Lets discuss Hybrids

[fdcg27]

I have had four MBs, two of which were W123 240Ds.
The last one we had was a W201, so these were all fairly old-school Mercedes designs.
I can honestly state that it cost no more to maintain those cars than it cost to maintain a Honda. Replacement parts were not really that expensive and you didn't need to buy many parts, since everything was of high quality and rarely did anything break.
Having said that, I realize that I am promoting an apples to oranges comparison, since a current model Mercedes is a more complex beast in every way than the ones that I have had.
Also, reported MB reliability and durability does not appear to be what it once was.

WRT the Prius, FWIR they have been extemely reliable and durable in service.
There was a guy (Lonnie?) who used to post here, who had access to a huge fleet database. He stated that the Priuses were the most reliable model he tracked, IIRC.

 

[SteveSRT8]

And I've owned a few Mercedes myself, but no diesels.

My experience would be the exact opposite of yours.

They were outrageously expensive to maintain, even for a certified mechanic!

The only thing I can say good about them was they retained their value pretty well and they drove really good with very high miles. But their overall cost of ownership was way too high vs. the perceived benefits.

Your mileage may differ.

 

[rcy]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8


The bigger ones, like the Lexus, are a joke.


Would you please expand on this statement? I'd love to hear how you've actually driven one and how you came to this conclusion.

 

[hone eagle]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
And I've owned a few Mercedes myself, but no diesels.

My experience would be the exact opposite of yours.

They were outrageously expensive to maintain, even for a certified mechanic!

The only thing I can say good about them was they retained their value pretty well and they drove really good with very high miles. But their overall cost of ownership was way too high vs. the perceived benefits.

Not diesel's ' Mercedes' are outrageously expensive

Your mileage may differ.

 

[fdcg27]

Steve,
I would bet you owned later cars.
The older Benzes were great cars.
Anything up through the 201 or 124 should be pretty good.
For example, in the 34K miles we had the 201, before a son totaled it, I replaced the tires, a blower motor fuse and I might have done the brakes. Everything else worked as intended without needing any attention.
I have heard some bad things about the later cars, however.
For example, I don't think I'd take an early ML for free!

 

[Patman]

Originally Posted By: StevieC
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Yes it is miles per imperial gallon, not sure why we still use it in Canada

We don't... We use L/100KM or L/KM. The reason some older folk use MPG still is because Canada was on the Imperial system before switching to Metric back in the 60's.


We do still use it up here actually, if you go to any new car dealer and look at the sticker, in addition to L per 100km (which is a ridiculous and backwards way to figure out fuel economy, IMO) it still lists a figure for MPG and it's in imperial gallons, even though it's been decades since gas was sold in gallons here. They should've retired that ancient way of calculating fuel economy a long time ago.

 

[StevieC]

I think it is because the change was so recent (even decades) that they still do it for peoples convenience.

 

[Patman]

Originally Posted By: StevieC
I think it is because the change was so recent (even decades) that they still do it for peoples convenience.




They also probably love to still show the old MPG numbers because they look so high too. I saw a new Vibe on the lot of a GM dealer and it had a highway MPG rating of 50 MPG! There is no way it would come even close to that if it were US gallons.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: Patman
L per 100km (which is a ridiculous and backwards way to figure out fuel economy, IMO)


+ 1.

However, I was explaining to a new engineer the other day that km/l gives me an instant representation of the range of the vehicle, he countered with liking l/100km, as he knew how much to put in his tank before he left.

 

[crinkles]

it's all a wash... my dad always used km/L when i was growing up, then recently it changed to L/100km - wth kind of unit is that. L/centakilometre.

km/L much better.

 

[KrisZ]

Originally Posted By: crinkles
it's all a wash... my dad always used km/L when i was growing up, then recently it changed to L/100km - wth kind of unit is that. L/centakilometre.

km/L much better.


It all depends on what you are trying to achive. If you are just trying to measure the fuel economy, any method will do, but generally the fuel consumption i.e. L/KM, GAL/MILE or L/Hour is better for cost analysis and is easier to see the difference in fuel consumption when comparing two cars.

Let's say you have two cars, one gets 30mpg the other 15mpg, both are driven approx. the same, and you still want a bigger car for family trips, but you want to save money on gas.

You have two choices: replace the 30mpg car with a 40mpg car (compact to hybrid)- that's a 10mpg difference.
replace the 15mpg car with a 20 mpg car (SUV to minivan)- that's a 5mpg difference.

