Can a Hybrid Powertrain be viewed as a "Premium Upgrade"

[The Critic]

Let's say you are considering a new vehicle and the base engine option is a 2.4L, 4-cyl turbocharged direct-injection engine that performs adequately but is somewhat noisy and unrefined.

Due to current market conditions and differences in trim level packages, you have the option of getting a 2.5L, 4-cyl Hybrid Powertrain, but for an additional $3500. During the test drive, you find the hybrid powertrain to be significantly quieter and smoother under normal driving conditions.

Both engine options deliver nearly-identical 0-60, 1/4 mile and passing performance. Both engine options also require premium fuel.

The hybrid delivers 10 mpg better than the non-hybrid option, but as a low mileage driver, the fuel savings are non-existent should a battery replacement be required within 15 years of ownership.

Therefore, opting for the hybrid in this situation is strictly for the upgraded driving experience. Does it makes sense to do it?

 

[Trav]

For a low mileage driver living in the suburbs IMO it is questionable but living in near a big city where it can spend most of its time in electric mode absolutely.

 

[bullwinkle]

PHEV? Yes. Standard hybrid? Depends on how it's going to be used. This is my dilemma-want a PHEV, but don't drive enough non-highway miles to be worth it.

 

[wag123]

Unless you intend to keep it until the wheels fall off, keep in mind that the $3500 difference will come back to you when you sell or trade it.
Premium fuel is "recommended", not "required", for the hybrid. I don't see that there is any difference whatsoever between the RX350h power train and any other Toyota model with the same power train and none of Toyota's other hybrids "require" premium.
At your high gas prices in CA the 10 MPG difference will add-up to a pretty significant savings over the time that you own it. Furthermore, in real world use the MPG difference should be quite a bit higher than 10 MPG.

 

[ragtoplvr]

the premium fuel requirement kills it for me. Not in a daily driver.

 

[andrew_j]

If the hybrid saves that expensive premium fuel then worth it.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Let's say you are considering a new vehicle and the base engine option is a 2.4L, 4-cyl turbocharged direct-injection engine that performs adequately but is somewhat noisy and unrefined.

Due to current market conditions and differences in trim level packages, you have the option of getting a 2.5L, 4-cyl Hybrid Powertrain, but for an additional $3500. During the test drive, you find the hybrid powertrain to be significantly quieter and smoother under normal driving conditions.

Both engine options deliver nearly-identical 0-60, 1/4 mile and passing performance. Both engine options also require premium fuel.

The hybrid delivers 10 mpg better than the non-hybrid option, but as a low mileage driver, the fuel savings are non-existent should a battery replacement be required within 15 years of ownership.

Therefore, opting for the hybrid in this situation is strictly for the upgraded driving experience. Does it makes sense to do it?

15 yrs is a long time as it's almost a generation.

Also it's hard to put a figure towards the subjective value of driving experience. The hybrid will probably be easier to sell if for some reason the drivers of this vehicle prematurely loose the ability to drive the car.

 

[Jetronic]

Let's say you are considering a new vehicle and the base engine option is a 2.4L, 4-cyl turbocharged direct-injection engine that performs adequately but is somewhat noisy and unrefined.

Due to current market conditions and differences in trim level packages, you have the option of getting a 2.5L, 4-cyl Hybrid Powertrain, but for an additional $3500. During the test drive, you find the hybrid powertrain to be significantly quieter and smoother under normal driving conditions.

Both engine options deliver nearly-identical 0-60, 1/4 mile and passing performance. Both engine options also require premium fuel.

The hybrid delivers 10 mpg better than the non-hybrid option, but as a low mileage driver, the fuel savings are non-existent should a battery replacement be required within 15 years of ownership.

Therefore, opting for the hybrid in this situation is strictly for the upgraded driving experience. Does it makes sense to do it?

Was the noisy and unrefined ICE engine an issue before you tested the hybrid? If so, you really don't want the ICE and if not, forget you tested the hybrid.

 

[Snagglefoot]

I don’t consider a battery replacement as something has to meet the economic threshold. It’s not logical in my opinion. It would be like buying a car and having to imagine the cost of replacing engine and transmission.

As far as the hybrid option goes, I would want the gasoline break-even cost to occur within three years.

