On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 02:21:27 GMT, Gary Gorbet <ggorbet@houston.rr.com>
wrote:


>> > Hehe... From what I've heard, that's pretty typical. I guess I'm doing
>> > more for the environment by driving my 1994 Civic 5-speed at 42-45
>> > mpg. Hey, and I didn't even add a bunch of steel and battery trash to
>> > the environment!! Good luck on your attempt at being environmentally
>> > friendly!!!
>>
>> Hahahah. Best post ever.
>>
>> The EPA estimates for my V6 Accord, 21/30 (which you are beating by 9mpg
>> with a go-kart engine) are right on.
>>
>> Tip: do the math before you buy a hybrid car.
>>
>>
>Tip: YOU do the math: 39-21 = 18 MPG (nearly DOUBLE what you get in
>town).
>
>No surprise that, since you can't even do simple math, that you'd
>characterize a very peppy engine as "go-kart".

I agree, my 94 Civic is not a "go-kart!" It might not be a Z06, but it
certainly gets up to speed well, especially since it has a 2300lb curb
weight. Besides, I could have sworn I get BETTER mileage than the
hybrid, not half like you said....

Nate

 

I think he was referring to the mileage of the v-6. But I never compared
mileage of the v-6 only the more equivalent 4 cylinder Civic

CaptainKrunch


"Me" <nhzero@dontmailme.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:icsuvvchdc3fk7tlqm9q98mo5kt56a3ph5@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 02:21:27 GMT, Gary Gorbet <ggorbet@houston.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> > Hehe... From what I've heard, that's pretty typical. I guess I'm
doing
> >> > more for the environment by driving my 1994 Civic 5-speed at 42-45
> >> > mpg. Hey, and I didn't even add a bunch of steel and battery trash to
> >> > the environment!! Good luck on your attempt at being environmentally
> >> > friendly!!!
> >>
> >> Hahahah. Best post ever.
> >>
> >> The EPA estimates for my V6 Accord, 21/30 (which you are beating by
9mpg
> >> with a go-kart engine) are right on.
> >>
> >> Tip: do the math before you buy a hybrid car.
> >>
> >>
> >Tip: YOU do the math: 39-21 = 18 MPG (nearly DOUBLE what you get in
> >town).
> >
> >No surprise that, since you can't even do simple math, that you'd
> >characterize a very peppy engine as "go-kart".
>
> I agree, my 94 Civic is not a "go-kart!" It might not be a Z06, but it
> certainly gets up to speed well, especially since it has a 2300lb curb
> weight. Besides, I could have sworn I get BETTER mileage than the
> hybrid, not half like you said....
>
> Nate

 

I think he was referring to the mileage of the v-6. But I never compared
mileage of the v-6 only the more equivalent 4 cylinder Civic

CaptainKrunch


"Me" <nhzero@dontmailme.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:icsuvvchdc3fk7tlqm9q98mo5kt56a3ph5@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 02:21:27 GMT, Gary Gorbet <ggorbet@houston.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> > Hehe... From what I've heard, that's pretty typical. I guess I'm
doing
> >> > more for the environment by driving my 1994 Civic 5-speed at 42-45
> >> > mpg. Hey, and I didn't even add a bunch of steel and battery trash to
> >> > the environment!! Good luck on your attempt at being environmentally
> >> > friendly!!!
> >>
> >> Hahahah. Best post ever.
> >>
> >> The EPA estimates for my V6 Accord, 21/30 (which you are beating by
9mpg
> >> with a go-kart engine) are right on.
> >>
> >> Tip: do the math before you buy a hybrid car.
> >>
> >>
> >Tip: YOU do the math: 39-21 = 18 MPG (nearly DOUBLE what you get in
> >town).
> >
> >No surprise that, since you can't even do simple math, that you'd
> >characterize a very peppy engine as "go-kart".
>
> I agree, my 94 Civic is not a "go-kart!" It might not be a Z06, but it
> certainly gets up to speed well, especially since it has a 2300lb curb
> weight. Besides, I could have sworn I get BETTER mileage than the
> hybrid, not half like you said....
>
> Nate

 

I think he was referring to the mileage of the v-6. But I never compared
mileage of the v-6 only the more equivalent 4 cylinder Civic

CaptainKrunch


"Me" <nhzero@dontmailme.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:icsuvvchdc3fk7tlqm9q98mo5kt56a3ph5@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 02:21:27 GMT, Gary Gorbet <ggorbet@houston.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> > Hehe... From what I've heard, that's pretty typical. I guess I'm
doing
> >> > more for the environment by driving my 1994 Civic 5-speed at 42-45
> >> > mpg. Hey, and I didn't even add a bunch of steel and battery trash to
> >> > the environment!! Good luck on your attempt at being environmentally
> >> > friendly!!!
> >>
> >> Hahahah. Best post ever.
> >>
> >> The EPA estimates for my V6 Accord, 21/30 (which you are beating by
9mpg
> >> with a go-kart engine) are right on.
> >>
> >> Tip: do the math before you buy a hybrid car.
> >>
> >>
> >Tip: YOU do the math: 39-21 = 18 MPG (nearly DOUBLE what you get in
> >town).
> >
> >No surprise that, since you can't even do simple math, that you'd
> >characterize a very peppy engine as "go-kart".
>
> I agree, my 94 Civic is not a "go-kart!" It might not be a Z06, but it
> certainly gets up to speed well, especially since it has a 2300lb curb
> weight. Besides, I could have sworn I get BETTER mileage than the
> hybrid, not half like you said....
>
> Nate

