Wrapper

Funny how some like to point to CRs impartially when CR says something they
want to hear about the car that person
prefers, but when CR says something they do not want to hear about the car
that person prefers, all of a sudden it is only CRs opinion. The fact it
is not ONLY CRs opinion, every buff magi that has analyzed the pros and cons
of owning a hybrid over a conventionally powered twin have come to be of the
same 'opinion,' hybrids do not save money, even at $4 a gallon, but they
use less fuel for those that can afford to help save the planet. Educate
yourself, do a goole search of, Do hybrids save money?


Personally I could not care less where one choose to spend their money, but
one is delusional if they think they are saving money on fuel. One must
pay a lot more to buy a Pruis than if they had purchased a similarly
equipped Corolla and until they save enough on the difference in fuel
mileage between the two, that have not saved penny on fuel yet. Nor will
they in five years if you do the math.

By the way the high voltage battery pack warranty is prorated, just like the
warranty on all other batteries, there is no free lunch ;)

mike hunt




"M. MacDonald" <mmacdonald@bc.cc.ca.us> wrote in message
news:7N0Qf.112$aN2.33565@okeanos.csu.net...[color=blue][color=green]
>> "Mike Hunter" wrote:
>> That may be your opinion but CR does not agree with your opinion. They
>> say in ten years the overall cost of owning a hybrid will get even worse
>> as retail value tanks at the prospect of replacing the batter pack at a
>> cost of $4,000 to $7,000 LOL[/color]
>
> Didn't read CR's Prius retraction, did ja? Wait for the April issue or
> check out the Stanford professor's cost analysis and response which led to
> their mistaken analysis. Besides, CR hasn't done a 10 year term
> evaluation nor has the car been out there long enough for them to forecast
> that. It's their opinion.
>
> However, it's not my opinion but more factual since I have my credit card
> statements to back it up, that show where my monthly fuel credit card
> statements have dropped from $200 down to $60 with no change in mileage.
> Guess I'm really losing money just like those Canadian cab companies are
> (lol!). So I'm saving $1680 a year, not as much as the taxi companies
> have at $1000 a month, but still good enough for me over the old dinosaur
> I had. During the 7 years I plan on keeping it, that will come to $11,760
> (it'll be more if gas rises above $2.50/gallon) in fuel savings at current
> prices over the old vehicle.
>
> Besides, I toss out my cars and trucks after 7-8 years anyway, if they
> don't manage to get smashed up before then. Don't want an old costly
> relic nor do I want to waste time calling Auto Club's tow truck. Been
> there in the past. I don't want some old relic with dried out electrical
> wiring, hardened-rubber suspension parts, leaks, squeaks, rust, upholstery
> problems, etc. At 10 years it's "driveway junk," imo.
>
> Regarding the battery, I really don't care about the battery in my car's
> lifetime - it's under warranty. Don't care what the person who gets it
> after me spends on it (probably $2K or so, but nothing like an old
> dinosaur's auto-transmission job). The battery is not my problem nor will
> it cost me anything. In 10 years of owning any car, it's worth zero to me
> as I either trade it in (maybe $500-$1000) or give it to the Goodwill
> store for free and get the better write-off (with far less headache and
> subsequent whining about the used car by its new owner).
>
> As I said, it's a non-issue.
>
> Got any better argument Mike? You really need some better facts against
> those that own them, pay for them, and use them than your - or CR's -
> fallacious hyperbole.
>
> Mack
>
>
>[/color]