Do hybrids last as long as naturally aspirated engine and do they make sense?

[SC Maintenance]

This is so far down in the weeds of speculation, like worrying about future tax law changes, that I'm not interested in that rabbit hole. I deal with what's here, today.

I agree, but you seemed to be the one adamant that your bank was "risk free". T-bill is even more risk free, if there could be more risk free (it technically is, but there both zero in practice).

I don't do T-Bills because I have to report certain types transactions in a financial disclosure. It can be quite burdensome.

If you stick to T-bills you get a form 1099 from your broker or Treasury direct and enter it on the same form as your bank interest. No extra disclosures. Your lending money to the US government, and they already know about it

Where do you think banks put there reserves? In T-bills of course - or park them at the fed which pays the same as T-bills practically - and they pay you less.

Honestly, put your money where it makes you happy. It just seems like your going to a lot of trouble to manage a loan so you can make a few bps in interest, then you make less interest. I hold lots of T-bills, but I just don't like loans, of any kind. I pay cash when I can, including for new cars.

 

[rijndael]

If you stick to T-bills you get a form 1099 from your broker or Treasury direct and enter it on the same form as your bank interest. No extra disclosures.

I'm not talking about tax reporting requirements, I have job reporting requirements. I'm not going to get in to my specifics, but that's not how it works for me.

I just don't like loans, of any kind.

I really like low interest loans.

It just seems like your going to a lot of trouble to manage a loan so you can make a few bps in interest, then you make less interest.

It's almost no work. Get the car, get the loan, setup direct withdrawl from the new account. Go back to it in 5 years when it's paid off and take out the interest.

 

[PandaBear]

I think most people should separate the discussions of many subjects instead of mixing them all up together:

1) Do you need that expensive vehicles. New or aged doesn't matter. Everyone has a different need regarding to what kind of vehicles to buy. Some like Prius, some like M3, some like Tesla, some like mini van. You can't force someone from a crew cab into a Prius because that's not what they want, or the other way around because they may not be able to afford it.

2) Is new or used a better deal? That depends. So far I have no regrets on all my new cars purchases. I negotiate well, typically to a point of my new car being almost the same price as 1-2 year old used, and over 20 years typical ownership I got what I want instead of buying something I don't (like instead of today's newer better car I was forced to buy something that is older and less efficient, etc). Plus I can get better interest rate financing instead of cash, so the cashflow in my investment compensate for some of the loss had I pay cash to buy a used car or finance with a higher cost. It may not work for everyone and it may not work for every kind of cars out there, but so far it works for me. I always review both new and used to see what works better.

3) Is financing a better deal? Depends on the deal. At 7% interest probably not (although I typically get about 10% market return in my investment, after tax it is less than 7%), but I once got a 1.5% rate on a car I already bought in cash, just went to my credit union to take advantage of that plan and open an account there. They ask me why I would send a paid off in cash car back into a car loan and I told them it is cheaper than my mortgage and I am using it to pay off my mortgage and pocket that 1.5% myself for free. It worked out well.

4) Is new car better or a beater that may need some repairs here and there better? Can you afford it breaking down? Do you have another car to use as a spare? Are you good at DIY? If you can't afford to miss work you probably should only buy less than 10 year old Corolla and call it a day, none of the iffy brands and none of the iffy models. I don't see buying beater being the best choice always, even if you save a few grands. I have a friend who got fired because his car broke down and he missed too many days at work. He regretted buying that beater and went back to a much newer Corolla afterward.

Split these decisions up and the answer depends on the buyer.

 

[brages]

I'm a hypothetical borrower and investor. Call me Even Steven.

I have a $100,000 investment at 3% interest. Every year it makes me $3000, but I'm taxed at 25%, so I get to keep $2250.

I also have a $100,000 loan at 3%. Every year I pay $3000 in interest. $2250 comes from my investment income and the rest comes from my discretionary spending account...

 

[CarlB]

The profits on the investment make the loan payment. My argument is simply that if you are spending the money, this is the smarter route vs pulling that money out of the investment portfolio and spending it. Sure, you could spend less and get less, but that's not the point that @rijndael had made with his two options that I originally was responding to.

I'd argue warranty is more than a "want" for somebody in their 70's.

No, I'm coming at this from a fixed spend perspective, which I thought I had made clear, IE, you are buying the vehicle anyway, these are your two options for paying for it, which is how @rijndael had presented his reply to you.

Someone in their 70's can drop $100k because a warranty is more than a want, yet can't afford to pay for repairs. Sounds like a, "want."