 

[IveBeenRued]

Toyota hybrids are smoother, quieter, more reliable, than their non-hybrid counterparts. If you are going for luxury, it’s a no-brainer. Plus there is lower maintenance in general which adds up over time. Take my RAV4 Hybrid for example; I’m at 90K miles and still have 80-90% of my brake pad material remaining. Most non-hybrid owners are getting 25-45K on a set of rotors and pads. The only extra maintenance for my hybrid is a $8 battery air filter every 60-90K and a $110 (at the dealer) inverter coolant change every 100K. Both additional maintenance items are easily DIYable for dirt cheap.

 

[JeffKeryk]

Not sure I see a hybrid as a "Premium Upgrade" but perhaps it is.
Hybrid would be my choice, all the way. Arm wrestle the local dealers to get the deal you want.
As others have said, resale will likely be better, and CA gas ain't getting any cheaper.
Around town hybrids rock; our RX450h gets as good or better MPG than the TSX 4 banger.

 

[supton]

I don’t consider a battery replacement as something has to meet the economic threshold. It’s not logical in my opinion. It would be like buying a car and having to imagine the cost of replacing engine and transmission.

Well, if you buy an H/K product, engine replacement is something to think about...

Don't we spend quite a bit of time trying to figure out the best fluids for longest lifespan? Used to be automatic transmissions were considered a wear item, and many of us wrung our hands over replacement costs for anything with more than 5 speeds.

Long term costs are something I do worry about, especially when buying used.

In one of the threads about Hemi lifters, wasn't the path chosen to replace the engine? Granted, that's not always the case for that engine, but at what point do you say, I should be keeping $5k in my back pocket, just in case? One should be, in the general case (an emergency fund of some sort), but if one buys something with a really expensive transmission, shouldn't they increase their emergency stash in order to cover that? Your emergency fund needs to be large enough to cover any singular failure point, and at some point, you start to think about how to cover multiple points of failure.

 

[Snagglefoot]

Here is some info on the Honda Accord. It has the distinction of having one of the longest periods or original ownership which is 9.4 years. The warranties on EV batteries is usually around that long. Original owners of EV’s will not be the people having to pay for replacement batteries, on average so I can’t imagine why the average EV purchaser should ring their hands over it. Only Bitoggers will do that.

 

[Snagglefoot]

15 yrs is a long time as it's almost a generation.

Also it's hard to put a figure towards the subjective value of driving experience. The hybrid will probably be easier to sell if for some reason the drivers of this vehicle prematurely loose the ability to drive the car.

I was going to say that if you lived in West Virginia it would be a generation, but I’m not going to say that.

Fifteen years takes us to 2039. That’s four years past 2035 at which point there supposedly will not be any new ICE cars for sale. Having a hybrid will probably be a good thing since they will probably create punishments for ICE vehicle owners such as no access to HOV lanes and a potential carbon tax which by the way, already exists in Canada.

 

[The Critic]

but living in near a big city where it can spend most of its time in electric mode absolutely.

I have never seen a Toyota hybrid spend "most of its time" in electric mode....except at a stop. When moving, the two powertrains are generally used simultaneously, but at varying outputs.

Premium fuel is "recommended", not "required", for the hybrid. I don't see that there is any difference whatsoever between the RX350h power train and any other Toyota model with the same power train and none of Toyota's other hybrids "require" premium.

Technically correct, but Toyota likely optimized performance (and efficiency) by way of higher octane fuel (and software) in this application.

I don’t consider a battery replacement as something has to meet the economic threshold. It’s not logical in my opinion. It would be like buying a car and having to imagine the cost of replacing engine and transmission.

My thought process was - there's a 100% chance that I'll need to replace the hybrid battery before the chassis wears out. At least that was true on the 2nd/3rd Gen Toyota Hybrid systems. Maybe things have changed with the 4th Gen and now 5th gen systems? I could be wrong.

15 yrs is a long time as it's almost a generation.

Also it's hard to put a figure towards the subjective value of driving experience. The hybrid will probably be easier to sell if for some reason the drivers of this vehicle prematurely loose the ability to drive the car.

Traditionally, our families have always kept vehicles for >15 years. But you raised a very valid point - if the owner of this vehicle stops driving earlier than expected, this car could end up being sold or I may take for it myself.....in which case, a hybrid could have some significant benefits.

 

[IveBeenRued]

My thought process was - there's a 100% chance that I'll need to replace the hybrid battery before the chassis wears out. At least that was true on the 2nd/3rd Gen Toyota Hybrid systems. Maybe things have changed with the 4th Gen and now 5th gen systems? I could be wrong.