So by looking just at the MPG difference most people would go with the hybrid, but if you convert to L/KM you will have:

30mpg = 7.8L/100KM --------------------------15mpg = 15.6L/100KM
40mpg = 5.9L/100KM --------------------------20mpg = 11.7L/100KM
Difference 1.9L/100KM --------------------- Difference 3.9L/100KM

So with MPG you have to do some more calculations and most people with go with 10 MPG difference, but with L/100KM you see righ away that replacing that SUV will save you twice as much as replacing that corolla.

Of cource the best would be to replace the SUV with a compact, or keep just one car, but that's not the reality for most families.

 

[StevieC]

I don't buy a vehicle based on the "Fuel Economy" numbers, I buy it based on size of the vehicle, vehicles weight, engine size and the amount of transmission gears or the gearing and/or revs.

If you really are worried about fuel economy outside of that then you shouldn't be driving because it's not in your budget as far as I'm concerned.

That said my Santa Fe with the 2.7 Litre V6 with a 4 Speed lockup which weighs in at 4400 LBS achieves about 10L/100 KM in the summer and 12L/100KM in the winter. Mind you I restart the engine many times in a day.

My next vehicle will have a 4 Cylinder as I don't really need a six or an SUV, just something that will let me haul lots of stuff from time to time. Like a Honda Fit or a Wagon of some sort.

 

[KrisZ]

Your case is different than most, as your work compensates your gas bill, thats hardly the case for the majority of people.

And people will shop fuel economy only, last year is a perfect example, when some were buying 10 year old corollas and civics for $10 grand, Priuses were sold out.

You can't honestly tell me that all of the sudden the big SUV did not fit their needs and these people decided that a small compact will be engough, they bought these gas misers ONLY because of the fuel consumption, and the moment gas prices went down so did the sales of priuses and small cars.

 

[BrianWC]

Yep. My work vehicle is a longbed, crewcab 4x4 V-8 Silverado. It fits my needs, too, but thank goodness I don't have to pay for gas..

I think part of last year's frenzy wasn't just about last year's prices. It was the fear that they were going to go much higher. As much as I hated pumping $4 premium into my 9-5, it wasn't exactly killing me. But the thought that it could be $7-10 by summer 09 was a much bigger concern.

Either way all this small car revival stuff has me feeling all late 70's-early 80's. Fun times.

 

[DaveL]

I've had my 2010 Insight for about 10 days now, so here are a few initial impressions. Overall I like the car, but as with any car there is the good and the bad:

On the good side: I like the dash/controls layout and the electronics are great (nav, bluetooth, etc.), as are all the info/feedback screens to let you know about how your driving is affecting your mpg. I know that the dash has been criticized for lack of elegance - and I agree with that assessment - but it is very functional. Seats are comfortable, and the hatchback design is versatile. Mileage so far is 44 mpg in mix of city/highway driving. Over 50 mpg on highway only segments. Handles reasonably well - way better than the Prius, though a big step down from my 04 Accord with modified suspension. I like how it looks.

On the bad side: Most, if not all, of my gripes are related to Honda's acknowledged efforts to make this a lower cost alternative to the Prius or their own Civic Hybrid. For example, they did not include some features they offer on the Insight in other countries, such as rear disks (US has drums) and a locking gas cap cover. With regard to the brakes, the brakes on the car actually work very well based on both my impressions and reported stopping tests, I just prefer disks on all four wheels. Some interior materials (plastics and fabrics) seem cheap - makes the cost control engineering seem a little too obvious. The auto-stop feature (stopping the ICE when not moving) seems flaky and unpredictable. My hunch is that if they had used an electric AC compressor they would have been able to make the auto-stop function more predictably. Some of the rubber items (e.g., seal around windshield) do not seem to be quite up to the quality that I have come to expect from Honda - though only time will tell whether my early impressions are correct. Rear seat room is tight, but I can't really call that a bad point of the car since I wanted a smaller car and don't really care about rear seat comfort.

I know that Honda was very deliberately trying to produce a lower cost hybrid as an alternative to the Prius, and even their own Civic hybrid, but I think they went a little too far. I would rather have paid another $1000 and had this litany of little issues addressed. What it really amounts to is that they didn't ask me when making their decisions about where to cut costs - though I suspect that many of them will be addressed in the next generation of this car.

Even with my gripes, however, I am enjoying driving the car. Most of my driving is suburban/city commuting/errand running with no passengers, so the Insight meets my needs well.