Gas is something like $3.80 up here (I don't follow, I buy D2--which is like $4.12, but again I don't follow that either). At 50mpg it's 7.6cents/mile. 17.6cents/mile would be 22mpg.
If you save 5 cents/mile (that is the diff between 30 and 50mpg) you'd save $5k over 100kmiles, or $7.5k over 150k, or (drum roll please) $10k over 200k. Ignoring the fact that gas prices are likely to rise, it seems that, if one is going to keep the car long enough, the battery replacement plus extra cost of the vehicle has to come out of the $5-10k savings.
The Prius c is basically a high end Yaris, no? Which means a good $5k over that, in order to go from 40mpg to 50mpg? Give or take? Sounds like a dubious winner. Then again, if one wants to a) save the planet, b) has a heavy city drive which favors hybrid, c) has a small area to park in, or d) just wants it, then Prius c is hardly that bad.
Beats me. If I had to buy today, that is, if I totaled out my VW, I might be tempted. If only it had a larger fuel tank... Otherwise, my VW is paid off. I'm guessing it'd be cheaper to buy a second VW for when the first was broken, on a per-mile basis, or per-year basis.
It does seem like fuel cost is a more minor issue for most people, compared to vehicle depreciation. I guess most people write it off as a different catagory: they are bound and determined to spend $x for a vehicle, but no more than $y for fuel. Then again, this battery griping is a prime reason why: no one wants to keep a vehicle past 150k, which is when all this repair stuff crops up. At which one could have two vehicles; but then I think it becomes a dubious savings (two older vehicles versus one car payment).
