Hybrid cars are the automaker’s equivalent of straight teeth: everyone wants them. Carmakers without hybrids are beginning to look, well, a little unkempt. Not wanting to be perceived as a snaggletooth, Nissan joins the club with its new-for-‘07 Altima Hybrid. The company describes its first foray into gas-electric frugality as "the first hybrid that drives like a Nissan." The firm’s marketers clearly intend for Nissan’s self-fashioned sporting image to set the Altima hybrid apart from its key competitors. They’re also convinced, presumably, that consumers will know what this tagline means.
That may be too much of an intellectual leap. After all, Nissan's current lineup runs the dynamic gamut, from the nimble Versa to the titanic Titan. Even if we restrict the field to sporting machinery, should prospective hybrid buyers expect the uncouth thrills of the torque-steering SE-R Spec V? The grippy, hefty confidence of the 350Z? The loping, nose-heavy gait of the Maxima? Or, as John Cleese might say, “something completely different?”
Further muddying the waters: much of the Altima Hybrid's running gear is licensed from Toyota. The borrowed tech includes the electric motor and battery pack, electric-assist steering system, CVT transmission and battery-charging regenerative brakes. The resulting fuel savings are spectacular; Nissan says Altima Hybrid drivers can expect 41/36mpg. But with all of these shared components, the Altima Hybrid claims to dynamic uniqueness seem a bit, um, dubious. Is it "the first Nissan that drives like a Toyota?"
First, let’s at least agree that the new Altima doesn’t look like a Toyota. While all midsize sedans suffer a certain inherent stuffiness, the Altima’s shape is more interesting than most, with leaner, crisper lines than the Camry dares wear. Moreover, the ’07 Altima appears— applause, please —more compact than the outgoing model, though its actual dimensions have changed little.
Slide into the Altima Hybrid, and you’ll find that its driver’s station incorporates a similar pinch of pizzazz, supplied mostly by the triple-barrel vents atop the center stack. But the quality of materials used is a bigger surprise; the dash is draped in rubbery, hide-like polymers, while the hard plastics elsewhere are low-gloss and tight-fitting. Sure, the switchgear and bin lids feel a bit more brittle than a Toyota’s, but unlike the last Altima’s cabin, this one can’t be described as “toylike.”
Unfortunately, it can’t be called “spacious” either. While the Altima’s front cabin fits naturally and offers contemporary helpings of head and legroom, the rear bench’s low cushion and fair knee clearance are merely acceptable for this class. Families with lanky, cranky teenagers will appreciate the airier quarters of the hybrid Camry and Accord.
If the aforementioned families do pick the Altima Hybrid over its Honda and Toyota rivals, their teens won’t harbor any great relish for borrowing Dad’s wheels on Saturday night. Fact is, if you’ve driven a Prius, you’ve already experienced the burning excitement that awaits behind the wheel of the Altima Hybrid.
Surprised? Don’t be. After all, most of the elements that suck the fun right out of Toyota’s hybrids are present here, too, from the “slipping-clutch” feel of the CVT’s operation to the limp, twitchy guidance afforded by the hectic-assist steering. Nissan says the Hybrid’s suspension is slightly stiffer than other four-cylinder Altimas’, but there’s little incentive to exercise it, partly because slowing back down involves awkward negotiations with the touchy, feel-free regenerative brakes.
The Hybrid’s accelerative performance doesn’t drip adrenaline either, but that’s expected in a car designed for thrift. As in its other applications, Toyota’s parallel hybrid drivetrain allows you to whoosh around slowly on electric power alone— or keep up with traffic, the gas engine phasing in and out with mild shudders. Brisk moves are accompanied by a strident, hollow drone from Nissan’s 2.5-liter, 162 horsepower four, but at least they’re on the menu.
How much will the Altima Hybrid’s sterile, slightly sloppy dynamics matter to prospective buyers? In all likelihood, very little. With the partial exception of the 253-horse Accord, there isn’t a hybrid on the market that’s particularly stimulating to drive. Given the mechanical disconnect integral to such systems, that’s not likely to change anytime soon.
Instead, the Altima Hybrid offers a package essentially similar to the Camry Hybrid’s, with a little less space, a lot more style and fuel economy that makes Honda’s cooking, sales challenged Accord Hybrid seem like a bad global citizen. (Though both vehicles surpass Super Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle (SULEV) standards and meet Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle (PZEV) requirements.) Nissan expects the Altima Hybrid’s base pricing to slot neatly between the $26,200 Camry and the $31,090 Accord.
In sum, I offer an amended version of Nissan’s pitch for this electrified— but not electrifying— Altima: “The first hybrid that looks like a Nissan.” Considering the target market’s priorities, that’s probably enough to put Nissan in the hunt.
117 Comments on “Nissan Altima Hybrid Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
If it’s like most hybrids the estimated mileage will be much lower than advertised. But it should at least compete with the other offerings.