 

I think he was referring to the mileage of the v-6. But I never compared
mileage of the v-6 only the more equivalent 4 cylinder Civic

CaptainKrunch


"Me" <nhzero@dontmailme.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:icsuvvchdc3fk7tlqm9q98mo5kt56a3ph5@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 02:21:27 GMT, Gary Gorbet <ggorbet@houston.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> > Hehe... From what I've heard, that's pretty typical. I guess I'm
doing
> >> > more for the environment by driving my 1994 Civic 5-speed at 42-45
> >> > mpg. Hey, and I didn't even add a bunch of steel and battery trash to
> >> > the environment!! Good luck on your attempt at being environmentally
> >> > friendly!!!
> >>
> >> Hahahah. Best post ever.
> >>
> >> The EPA estimates for my V6 Accord, 21/30 (which you are beating by
9mpg
> >> with a go-kart engine) are right on.
> >>
> >> Tip: do the math before you buy a hybrid car.
> >>
> >>
> >Tip: YOU do the math: 39-21 = 18 MPG (nearly DOUBLE what you get in
> >town).
> >
> >No surprise that, since you can't even do simple math, that you'd
> >characterize a very peppy engine as "go-kart".
>
> I agree, my 94 Civic is not a "go-kart!" It might not be a Z06, but it
> certainly gets up to speed well, especially since it has a 2300lb curb
> weight. Besides, I could have sworn I get BETTER mileage than the
> hybrid, not half like you said....
>
> Nate

 

Captain...

A few things wrong with your analysis.

The batteries are guaranteed for 10 years. So if they have to be replaced
after 5, it won't cost you anything. Also, almost everything involved with
the motor is guaranteed for 15 years or 150,000 miles in the Civic Hybrid.

Also, there's a federal tax credit for buying hybrid cars ($2,000 for
calendar year 2003, $1,500 for 2004) and many states have state tax credits
as well.

Also, unless you're unlike almost everyone else in the world, you don't do
all your driving at highway speeds; there's almost no difference in
city/highway MPG for hybrids, but a huge difference for conventional gas
engines.

Plus, in many states, you can drive alone in carpool lanes in a hybrid car
(which might save you some time and aggravation over the years).

Yes, the hybrids cost more (and no, you're not going to entirely make up
that cost in 4 or 5 years), but if you factor everything in, the difference
isn't that great.


