Toyota's "Hybrid Math"

[sentra]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek

Look, there are actually people who DO drive more 24,000 km per year. The fact that you don't, doesn't give you a right to call other people idiots. As far as I can see you are just trolling here.


Did you even read my post? Can you point to the portion where i claimed, or even implied, that no one drives more than 24,000 kms per year? It's mind-boggling that you would come to that conclusion.

Since you are appear to confused, i will explain the crux of my post. Toyota assumes that a person drives the Mazda 4000 kms more than lease allowed 20,000 kms, which would incur penalties, something a rational person avoids and would factor into their decision-making when purchasing a vehicle. The case for a Toyota hybrid simply isn't there if a person doesn't drive high kms, something not everybody does. Again, the financial case to buy a Toyota hybrid for many buyers just isn't there after you critically examine the numbers used by Toyota.

You appear impetuously determined to defend a hybrid against any criticism or even any notion that it might not suit everyone's need or desires; you resorted to reductio ad absurdum of a hammer, of all things, to make a case for a hybrid. You move the goalposts when cornered, and you had to demonize me by calling me a troll to discredit me.

All of the aforementioned characteristics are symbolic of the stereotype typically associated with hybrid owners. I don't care what you choose to drive; i am merely pointing out that the numbers used in that add, at best, are misleading.

 

[stephen9666]

Originally Posted By: sentra
Toyota assumes that a person drives the Mazda 4000 kms more than lease allowed 20,000 kms, which would incur penalties, something a rational person avoids and would factor into their decision-making when purchasing a vehicle.


Side note -

The site you linked to appears to be a dealer website, not an official Toyota website. It's a website for a chain of dealers in the British Columbia area, so I don't know if it's fair to say "Toyota assumes..."

Is this an official Toyota-sanctioned ad, or something a local dealer chain concocted? It seems more in line with dealer shenanigans that something directly from the automaker, but that's just my hunch.

At the bottom of the website in question is says:
Quote:
Copyright ©2012. Toyota BC Dealers. All rights reserved.

 

[badtlc]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: badtlc
every used car on the market is a more environmentally friendly choice than buying a new one. The only justification for a new one is if you like the car itself and/or the technology. There is no environmental reason and no financial reason.


You made one glaring omission and I fixed it for you.


You obviously didn't read my post then. I clearly said "new."

 

[badtlc]

Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: badtlc
every used car on the market is a more environmentally friendly choice than buying a new hybrid.


That's definitely not true. About 90% of the energy of a car is used to operate it during its lifetime. And "every" is a big number... Of course, one can always buy a used hybrid, so I'm not sure I get your point?


Originally Posted By: badtlc
The only justification for a hybrid is if you like the car itself and/or the technology. There is no environmental reason and no financial reason.


That's not true either. It depends a lot on the cost of fuel and how much you drive.


The energy that goes into making every part, assembling the car, shipping the car, etc. consumes more energy than it takes to drive a used car until the wheels fall off.

 

[sentra]

Originally Posted By: stephen9666


Side note -

The site you linked to appears to be a dealer website, not an official Toyota website. It's a website for a chain of dealers in the British Columbia area, so I don't know if it's fair to say "Toyota assumes..."

Is this an official Toyota-sanctioned ad, or something a local dealer chain concocted? It seems more in line with dealer shenanigans that something directly from the automaker, but that's just my hunch.

At the bottom of the website in question is says:
Quote:
Copyright ©2012. Toyota BC Dealers. All rights reserved.



You are correct. Strictly speaking, i should have stated that "the add assumes" instead of "Toyota assumes," as i am critical of only the misleading advertisement, not Toyota or hybrids.

However, some marketing guy at Toyota Canada most likely went over it and approved it, before the province-wide add campaign went into effect by "The Toyota Dealers Association of British Columbia."

 

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: sentra

Did you even read my post? Can you point to the portion where i claimed, or even implied, that no one drives more than 24,000 kms per year? It's mind-boggling that you would come to that conclusion.


here is what you wrote:

Quote:
To make the numbers work for the hybrid, Toyota has assumed one would be driving the Mazda and the Fusion for about 24,000 kms per year, which is 4000 kms more than the basic kilometer per year lease allowance offered by Mazda here in BC.


You imply that Mazda or Fusion drivers will always go under 24,000 miles hence Toyota numbers are "wrong".

 

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: sentra

You appear impetuously determined to defend a hybrid against any criticism or even any notion that it might not suit everyone's need or desires;


Of course I'm going to defend the hybrids. After all, you started the thread implying that people buying hybrids are idiots and are being brainwashed by Toyota, didn't you?

You clearly have an agenda yourself and like to put down people for having different point of view.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: JOD
Originally Posted By: badtlc
every used car on the market is a more environmentally friendly choice than buying a new hybrid.


That's definitely not true. About 90% of the energy of a car is used to operate it during its lifetime. And "every" is a big number... Of course, one can always buy a used hybrid, so I'm not sure I get your point?


Originally Posted By: badtlc
The only justification for a hybrid is if you like the car itself and/or the technology. There is no environmental reason and no financial reason.


That's not true either. It depends a lot on the cost of fuel and how much you drive.


The energy that goes into making every part, assembling the car, shipping the car, etc. consumes more energy than it takes to drive a used car until the wheels fall off.


Problem is that there's not many manufacturers who make used cars.

I'm assuming that you understand that every used car was once a new car on the lot (although seeing some of the logic in this thread, my assumption appears to be a big ask).

 

[SteveSRT8]

^^^^Hahaha, another gem. keep it going, boys.

 

[JOD]

Originally Posted By: badtlc

The energy that goes into making every part, assembling the car, shipping the car, etc. consumes more energy than it takes to drive a used car until the wheels fall off.


This is categorically false. On average, about 80% of the energy that a car consumes is consumed in operation, not production; but again, please don't ever let the facts get in the way.

http://greet.es.anl.gov/files/vehicle_and_components_manufacturing

Why do people feel the need to just make up random facts to support their position, particularly when they're SO off base?

 

[sentra]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek


here is what you wrote:

Quote:
To make the numbers work for the hybrid, Toyota has assumed one would be driving the Mazda and the Fusion for about 24,000 kms per year, which is 4000 kms more than the basic kilometer per year lease allowance offered by Mazda here in BC.


You imply that Mazda or Fusion drivers will always go under 24,000 miles hence Toyota numbers are "wrong".


It's quite baffling how you have come to that deduction. I have used the terms "... one would be driving..." The term "one" here is a singular, neutral identifier, referring to "some driver." You have attributed a universal statement to me, a strawman by quite the stretch.

The statement speaks for itself, but i will still clarify it for you: the add assumes that one would drive the high kilometers, 4000 kms over the yearly lease allowance for the Mazda, incurring high fuel fuel costs, to make the financial case for the hybrid. No everyone would be be driving the high kms.