Where are you getting this stat from? I’ve never heard of any gen 2/3 Toyota owner needing a battery replacement, let alone 100% of them.

In the past eight years, I’ve heard of way more people running into issue with 8,9,10 speed ATs than hybrid drivetrain components(including batteries).

 

[The Critic]

Where are you getting this stat from? I’ve never heard of any gen 2/3 Toyota owner needing a battery replacement, let alone 100% of them.

In the past eight years, I’ve heard of way more people running into issue with 8,9,10 speed ATs than hybrid drivetrain components(including batteries).

Gen 2 and 3 HSD system - so Prius before 2015MY, Gen 1 Camry Hybrid, etc.

I've replaced quite a few hybrid batteries myself and if you don't believe me, there are plenty of folks on Priuschat who have had to replace their's.

 

[IveBeenRued]

Gen 2 and 3 HSD system - so Prius before 2015MY, Gen 1 Camry Hybrid, etc.

I've replaced quite a few hybrid batteries myself and if you don't believe me, there are plenty of folks on Priuschat who have had to replace their's.

Just glanced through Prius Chat for their battery replacement threads. It still seems like an exceedingly rare issue. Most of the threads that are in fact dealing replacement batteries are people with 2005-2007 Priuses and it’s looking like $1800-3000 for a new battery, installed, with a new 10 year warranty. Makes you wonder why someone with a 18-20 year old vehicle is willing to drop a couple grand to keep it on the road huh.

Also, thinking that a handful forum posts taking about a couple bad cells on 250K+ mile vehicles is representative of the 2.9M Priuses sold in those two generations is just doomer thinking.

Besides, you are comparing a high stress 2.4L turbo compared to a low stress hybrid. One has an expensive turbo and one has an expensive battery. Neither has a high likelihood of going bad but risk-wise, it’s probably a wash. If you are going for luxury with the more refined and pleasant to drive vehicle.

 

[wag123]

Technically correct, but Toyota likely optimized performance (and efficiency) by way of higher octane fuel (and software) in this application.

My 2005 Sienna says "premium fuel recommended" right on the inside of the fuel door but says that using 87 octane is acceptable in the owner's manual. Years ago I asked a Toyota engineer I was acquainted with why they did this and he told me that the only reason that Toyota does this is because they have to "recommend" the fuel that was in it when the EPA MPG testing was originally performed. On a couple of different occasions I actually ran premium in it for a couple of months. I didn't get any better gas mileage, it didn't run any better, and my "butt dyno" didn't detect any improvement over using 87 octane.
In the case of Toyota hybrids, the engine is running in Atkinson Cycle and there isn't really anything to be gained by running premium in it. Atkinson cycle engines in the hybrids cannot take advantage of higher octane fuels because they bleed-off the engine's static compression through the intake valve by holding the intake valve partially open during the first part of the compression stroke. You can run premium gas in it if you want to, but the only thing you will gain by using it in a Toyota hybrid is a lighter wallet. The 2.4L Turbo is a different story.

 

[The Critic]

My 2005 Sienna says "premium fuel recommended" right on the inside of the fuel door but says that using 87 octane is acceptable in the owner's manual. Years ago I asked a Toyota engineer I was acquainted with why they did this and he told me that the only reason that Toyota does this is because they have to "recommend" the fuel that was in it when the EPA MPG testing was originally performed. On a couple of different occasions I actually ran premium in it for a couple of months. I didn't get any better gas mileage, it didn't run any better, and my "butt dyno" didn't detect any improvement over using 87 octane.
In the case of Toyota hybrids, the engine is running in Atkinson Cycle and there isn't really anything to be gained by running premium in it. Atkinson cycle engines in the hybrids cannot take advantage of higher octane fuels because they bleed-off the engine's static compression through the intake valve by holding the intake valve partially open during the first part of the compression stroke. You can run premium gas in it if you want to, but the only thing you will gain by using it in a Toyota hybrid is a lighter wallet. The 2.4L Turbo is a different story.

Not sure if I agree with that one until I do some data-logging to validate. Even in an Atkinson Cycle engine, there is potentially room within the calibration to take advantage of the higher octane. The knock retard can be monitored and graphed with scan tools to validate your argument.

If we end up with the hybrid, I'll put this on my long-term to-do list.