"CaptainKrunch" <nothing@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:cvadnVVEAMivjWOiRVn-hw@comcast.com...
> Well if we are going to go percentage routes lets us state that the over
two
> cubic foot cargo capacity difference between the two means the standard
> Civic has a 20% larger cargo capacity. The engine in the EX has about
36%
> more horsepower and after a year of driving 15,000 miles at $1.50 a gallon
> at freeway EPA estimates of Mpg the hybrid costs about $441 a year
compared
> to the $592 a year for the Civic EX. This is just assuming all freeway
> miles and EPA estimates of MPG for the sake of clarity and argument. At
the
> end of 5 years that is $2205 for the hybrid and $2960 for the Civic Ex.
So
> over the period of five years and 75,000 miles you save about $760 in
gas.
> Of course the hybrid is about $4000 more than the standard LX and $2000
more
> than a Civic Ex plus at the end of five years it is totally feasible that
> those batteries will now have to be replaced at a cost of several thousand
> dollars. That is what I hear anyways.
>
> So it costs several thousand more in the initial purchase plus battery
> replacement down the road which is a major expense in the few thousand $
> range all so that you could save $760 over 5 years in gas and think that
> you are doing the environment good.
>
> Theoretically if you bought the Lx for 16k MSRP and drove it for 5 years,
> 75,000 miles it would cost $17,960 not including tax, license, insurance
> standard maintenance etc. Just MSRP and gas. The hybrid would cost
20K
> plus $2205 for gas and about $2000 for batteries. I have included
batteries
> for the hybrid because that is the whole point of this car and is being
used
> to contest the 40% or so in gas savings. So the total for the hybrid is
> $24,205 and the Civic LX is $17,960. There is some type of tax deduction
> with the hybrid purchase I believe but I don't know what it is or if it is
> only able to be utilized if you itemize your taxes so I have left it out.
> But I am sure it isn't that much.
>
> In the end if I want to save $760 in gas over a five year period I only
have
> to cut my horsepower from 127 to around 93, lose a few cubic feet in the
> trunk, keep my rear seats from folding down and pay an additional
$6245.00?
>
> I don't think I need to beat this dead horse anymore.
>
> CaptainKrunch
>
>
> "TL" <tlehman@visi.com> wrote in message
> news:h3ervvsb1kquqglbujd1b6p6bfjb90gt7i@4ax.com...
> > I would beg to differ on both counts.
> >
> > According the Honda website, the cars are identical in overall size.
> > They have exactly the same passenger compartment measurements. The
> > trunk is 2 cu ft larger in the Civic than the Hybrid which I assume is
> > because of the batteries). Don't know what you mean by "more
> > substantial" so I can't comment on that.
> >
> > EPA mileage estimates for the Hybrid are 46/51 MT; the MT Civic is
> > rated at 32/38. That's about 44% higher city and 34% higher highway
> > mileage. That sounds pretty significant to me.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 10:26:49 -0800, "CaptainKrunch"
> > <nothing@nobody.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Personally I don't see the fascination with these hybrid cars. I mean
> what
> > >really are you saving anyway? They don't get that much better mileage
> than
> > >a standard Honda Civic which is bigger and a more substantial car.
They
> > >both use gas. And at the end of 100,000 miles or so, if you buy a
> hybrid,
> > >you are having to spend several thousand dollars to buy 1000 lbs or so
of
> > >batteries to replace the old ones in the hybrid. You also don't have
to
> > >dispose of these batteries which are considered hazardous material. I
> > >forgot to mention that the cost of the hybrid is higher than the Civic
> even
> > >with a tax deduction.
> > >
> > >Strictly from an environmental standpoint I don't think these things
are
> > >helping the environment at all and in fact may be hurting it. Honda
> > >vehicles in general already have extremely low emissions.
> > >
> > >CaptainKrunch
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >"Gary Gorbet" <ggorbet@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
> > >news:070120042110075950%ggorbet@houston.rr.com. ..
> > >> I have a 2003 Civic Hybrid. It's got about 3500 miles on it now. I
have
> > >> *loved* driving this car - quiet, smooth and peppy. But I must say
that
> > >> I'm somewhat disappointed in the mileage I'm getting. It's averaging
a
> > >> little better than 39 MPG. The EPA estimate is just under 50 MPG. I
> > >> know EPA is always high, but I would have thought I'd have gotten
> > >> closer than 10 MPG under.
> > >>
> > >> It is true that most of my driving is the 20 minute trip to and from
> > >> work in stop and go traffic. I think I've done a pretty good job of
> > >> modifying my driving habits to the hybrid. I'm not sure what I could
do
> > >> to maximize mileage, any more that what I've been doing.
> > >>
> > >> What I'd like to hear is the experience of other Hybrid owners. Is my
> > >> mileage reasonable for the kind of driving I do? Does it get better
> > >> after the break-in period?
> > >
> >
>
>

 

Captain...

A few things wrong with your analysis.

The batteries are guaranteed for 10 years. So if they have to be replaced
after 5, it won't cost you anything. Also, almost everything involved with
the motor is guaranteed for 15 years or 150,000 miles in the Civic Hybrid.

Also, there's a federal tax credit for buying hybrid cars ($2,000 for
calendar year 2003, $1,500 for 2004) and many states have state tax credits
as well.

Also, unless you're unlike almost everyone else in the world, you don't do
all your driving at highway speeds; there's almost no difference in
city/highway MPG for hybrids, but a huge difference for conventional gas
engines.

Plus, in many states, you can drive alone in carpool lanes in a hybrid car
(which might save you some time and aggravation over the years).

Yes, the hybrids cost more (and no, you're not going to entirely make up
that cost in 4 or 5 years), but if you factor everything in, the difference
isn't that great.