Again, if you are going to ignore depreciation, opportunity cost, because you have made up your mind to either pay $100k + interest or $100k in cash. This isn't a financial planning discussion anymore. Want vs need. Buying cool toys is fun, just understand it isn't a need.

 

[OVERKILL]

Someone in their 70's can drop $100k because a warranty is more than a want, yet can't afford to pay for repairs. Sounds like a, "want."

It's not about paying for the repairs, JFC. It's about the security of holistic coverage, which typically includes a loaner vehicle, roadside assistance...etc. My dad paid for the repairs on his Expedition for 20 years. More recently, those repairs got more expensive and more frequent and the vehicle's reliability became questionable. And there was the real risk of it breaking down between the house and the cottage, or coming back from a doctor's appointment in the middle of winter.

This became challenging without the availability of a loaner vehicle in the winter months, since their 2nd vehicle (a 2003 Town Car) has never been winter driven and isn't equipped with snow tires. So they were relying on others (like me) to ferry them around when the Expedition was in the shop.

So, part of the peace of mind of buying new was not only warranty and reduced likelihood of experiencing issues in the first place, but also the availability of a loaner vehicle as part of that package, on the off chance that it did end up in the shop. You may not prioritize these things in your life, and that's fine, but my family sees them as important in ensuring the safety and security our our elderly parents, while also working to meet their needs in terms of capability and comfort.

Again, if you are going to ignore depreciation, opportunity cost, because you have made up your mind to either pay $100k + interest or $100k in cash. This isn't a financial planning discussion anymore. Want vs need. Buying cool toys is fun, just understand it isn't a need.

Bro, the discussion was *IF YOU ARE SPENDING THE MONEY ANYWAY* and, *IN THAT SCENARIO* whether it was better to finance at low/zero interest, or pay cash. I've argued that it's better to finance if the cash you are going to be spending is already working for you.

It's not about the amount being spent, it could be $50K, $40K, it doesn't matter. If the same amount of money is being spent, which is the better decision? @rijndael argued that the financing made more sense and I agreed with him and have articulated why I believe that to be the case. Instead of addressing that scenario as presented, you've taken us off into the wonderful world of whataboutism where other options, not presented, like not buying a vehicle, or buying a used jalopy that already suffered from massive amounts of depreciation, are on the table.

 

[CarlB]

It's not about paying for the repairs, JFC. It's about the security of holistic coverage, which typically includes a loaner vehicle, roadside assistance...etc. My dad paid for the repairs on his Expedition for 20 years. More recently, those repairs got more expensive and more frequent and the vehicle's reliability became questionable. And there was the real risk of it breaking down between the house and the cottage, or coming back from a doctor's appointment in the middle of winter.

This became challenging without the availability of a loaner vehicle in the winter months, since their 2nd vehicle (a 2003 Town Car) has never been winter driven and isn't equipped with snow tires. So they were relying on others (like me) to ferry them around when the Expedition was in the shop.

So, part of the peace of mind of buying new was not only warranty and reduced likelihood of experiencing issues in the first place, but also the availability of a loaner vehicle as part of that package, on the off chance that it did end up in the shop. You may not prioritize these things in your life, and that's fine, but my family sees them as important in ensuring the safety and security our our elderly parents, while also working to meet their needs in terms of capability and comfort.

Bro, the discussion was *IF YOU ARE SPENDING THE MONEY ANYWAY* and, *IN THAT SCENARIO* whether it was better to finance at low/zero interest, or pay cash. I've argued that it's better to finance if the cash you are going to be spending is already working for you.

It's not about the amount being spent, it could be $50K, $40K, it doesn't matter. If the same amount of money is being spent, which is the better decision? @rijndael argued that the financing made more sense and I agreed with him and have articulated why I believe that to be the case. Instead of addressing that scenario as presented, you've taken us off into the wonderful world of whataboutism where other options, not presented, like not buying a vehicle, or buying a used jalopy that already suffered from massive amounts of depreciation, are on the table.

There is probably somewhere between, a 20 year old expedition and a brand new $100k vehicle. That's the point. Finance or Cash on a $100k new vehicle is not the play for financial planning. It's fine if you want to forgo earnings and take on high depreciation for the luxury of owning something new. That's all subjective value. The statement, "never pay interest on a depreciating asset" summarizes it into a nutshell.

If we are determined to buy a new vehicle for $100k, then my previous points about how to calculate the real interest still stands. It's no longer at $100k proposition, it's much higher.