This deal shows Toyota is willing to spread the tech on hybrids and negotiations with Ford may be circling around such a deal.
I’m not sure about engines cutting out and back in while driving slow, that would get on your nerves after a few months.
You could save $10K and get the base I-4 with a proper manual. The savings in interest alone on that $10K make up for any gas savings from the hybrid.
Silly car for eco-poseurs. But well reviewed.
SherbornSean
you are right of course, but the people I know who bought hybrids are not interested in saving money, they are interested in not using as much gas, or creating as much emissions. The fact that they save money at the pump (and they DO), is a pleasent by product. But not the point.
My friends who own these cars are well to do, and could buy anything they wanted.
Its not always about money,
SULEV? Puh-leeze. I’m holding out for a Way Awesomely Superifically Ultra Low Emissiontastic Vechicle.
Very nice review, and you managed to avoid any uber-cheesy lines like “With comparable hybrids available from both Honda and Toyota, Nissan was facing an Altimatum.”
I like hybrids for city use–they’re the perfect taxi, airport shuttle, or courier vehicle. But the highway mileage (the one that incents most high-mileage drivers) is, what, only marginally better than the I-4. And for a lot more money. With Nissan positioned as the “edgy, sporty” Japanese maker, I wonder why they didn’t sacrafice hybrid economy for synergistic power like Honda did.
If people were really serious about saving the environment, and not just doing so in the most convenient and pre-packaged manner possible, you’d see more LPG conversions, biodiesels, plug-in hybrid conversions, and other alternatives. Those require a bit more planning and execution, though.
I’d rather drive an RS4 like I stole it, then buy carbon credits–IF it’s just about paying for a clear conscience :D
My father lives in New York, one of the few states where the Altima Hybrid is going to be available for sale. He drives local traffic only, but needs an ample trunk for him and his golf buddies.
How small is the trunk?
starlightmica: Dunno about the trunk, but good point about availability.
The Altima hybrid will only be sold in [blue?] states that have adopted CA's emission regs: CA, CT, ME, MA, NJ, NY, RI and VT.
And I'm not sure why. The press release states that "these eight states are among the strongest market for hybrid vehicles." I'll put a call into the press office…
Good review, P.J. The rear seat certainly is smaller this time around. Good question above on the trunk–the Camry Hybrid has a tight one.
Those interested in how real-world fuel economy compares can check the results of my site’s survey:
http://www.truedelta.com/fuel_economy.php
No Altima Hybrids yet, but most others.
Great review… Fair and balanced. As to the motives of the people who want to save gas, unfortunately basic economics foils their good intentions unless a majority of cars are equally fuel-frugal.
The lowered demand that their vehicles make for fossil fuel drives the fuel price lower, which encourages other vehicles to use more. The net result is no fuel saved, and the intentions are purely symbolic.
jerseydevil:
January 17th, 2007 at 9:21 am
SherbornSean
you are right of course, but the people I know who bought hybrids are not interested in saving money, they are interested in not using as much gas, or creating as much emissions. The fact that they save money at the pump (and they DO), is a pleasent by product. But not the point.
My friends who own these cars are well to do, and could buy anything they wanted.
Its not always about money,
I have to agree with jerseydevil its not about money.Its a statement.
I think the jury is still out on the whole hybrid concept.
I think people would be really wise to lease one as oposed to buying.
If they are being sold and driven in upstate NY and Maine
I’d like to see one of these with say 40k on the odometer and 5 winters
The used car market is a great indicator for just how good a given vehicle is,or was.
In light of the fact that batteries are to the Earth what the Dark Side is to a Jedi Knight, one question: what is the
LIFETIME
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT?
This is why I don’t understand Toyota’s 400hp hybrid concept. The fact that it’s a hybrid is probably going to rob it of everything that makes a sports car fun.
Good point captain.And also what happens if god forbid somebody has an accident what happens to the battery?
What if it burns? Have the firefighters been trained in how to deal with this stuff.
If these things are the flavor of the month or the in thing to buy for the idle rich.I have to wonder whats gonna happen when they filter thier way down to the real world.
I know the SF Fire Dept offered speciality training classes on how to deal with hybrid accidents, and I understand several other cities have followed suit. Anecdotally, I’ve heard a lot of negativity from some firefighters about having to learn a whole new arena of risk assessment (explosions, and now electocution, acid, and other noxious chemicals? Sign me up).
Wow, interesting comments.
A few of my own.
I disagree with Nissan’s assertion that the low-emission (i.e. California emission) states are where hybrids are most popular. I’ve studied the matter and California, Arizona, Illinois, New York, etc. are where the hybrids seem to be most popular. I think Nissan just took the lazy way out and picked the states because they share California emissions.