"CaptainKrunch" <nothing@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:cvadnVVEAMivjWOiRVn-hw@comcast.com...
> Well if we are going to go percentage routes lets us state that the over
two
> cubic foot cargo capacity difference between the two means the standard
> Civic has a 20% larger cargo capacity. The engine in the EX has about
36%
> more horsepower and after a year of driving 15,000 miles at $1.50 a gallon
> at freeway EPA estimates of Mpg the hybrid costs about $441 a year
compared
> to the $592 a year for the Civic EX. This is just assuming all freeway
> miles and EPA estimates of MPG for the sake of clarity and argument. At
the
> end of 5 years that is $2205 for the hybrid and $2960 for the Civic Ex.
So
> over the period of five years and 75,000 miles you save about $760 in
gas.
> Of course the hybrid is about $4000 more than the standard LX and $2000
more
> than a Civic Ex plus at the end of five years it is totally feasible that
> those batteries will now have to be replaced at a cost of several thousand
> dollars. That is what I hear anyways.
>
> So it costs several thousand more in the initial purchase plus battery
> replacement down the road which is a major expense in the few thousand $
> range all so that you could save $760 over 5 years in gas and think that
> you are doing the environment good.
>
> Theoretically if you bought the Lx for 16k MSRP and drove it for 5 years,
> 75,000 miles it would cost $17,960 not including tax, license, insurance
> standard maintenance etc. Just MSRP and gas. The hybrid would cost
20K
> plus $2205 for gas and about $2000 for batteries. I have included
batteries
> for the hybrid because that is the whole point of this car and is being
used
> to contest the 40% or so in gas savings. So the total for the hybrid is
> $24,205 and the Civic LX is $17,960. There is some type of tax deduction
> with the hybrid purchase I believe but I don't know what it is or if it is
> only able to be utilized if you itemize your taxes so I have left it out.
> But I am sure it isn't that much.
>
> In the end if I want to save $760 in gas over a five year period I only
have
> to cut my horsepower from 127 to around 93, lose a few cubic feet in the
> trunk, keep my rear seats from folding down and pay an additional
$6245.00?
>
> I don't think I need to beat this dead horse anymore.
>
> CaptainKrunch
>
>
> "TL" <tlehman@visi.com> wrote in message
> news:h3ervvsb1kquqglbujd1b6p6bfjb90gt7i@4ax.com...
> > I would beg to differ on both counts.
> >
> > According the Honda website, the cars are identical in overall size.
> > They have exactly the same passenger compartment measurements. The
> > trunk is 2 cu ft larger in the Civic than the Hybrid which I assume is
> > because of the batteries). Don't know what you mean by "more
> > substantial" so I can't comment on that.
> >
> > EPA mileage estimates for the Hybrid are 46/51 MT; the MT Civic is
> > rated at 32/38. That's about 44% higher city and 34% higher highway
> > mileage. That sounds pretty significant to me.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 10:26:49 -0800, "CaptainKrunch"
> > <nothing@nobody.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Personally I don't see the fascination with these hybrid cars. I mean
> what
> > >really are you saving anyway? They don't get that much better mileage
> than
> > >a standard Honda Civic which is bigger and a more substantial car.
They
> > >both use gas. And at the end of 100,000 miles or so, if you buy a
> hybrid,
> > >you are having to spend several thousand dollars to buy 1000 lbs or so
of
> > >batteries to replace the old ones in the hybrid. You also don't have
to
> > >dispose of these batteries which are considered hazardous material. I
> > >forgot to mention that the cost of the hybrid is higher than the Civic
> even
> > >with a tax deduction.
> > >
> > >Strictly from an environmental standpoint I don't think these things
are
> > >helping the environment at all and in fact may be hurting it. Honda
> > >vehicles in general already have extremely low emissions.
> > >
> > >CaptainKrunch
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >"Gary Gorbet" <ggorbet@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
> > >news:070120042110075950%ggorbet@houston.rr.com. ..
> > >> I have a 2003 Civic Hybrid. It's got about 3500 miles on it now. I
have
> > >> *loved* driving this car - quiet, smooth and peppy. But I must say
that
> > >> I'm somewhat disappointed in the mileage I'm getting. It's averaging
a
> > >> little better than 39 MPG. The EPA estimate is just under 50 MPG. I
> > >> know EPA is always high, but I would have thought I'd have gotten
> > >> closer than 10 MPG under.
> > >>
> > >> It is true that most of my driving is the 20 minute trip to and from
> > >> work in stop and go traffic. I think I've done a pretty good job of
> > >> modifying my driving habits to the hybrid. I'm not sure what I could
do
> > >> to maximize mileage, any more that what I've been doing.
> > >>
> > >> What I'd like to hear is the experience of other Hybrid owners. Is my
> > >> mileage reasonable for the kind of driving I do? Does it get better
> > >> after the break-in period?
> > >
> >
>
>

 

Captain...

A few things wrong with your analysis.

The batteries are guaranteed for 10 years. So if they have to be replaced
after 5, it won't cost you anything. Also, almost everything involved with
the motor is guaranteed for 15 years or 150,000 miles in the Civic Hybrid.

Also, there's a federal tax credit for buying hybrid cars ($2,000 for
calendar year 2003, $1,500 for 2004) and many states have state tax credits
as well.

Also, unless you're unlike almost everyone else in the world, you don't do
all your driving at highway speeds; there's almost no difference in
city/highway MPG for hybrids, but a huge difference for conventional gas
engines.

Plus, in many states, you can drive alone in carpool lanes in a hybrid car
(which might save you some time and aggravation over the years).

Yes, the hybrids cost more (and no, you're not going to entirely make up
that cost in 4 or 5 years), but if you factor everything in, the difference
isn't that great.