 

[CKN]

We have owned the ICE model of the new RAV4 for 5+ years. Its a fine car. I have also driven the hybrid. When we bought in 2019 the ICE models were highly discounted and the hybrids were MSRP due to supply, so for us was an easy choice.

Statistically the hybrid has had more problems already. The only hybrid only problem that is still somewhat unknown is the high power cable going to the rear differential. Toyota has updated this part, but some, including me, are still skeptical. Its only really a problem if your an area that heavily salts the roads. So long as your not in the rust belt, I would be happy with either.

I am skeptical that any new car will last 20 years now without some sort of significant repair. I hope I am wrong.

The engines between the two are identical (different tune). The transmission on the hybrid is really a planetary gearbox and should be better, although there are already plenty of ICE models out there with 200K on the trans without issue. The hybrid will likely need a battery at some point, but at that time there will likely be refurbs available for much less than $6K.

As for everyone saying buy the hybrid because its faster - there both underpowered and slow. If your a foot to the floor kind of guy its not the car for you either way.

Either would be a good choice IMHO. If you commute a lot the hybrid gets the nod for mileage. I will likely give ours to one of our daughters and buy another one. I would do it today if they hadn't gotten so darn expensive.

You do know there are Hybrid taxis in New York City with mega miles on them?

 

[OVERKILL]

There is probably somewhere between, a 20 year old expedition and a brand new $100k vehicle.

Again, you are trying to expand the argument to fit the narrative you've crafted and completely ignoring the context in which both my replies and @rijndael were made to you. I don't know if you are being intentionally difficult or just struggle with the idea that the conversation can be constrained to a specific context, but this incessant reframing and rehashing of the scenario to include options that were not included does nothing to further resolution of this exchange.

That's the point. Finance or Cash on a $100k new vehicle is not the play for financial planning.

Again, the amount is ARBITRARY. Choose $40K, choose $50K, I don't care. If the choice is to finance at 0% or close to vs paying cash that would otherwise be making you money, our argument is that the former is the smarter choice.

It's fine if you want to forgo earnings and take on high depreciation for the luxury of owning something new. That's all subjective value. The statement, "never pay interest on a depreciating asset" summarizes it into a nutshell.

If we are determined to buy a new vehicle for $100k, then my previous points about how to calculate the real interest still stands. It's no longer at $100k proposition, it's much higher.

THE AMOUNT IS ARBITRARY, HOLY HELL DUDE.

Try READING WHAT IS BEING SAID TO YOU, IN THE CONTEXT IT IS BEING SAID.

 

[SC Maintenance]

You do know there are Hybrid taxis in New York City with mega miles on them?

My specific post was a Rav4 to a Rav4 hybrid - current generation, specifically because it was the OP's specific vehicle he was considering for purchase and I also considered for purchase both and bought one. The thread has evolved to all things hybrid. Take it in context.

But since you brought it up - regarding your NYC taxi's - the highest documented miles one I can find was this 600K mile Prius, which isn't all that amazing IMHO - https://www.electricbike.com/the-curious-case-of-the-600000-mile-hybrid-electric-taxi/

There was a courier in Chicago that ran his Frontier to 1M miles - only major replacement item was the seat - twice. Nissan gave him a new one. https://usa.nissannews.com/en-US/re...r-that-delivered-a-million-miles-and-counting

I'll also comment that the original few generations of the Prius synergy drive was a work of art. FWD only, a single motor/generator, engine and planetary gear. So simple it was stupid and amazing all at once. However you can't buy that system anymore. The current "parallel" systems mostly have a second motor requiring a second drive, motor controller, a ton more wiring, and the motor / generator must now be bigger. Maybe it lasts as long, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the more parts, the more things that can fail. They have already had connector issues.

 

[brages]

Every Prius has had at least two electric motors... They are described as being part serial hybrid, part parallel hybrid (with the proportions varying while you drive)

 

[SC Maintenance]

Every Prius has had at least two electric motors... They are described as being part serial hybrid, part parallel hybrid (with the proportions varying while you drive)

The original few Prius systems I believe they call it MG1 and MG2, but MGI never acts as a motor - its a generator, and its a lot smaller. Hence the motor / generator name game.

In the new system I think they still have MG1 and MG2, but MG1 (the generator) has to be larger to now power also MG3 or whatever they call the 3rd motor for the AWD.

I guess Toyota can call it whatever it wants. Technically motors and generators are pretty much the same. They call their planetary gear an E-CVT - but there is nothing E about it, and planetary gears have been around as long as gears have been around.

