure if that's a credible claim in real world driving but it's certainly better than the competition right now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cubsfan



Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 83

PostPosted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:30 am    Post subject: Re: Different hybrid technologies Reply with quote

Valuethinker wrote:
Cubsfan wrote:
We should keep in mind that Toyota hybrids and Honda hybrids use very different hybrid technology. In a Honda, the battery gets a lot of use in highway driving. In a Prius, not so much.

Another thing to consider is that people who drive the most miles probably have the most incentive to go with a hybrid (or the Jetta TDI for those who don't mind diesel).


I should be interested in the technical detail behind this as AFAIK they use essentially the same technology?



Honda and Toyota actually use very different technologies. Some refer to the Prius as a true hybrid and the Civic hybrid as a hybrid lite. The biggest difference that you'd notice as a driver is that the Prius will run on just the electric motor at low speeds. The gas engine on the Civic hybrid will start running as soon as you touch the gas pedal.

Here's an article that explains the differences:

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/hybrid-car.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bogleheads Forum Index -> Consumer and Recreation All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group