"CaptainKrunch" <nothing@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:cvadnVVEAMivjWOiRVn-hw@comcast.com...
> Well if we are going to go percentage routes lets us state that the over
two
> cubic foot cargo capacity difference between the two means the standard
> Civic has a 20% larger cargo capacity. The engine in the EX has about
36%
> more horsepower and after a year of driving 15,000 miles at $1.50 a gallon
> at freeway EPA estimates of Mpg the hybrid costs about $441 a year
compared
> to the $592 a year for the Civic EX. This is just assuming all freeway
> miles and EPA estimates of MPG for the sake of clarity and argument. At
the
> end of 5 years that is $2205 for the hybrid and $2960 for the Civic Ex.
So
> over the period of five years and 75,000 miles you save about $760 in
gas.
> Of course the hybrid is about $4000 more than the standard LX and $2000
more
> than a Civic Ex plus at the end of five years it is totally feasible that
> those batteries will now have to be replaced at a cost of several thousand
> dollars. That is what I hear anyways.
>
> So it costs several thousand more in the initial purchase plus battery
> replacement down the road which is a major expense in the few thousand $
> range all so that you could save $760 over 5 years in gas and think that
> you are doing the environment good.
>
> Theoretically if you bought the Lx for 16k MSRP and drove it for 5 years,
> 75,000 miles it would cost $17,960 not including tax, license, insurance
> standard maintenance etc. Just MSRP and gas. The hybrid would cost
20K
> plus $2205 for gas and about $2000 for batteries. I have included
batteries
> for the hybrid because that is the whole point of this car and is being
used
> to contest the 40% or so in gas savings. So the total for the hybrid is
> $24,205 and the Civic LX is $17,960. There is some type of tax deduction
> with the hybrid purchase I believe but I don't know what it is or if it is
> only able to be utilized if you itemize your taxes so I have left it out.
> But I am sure it isn't that much.
>
> In the end if I want to save $760 in gas over a five year period I only
have
> to cut my horsepower from 127 to around 93, lose a few cubic feet in the
> trunk, keep my rear seats from folding down and pay an additional
$6245.00?
>
> I don't think I need to beat this dead horse anymore.
>
> CaptainKrunch
>
>
> "TL" <tlehman@visi.com> wrote in message
> news:h3ervvsb1kquqglbujd1b6p6bfjb90gt7i@4ax.com...
> > I would beg to differ on both counts.
> >
> > According the Honda website, the cars are identical in overall size.
> > They have exactly the same passenger compartment measurements. The
> > trunk is 2 cu ft larger in the Civic than the Hybrid which I assume is
> > because of the batteries). Don't know what you mean by "more
> > substantial" so I can't comment on that.
> >
> > EPA mileage estimates for the Hybrid are 46/51 MT; the MT Civic is
> > rated at 32/38. That's about 44% higher city and 34% higher highway
> > mileage. That sounds pretty significant to me.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 10:26:49 -0800, "CaptainKrunch"
> > <nothing@nobody.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Personally I don't see the fascination with these hybrid cars. I mean
> what
> > >really are you saving anyway? They don't get that much better mileage
> than
> > >a standard Honda Civic which is bigger and a more substantial car.
They
> > >both use gas. And at the end of 100,000 miles or so, if you buy a
> hybrid,
> > >you are having to spend several thousand dollars to buy 1000 lbs or so
of
> > >batteries to replace the old ones in the hybrid. You also don't have
to
> > >dispose of these batteries which are considered hazardous material. I
> > >forgot to mention that the cost of the hybrid is higher than the Civic
> even
> > >with a tax deduction.
> > >
> > >Strictly from an environmental standpoint I don't think these things
are
> > >helping the environment at all and in fact may be hurting it. Honda
> > >vehicles in general already have extremely low emissions.
> > >
> > >CaptainKrunch
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >"Gary Gorbet" <ggorbet@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
> > >news:070120042110075950%ggorbet@houston.rr.com. ..
> > >> I have a 2003 Civic Hybrid. It's got about 3500 miles on it now. I
have
> > >> *loved* driving this car - quiet, smooth and peppy. But I must say
that
> > >> I'm somewhat disappointed in the mileage I'm getting. It's averaging
a
> > >> little better than 39 MPG. The EPA estimate is just under 50 MPG. I
> > >> know EPA is always high, but I would have thought I'd have gotten
> > >> closer than 10 MPG under.
> > >>
> > >> It is true that most of my driving is the 20 minute trip to and from
> > >> work in stop and go traffic. I think I've done a pretty good job of
> > >> modifying my driving habits to the hybrid. I'm not sure what I could
do
> > >> to maximize mileage, any more that what I've been doing.
> > >>
> > >> What I'd like to hear is the experience of other Hybrid owners. Is my
> > >> mileage reasonable for the kind of driving I do? Does it get better
> > >> after the break-in period?
> > >
> >
>
>

 

Captain...

A few things wrong with your analysis.

The batteries are guaranteed for 10 years. So if they have to be replaced
after 5, it won't cost you anything. Also, almost everything involved with
the motor is guaranteed for 15 years or 150,000 miles in the Civic Hybrid.