Unlike the new Honda system which can be series (both motors power the wheels) or parallel. I believe Toyota's PHEV's can do this also - which is why they end up having a lot more Horsepower than the regular hybrids.

 

[CKN]

My specific post was a Rav4 to a Rav4 hybrid - current generation, specifically because it was the OP's specific vehicle he was considering for purchase and I also considered for purchase both and bought one. The thread has evolved to all things hybrid. Take it in context.

But since you brought it up - regarding your NYC taxi's - the highest documented miles one I can find was this 600K mile Prius, which isn't all that amazing IMHO - https://www.electricbike.com/the-curious-case-of-the-600000-mile-hybrid-electric-taxi/

There was a courier in Chicago that ran his Frontier to 1M miles - only major replacement item was the seat - twice. Nissan gave him a new one. https://usa.nissannews.com/en-US/re...r-that-delivered-a-million-miles-and-counting

I'll also comment that the original few generations of the Prius synergy drive was a work of art. FWD only, a single motor/generator, engine and planetary gear. So simple it was stupid and amazing all at once. However you can't buy that system anymore. The current "parallel" systems mostly have a second motor requiring a second drive, motor controller, a ton more wiring, and the motor / generator must now be bigger. Maybe it lasts as long, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the more parts, the more things that can fail. They have already had connector issues.

600,000 is not that amazing...REALLY?

 

[SC Maintenance]

600,000 is not that amazing...REALLY?

Not really when its a one off outlier. LIke I posted above, a Frontier with 1M. There outliers. How many NYC prius taxis made it to 600K, compared to say how many crown vic taxis's? We don't know.

Without knowing the whole distribution, a single data point is statistically insignificant.

I have 415K on my Xterra still going strong. Thats double the miles most cars will ever see. Should we infer that second generation Xterra's are amazing. Well they are - but for other reasons.

If you know you know:

 

[goblin]

...How many NYC prius taxis made it to 600K, compared to say how many crown vic taxis's? We don't know...

If we don't know - then I'd venture - at least that many.

Cab fleets are not that easy to track, but gov fleets are. Government auctions in NYC were still selling boatloads of first and second gen Prius...Priuses? Prii ? with hundreds of thousands of miles on them, a few years ago, still driving, just old. They kept them for 15+ years in NYC parks, the ones crawling in Central Park were dinosaurs.

They were also lasting at least 10 years as cabs, there were still 2nd gen yellow priuses in use before the pandemic

And while all of them have probably gone through a battery pack, one should look at what a large cab operator's yard used to look when they were all crown vics. There were stashes of dozens and dozens of cars with no plates, frames, parts, with probably at least a car or two stashed for each rolling one. When new Crown Vics became no longer eligible to be registered as cabs (Bloomberg was still mayor and not nearing end of term yet), they magically became longer lasting, and distinguishing what part came from which became a shell game. They, or at least their titles, mostly became immortal unless heavily crashed.

As much as a government Crown Vic is a mighty hero, a NYC cab one has the transplants of several fallen in battle.

 

[CKN]

If we don't know - then I'd venture - at least that many.

Cab fleets are not that easy to track, but gov fleets are. Government auctions in NYC were still selling boatloads of first and second gen Prius...Priuses? Prii ? with hundreds of thousands of miles on them, a few years ago, still driving, just old. They kept them for 15+ years in NYC parks, the ones crawling in Central Park were dinosaurs.

They were also lasting at least 10 years as cabs, there were still 2nd gen yellow priuses in use before the pandemic

And while all of them have probably gone through a battery pack, one should look at what a large cab operator's yard used to look when they were all crown vics. There were stashes of dozens and dozens of cars with no plates, frames, parts, with probably at least a car or two stashed for each rolling one. When new Crown Vics became no longer eligible to be registered as cabs (Bloomberg was still mayor and not nearing end of term yet), they magically became longer lasting, and distinguishing what part came from which became a shell game. They, or at least their titles, mostly became immortal unless heavily crashed.

As much as a government Crown Vic is a mighty hero, a NYC cab one has the transplants of several fallen in battle.

Yeah-there are many ultra high millage hybrids in New York. SC is just trying to solidify his argument. He called the 600,00 mile on "insignificant".

 

[goblin]

I don't think there's much of an argument one way or the other. Utility cats are tools, they have dedicated maintenance crews, and any crew should be able to make a decent platform last indefinitely with the right amount of work.

Both the Crown vic and the Toyota hybrid are more than decent platforms.