I also take exception with the idea that a hybrid just ‘pulls the fun right out of a car.’
Does anyone out there think rowing a boat is more fun than an electric motor to get out to the fishing area on a lake, when the object of the exercise is to enjoy fishing?
Electric cars and steam cars do not require transmissions because the engines put out maximum torque (accerlative power) at zero to low RPM. It is reciprocating engines which are useless without a transmission. Hybrids are electric cars with gasoline engines allowing more than a few miles range, instead up to 500 miles.
Imagine if you will, if easily started flash boiler coal derived kerosene powered steam cars had been what Henry Ford advocated for his Model T. No cranking! No transmission!
Then imagine, if you will, that some bright spark decided he would invent an electric starter in the 1960’s and try to bring back the gasoline engine, abandoned in the 1920’s. People would have heaped derision on him. A clutch?! What kind of anachronism is that?! A crash-box transmission? You have to be some kind of expert to drive smoothly! How ridiculous…
Folks, we need to get over this mental block of ‘hybrids ruining the fun’ because, if you look at the big picture, there ain’t gonna be any driving fun for long when the oil runs low, is there? That nice ‘conventional car’ sitting in your driveway will make a wonderful planter, if you cut the roof off.
I think Nissan are only doing this hybrid as window-dressing because the big boss, Ghosn, does not like hybrids.
Nissan frankly should not have bothered.
By the way, the idea that hybrid batteries are dangerous, and that hybrid cars are dangerous in crashes, has been well and truly disproved time and again.
I’m sort of sad to see a lot of the car guys here regurgitating these questions, the answers have been ‘out there’ for some while.
So, all of you doubters, are you going to give up your cell phone? I just read in the news yesterday that a guy got severe burns because his cell phone exploded. Well, you might be able to find the occasional pay phone, but most of them are gone…
How about your laptop computers? Why, Sony just recalled a bunch of them for problems with batteries. You going to give them up, too? Good luck with the Underwood manual, eh?
No Prius or Honda or any electric hybrid cars have exploded from battery problems thus far, and they’ve been on the market a decade.
Toyota places a $300 bounty on the battery to ensure the salvage yard turns it in for recycling (the rare earth materials are valuable). Interestingly, I read that more salvage yards are profitable in the US than car dealers, so I’d say these “dummies” are bright enough to read “$300 bounty – send to Toyota” on the battery pack when they disassemble the cars.
As for the firefighters, my own teen age son was volunteering at a local firehouse and Toyota came in with a Prius presentation for everyone and he said that it was very well done, the car is very advanced, all it takes is a little intelligence and knowledge just like anything else new. None of the firefighters there in rural Michigan had a problem with it. Can’t speak for city-boy firemen who get paychecks.
And I’m not sure why. The press release states that “these eight states are among the strongest market for hybrid vehicles.”
Because these States have the “best” Public Schools.
More bonafide than anything. Hopefully the licensed technology doesn’t sludge up and cause warranties to be extended (IN THE NEWS LAST WEEK!)
Hybrids are like brick cell phones.. they point to something cool, in maybe 10 years.
Wait til 08 when the mileage gets deflated 30% I know I’ll have a chuckle.
As for hybrids not being fun to drive – it seems you either get a neutered one that gets OKAY mileage (prius), or a performance oriented one (like the lexus “performance hybrid”) which is a wash on economy, but masquerades itself as green.
I’ll recall the CNW market research group’s study on the greenest cars last year (measuring from creation to disposition) which measured the Prius near the bottom of the almost hundred vehicles rated… Mom always daid don’t throw batteries in the garbage..
But hey let’s go with hype and government handouts.
“strongest market for hybrid vehicles” = “states where we’ll make the most profit per car and, if the car flops, we can write it off as a small-scale experiment”
If it does well, I bet it goes 50-state-wide within a year or two.
Captain Neek:
In light of the fact that batteries are to the Earth what the Dark Side is to a Jedi Knight…
mikey:
And also what happens if god forbid somebody has an accident what happens to the battery?
What if it burns?
Gentlemen,
I don’t quite understand where your battery concerns come from.
Modern hybrids do not use familiar lead-acid batteries. They use nickel-metal hydride batteries. The electrolyte in these batteries is potassium hydroxide which is less toxic than sulfuric acid (in fact, it’s used to make hominy and lutefisk). The metals used are also less toxic
than lead. NiMh, unlike lead-acid batteries, do not release gaseous hydrogen. NiMh batteries can be recycled just like lead-acid batteries (although the infrastructure is still small):
http://www.hybridcars.com/battery-toxicity.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel_metal_hydride
In short, NiMh batteries are less dangerous than then lead-acid batteries.
As for the safety risks, yes — hybrid battery packs operate at much higher voltages than lead-acid (400V+ vs. 12V). But the high-voltage wires on hybrids are very clearly marked in bright orange and most of the electrocution risk is mitigated by wearing insulating gloves (about $25).