Also, there's a federal tax credit for buying hybrid cars ($2,000 for
calendar year 2003, $1,500 for 2004) and many states have state tax credits
as well.

Also, unless you're unlike almost everyone else in the world, you don't do
all your driving at highway speeds; there's almost no difference in
city/highway MPG for hybrids, but a huge difference for conventional gas
engines.

Plus, in many states, you can drive alone in carpool lanes in a hybrid car
(which might save you some time and aggravation over the years).

Yes, the hybrids cost more (and no, you're not going to entirely make up
that cost in 4 or 5 years), but if you factor everything in, the difference
isn't that great.


"CaptainKrunch" <nothing@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:cvadnVVEAMivjWOiRVn-hw@comcast.com...
> Well if we are going to go percentage routes lets us state that the over
two
> cubic foot cargo capacity difference between the two means the standard
> Civic has a 20% larger cargo capacity. The engine in the EX has about
36%
> more horsepower and after a year of driving 15,000 miles at $1.50 a gallon
> at freeway EPA estimates of Mpg the hybrid costs about $441 a year
compared
> to the $592 a year for the Civic EX. This is just assuming all freeway
> miles and EPA estimates of MPG for the sake of clarity and argument. At
the
> end of 5 years that is $2205 for the hybrid and $2960 for the Civic Ex.
So
> over the period of five years and 75,000 miles you save about $760 in
gas.
> Of course the hybrid is about $4000 more than the standard LX and $2000
more
> than a Civic Ex plus at the end of five years it is totally feasible that
> those batteries will now have to be replaced at a cost of several thousand
> dollars. That is what I hear anyways.
>
> So it costs several thousand more in the initial purchase plus battery
> replacement down the road which is a major expense in the few thousand $
> range all so that you could save $760 over 5 years in gas and think that
> you are doing the environment good.
>
> Theoretically if you bought the Lx for 16k MSRP and drove it for 5 years,
> 75,000 miles it would cost $17,960 not including tax, license, insurance
> standard maintenance etc. Just MSRP and gas. The hybrid would cost
20K
> plus $2205 for gas and about $2000 for batteries. I have included
batteries
> for the hybrid because that is the whole point of this car and is being
used
> to contest the 40% or so in gas savings. So the total for the hybrid is
> $24,205 and the Civic LX is $17,960. There is some type of tax deduction
> with the hybrid purchase I believe but I don't know what it is or if it is
> only able to be utilized if you itemize your taxes so I have left it out.
> But I am sure it isn't that much.
>
> In the end if I want to save $760 in gas over a five year period I only
have
> to cut my horsepower from 127 to around 93, lose a few cubic feet in the
> trunk, keep my rear seats from folding down and pay an additional
$6245.00?
>
> I don't think I need to beat this dead horse anymore.
>
> CaptainKrunch
>
>
> "TL" <tlehman@visi.com> wrote in message
> news:h3ervvsb1kquqglbujd1b6p6bfjb90gt7i@4ax.com...
> > I would beg to differ on both counts.
> >
> > According the Honda website, the cars are identical in overall size.
> > They have exactly the same passenger compartment measurements. The
> > trunk is 2 cu ft larger in the Civic than the Hybrid which I assume is
> > because of the batteries). Don't know what you mean by "more
> > substantial" so I can't comment on that.
> >
> > EPA mileage estimates for the Hybrid are 46/51 MT; the MT Civic is
> > rated at 32/38. That's about 44% higher city and 34% higher highway
> > mileage. That sounds pretty significant to me.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 10:26:49 -0800, "CaptainKrunch"
> > <nothing@nobody.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Personally I don't see the fascination with these hybrid cars. I mean
> what
> > >really are you saving anyway? They don't get that much better mileage
> than
> > >a standard Honda Civic which is bigger and a more substantial car.
They
> > >both use gas. And at the end of 100,000 miles or so, if you buy a
> hybrid,
> > >you are having to spend several thousand dollars to buy 1000 lbs or so
of
> > >batteries to replace the old ones in the hybrid. You also don't have
to
> > >dispose of these batteries which are considered hazardous material. I
> > >forgot to mention that the cost of the hybrid is higher than the Civic
> even
> > >with a tax deduction.
> > >
> > >Strictly from an environmental standpoint I don't think these things
are
> > >helping the environment at all and in fact may be hurting it. Honda
> > >vehicles in general already have extremely low emissions.
> > >
> > >CaptainKrunch
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >"Gary Gorbet" <ggorbet@houston.rr.com> wrote in message
> > >news:070120042110075950%ggorbet@houston.rr.com. ..
> > >> I have a 2003 Civic Hybrid. It's got about 3500 miles on it now. I
have
> > >> *loved* driving this car - quiet, smooth and peppy. But I must say
that
> > >> I'm somewhat disappointed in the mileage I'm getting. It's averaging
a
> > >> little better than 39 MPG. The EPA estimate is just under 50 MPG. I
> > >> know EPA is always high, but I would have thought I'd have gotten
> > >> closer than 10 MPG under.
> > >>
> > >> It is true that most of my driving is the 20 minute trip to and from
> > >> work in stop and go traffic. I think I've done a pretty good job of
> > >> modifying my driving habits to the hybrid. I'm not sure what I could
do
> > >> to maximize mileage, any more that what I've been doing.
> > >>
> > >> What I'd like to hear is the experience of other Hybrid owners. Is my
> > >> mileage reasonable for the kind of driving I do? Does it get better
> > >> after the break-in period?
> > >
> >
>
>

 

Many apologies Gary, the folks posting here haven't even BEGUN to address
your original query.
EVERYONE: This can be a great newsgroup featuring help & assistance with the
best vehicles ever made (HONDA), but PLEASE STOP bantering back 'n forth
about which form of transportation is greener, and answer Gary's question!
-chris

"CaptainKrunch" <nothing@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:7bKdnTMPCq2N42KiRVn-tw@comcast.com...
> I think he was referring to the mileage of the v-6. But I never compared
> mileage of the v-6 only the more equivalent 4 cylinder Civic
>
> CaptainKrunch
>
>
> "Me" <nhzero@dontmailme.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:icsuvvchdc3fk7tlqm9q98mo5kt56a3ph5@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 02:21:27 GMT, Gary Gorbet <ggorbet@houston.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > >> > Hehe... From what I've heard, that's pretty typical. I guess I'm
> doing
> > >> > more for the environment by driving my 1994 Civic 5-speed at 42-45
> > >> > mpg. Hey, and I didn't even add a bunch of steel and battery trash
to
> > >> > the environment!! Good luck on your attempt at being
environmentally
> > >> > friendly!!!
> > >>
> > >> Hahahah. Best post ever.
> > >>
> > >> The EPA estimates for my V6 Accord, 21/30 (which you are beating by
> 9mpg
> > >> with a go-kart engine) are right on.
> > >>
> > >> Tip: do the math before you buy a hybrid car.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >Tip: YOU do the math: 39-21 = 18 MPG (nearly DOUBLE what you get in
> > >town).
> > >
> > >No surprise that, since you can't even do simple math, that you'd
> > >characterize a very peppy engine as "go-kart".
> >
> > I agree, my 94 Civic is not a "go-kart!" It might not be a Z06, but it
> > certainly gets up to speed well, especially since it has a 2300lb curb
> > weight. Besides, I could have sworn I get BETTER mileage than the
> > hybrid, not half like you said....
> >
> > Nate
>
>

 

Many apologies Gary, the folks posting here haven't even BEGUN to address
your original query.
EVERYONE: This can be a great newsgroup featuring help & assistance with the
best vehicles ever made (HONDA), but PLEASE STOP bantering back 'n forth
about which form of transportation is greener, and answer Gary's question!
-chris

"CaptainKrunch" <nothing@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:7bKdnTMPCq2N42KiRVn-tw@comcast.com...
> I think he was referring to the mileage of the v-6. But I never compared
> mileage of the v-6 only the more equivalent 4 cylinder Civic
>
> CaptainKrunch
>
>
> "Me" <nhzero@dontmailme.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:icsuvvchdc3fk7tlqm9q98mo5kt56a3ph5@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 02:21:27 GMT, Gary Gorbet <ggorbet@houston.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > >> > Hehe... From what I've heard, that's pretty typical. I guess I'm
> doing
> > >> > more for the environment by driving my 1994 Civic 5-speed at 42-45
> > >> > mpg. Hey, and I didn't even add a bunch of steel and battery trash
to
> > >> > the environment!! Good luck on your attempt at being
environmentally
> > >> > friendly!!!
> > >>
> > >> Hahahah. Best post ever.
> > >>
> > >> The EPA estimates for my V6 Accord, 21/30 (which you are beating by
> 9mpg
> > >> with a go-kart engine) are right on.
> > >>
> > >> Tip: do the math before you buy a hybrid car.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >Tip: YOU do the math: 39-21 = 18 MPG (nearly DOUBLE what you get in
> > >town).
> > >
> > >No surprise that, since you can't even do simple math, that you'd
> > >characterize a very peppy engine as "go-kart".
> >
> > I agree, my 94 Civic is not a "go-kart!" It might not be a Z06, but it
> > certainly gets up to speed well, especially since it has a 2300lb curb
> > weight. Besides, I could have sworn I get BETTER mileage than the
> > hybrid, not half like you said....
> >
> > Nate
>
>

 

Many apologies Gary, the folks posting here haven't even BEGUN to address
your original query.
EVERYONE: This can be a great newsgroup featuring help & assistance with the
best vehicles ever made (HONDA), but PLEASE STOP bantering back 'n forth
about which form of transportation is greener, and answer Gary's question!
-chris

"CaptainKrunch" <nothing@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:7bKdnTMPCq2N42KiRVn-tw@comcast.com...
> I think he was referring to the mileage of the v-6. But I never compared
> mileage of the v-6 only the more equivalent 4 cylinder Civic
>
> CaptainKrunch
>
>
> "Me" <nhzero@dontmailme.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:icsuvvchdc3fk7tlqm9q98mo5kt56a3ph5@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 02:21:27 GMT, Gary Gorbet <ggorbet@houston.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > >> > Hehe... From what I've heard, that's pretty typical. I guess I'm
> doing
> > >> > more for the environment by driving my 1994 Civic 5-speed at 42-45
> > >> > mpg. Hey, and I didn't even add a bunch of steel and battery trash
to
> > >> > the environment!! Good luck on your attempt at being
environmentally
> > >> > friendly!!!
> > >>
> > >> Hahahah. Best post ever.
> > >>
> > >> The EPA estimates for my V6 Accord, 21/30 (which you are beating by
> 9mpg
> > >> with a go-kart engine) are right on.
> > >>
> > >> Tip: do the math before you buy a hybrid car.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >Tip: YOU do the math: 39-21 = 18 MPG (nearly DOUBLE what you get in
> > >town).
> > >
> > >No surprise that, since you can't even do simple math, that you'd
> > >characterize a very peppy engine as "go-kart".
> >
> > I agree, my 94 Civic is not a "go-kart!" It might not be a Z06, but it
> > certainly gets up to speed well, especially since it has a 2300lb curb
> > weight. Besides, I could have sworn I get BETTER mileage than the
> > hybrid, not half like you said....
> >
> > Nate
>
>

 

Many apologies Gary, the folks posting here haven't even BEGUN to address
your original query.
EVERYONE: This can be a great newsgroup featuring help & assistance with the
best vehicles ever made (HONDA), but PLEASE STOP bantering back 'n forth
about which form of transportation is greener, and answer Gary's question!
-chris

"CaptainKrunch" <nothing@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:7bKdnTMPCq2N42KiRVn-tw@comcast.com...
> I think he was referring to the mileage of the v-6. But I never compared
> mileage of the v-6 only the more equivalent 4 cylinder Civic
>
> CaptainKrunch
>
>
> "Me" <nhzero@dontmailme.yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:icsuvvchdc3fk7tlqm9q98mo5kt56a3ph5@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 02:21:27 GMT, Gary Gorbet <ggorbet@houston.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > >> > Hehe... From what I've heard, that's pretty typical. I guess I'm
> doing
> > >> > more for the environment by driving my 1994 Civic 5-speed at 42-45
> > >> > mpg. Hey, and I didn't even add a bunch of steel and battery trash
to
> > >> > the environment!! Good luck on your attempt at being
environmentally
> > >> > friendly!!!
> > >>
> > >> Hahahah. Best post ever.
> > >>
> > >> The EPA estimates for my V6 Accord, 21/30 (which you are beating by
> 9mpg
> > >> with a go-kart engine) are right on.
> > >>
> > >> Tip: do the math before you buy a hybrid car.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >Tip: YOU do the math: 39-21 = 18 MPG (nearly DOUBLE what you get in
> > >town).
> > >
> > >No surprise that, since you can't even do simple math, that you'd
> > >characterize a very peppy engine as "go-kart".
> >
> > I agree, my 94 Civic is not a "go-kart!" It might not be a Z06, but it
> > certainly gets up to speed well, especially since it has a 2300lb curb
> > weight. Besides, I could have sworn I get BETTER mileage than the
> > hybrid, not half like you said....
> >
> > Nate
>
>

 

In article <wy5Mb.55852$ts4.15858@pd7tw3no>, Chris
<whosechris@yahoo.ca> wrote:

> Many apologies Gary, the folks posting here haven't even BEGUN to address
> your original query.
> EVERYONE: This can be a great newsgroup featuring help & assistance with the
> best vehicles ever made (HONDA), but PLEASE STOP bantering back 'n forth
> about which form of transportation is greener, and answer Gary's question!
> -chris
>
Thank you, Chris. I was wondering if this newsgroup was primarily
peopled by trolls. You give me renewed hope that my original queries
will be addressed.

 

In article <wy5Mb.55852$ts4.15858@pd7tw3no>, Chris
<whosechris@yahoo.ca> wrote:

> Many apologies Gary, the folks posting here haven't even BEGUN to address
> your original query.
> EVERYONE: This can be a great newsgroup featuring help & assistance with the
> best vehicles ever made (HONDA), but PLEASE STOP bantering back 'n forth
> about which form of transportation is greener, and answer Gary's question!
> -chris
>
Thank you, Chris. I was wondering if this newsgroup was primarily
peopled by trolls. You give me renewed hope that my original queries
will be addressed.