Hybrids may have other problems (economics, poor driving dynamics, etc.) but safety is a relative non-issue.
Call me when Nissan or Toyota makes hybrid Titans and Tundras. Until then, putting hybrid technology in a car that already has decent fuel economy ratings seems to be a waste of engineering effort.
The CNW study was absolute garbage.
Just look at the summary results. IIRC, basic compacts supposedly have a lifetime cost of over $2 a mile. No one is subsidizing these cars, so any costs will be paid by the owner in one form or another. Are people who drive 15,000 miles a year really paying $30,000 a year for the privilege?
Of course not. Clearly the study made some very odd assumptions, and the results are useless as a result.
What I don’t get is this.
The Prius looks like it hails from Mars. Yet ALL OTHER hybrids look like normal cars. Except for the Honda Insight, which has not only been discontinued, but looked like a toaster.
The Prius sells and sells. Other hybrids don’t.
You think the two are related?
A Prius is as much of a lifestyle statement as a jacked-up Ford F350.
This Nissan Hybrid is for an American who actually cares about saving both fuel and the planet and doesn’t want anyone else to know. Trouble is, all seven of them already own a Prius.
41/36mpg? I wonder if that’s before the tighter EPA guidelines coming out soon. The real world will probably see a 30% drop in those numbers.
I still can’t believe I only netted 20-22mpg in the Lexus GS450h in traffic with the A/C cranked up.
At least they are in the game, unlike some..GM.
Folks think about it, Prius first came out in 1997 in Japan, we are in 2007, and GM still doesn’t have a real hybrid. This shows how backward that company is.
Quasimondo raises a good point. It has been marketing considerations that have put hybrid powertrains into already light efficient high-mileage vehicles.
As a matter of overall energy consumption, using hybrid technology to make 12mpg pickup trucks become 16mpg pickup trucks would save more fuel than turning 40mpg cars into 50mpg cars.
Example:
@40mpg, 100 miles = 2.5 gal fuel used
@50mpg, 100 miles = 2.0 gal
@12mpg, 100 miles = 8.33 gal
@16mpg, 100 miles = 6.25 gal
So, getting a pickup truck to 16mpg saves 2.08 gallons per 100 miles traveled, while getting the compact from 40mpg to 50mpg only saves 0.5 gallons per 100 miles traveled.
Furthermore, the torque characteristics of hybrid powertrains would seem to be well-suited to towing/hauling uses of pickup trucks.
It also seems like fitting battery packs into pickup trucks (Another use for the “trunk” in the Honda Ridgeline?) would be far easier than fitting them into compact vehicles.
But, as others have noted, buying a hybrid right now is more about ‘making a statement’ (Hence the enormous popularity of the space-age-looking Prius vs. the more ’stealthy’ hybrids) than practical considerations.
Jonny:
I couldn't agree more. Given the main impetus for hybrid sales– political correctness (whether correct or not)– a hybrid should LOOK like a hybrid.
These guys are NUTS. I mean, at least they should plaster the things with huge decals. How much would it cost to test market that concept? A thousand bucks? Sheesh.
raz:
Hello? GM will leapfrog hybrids and go straight to… something. Eventually.
I think it’s a bit obnoxious to call hybrid owners “posers.”
Some hybrid owners just want the latest and coolest technology. In any other situation, purchasing the latest tech wouldn’t get you a “poser” label.
Of the rest, some think that our dependence on foreign oil is a strategic problem. Some recognize that some of the oil money flowing off shore is funding terrorists. Some think that global warming is a serious problem. If they could switch to other vechicles with better fuel economy, they’d probably do that.
As far as I can tell, the “poser” label comes from people who are denial about the problems our oil thirst causes; strategic oil dependence, funding of terrorists and global warming.
Well, OK, people are free to “remain unconvinced” about these problems but they don’t need to belittle people who do believe these problems are real and are willing to pony up to reduce the impact of these problems. Hybrid owners are putting their money where their mouth is. I respect that.
That CNW study, by the way, is ridiculous. The cost of energy input into a vehicle can not be any larger than the cost of the vehicle. And is that the same study that figured the life of a Toyota was 100K miles and the life of a GM vehicle was 300K miles? As if!
What if manufacturers simply applied all the Prius attributes to regular cars? Small wheels, pizza-cutter tires, aero fairings around the underbody, plus some belly pans and an airfoil shape would get you at least an extra 5mpg from any old gasser. The hybrid drivertrain goes a long way, but there are lots of other little cues that contribute to the net result.
This comment is for the guys at the beginning of the thread talking discussing the real environmental impact of the hybrid:
A very good metric (although not perfect) for determining how good something is for the environment is to look at the wholesale price of something – or in the case of cars, how much is costs the maufacturer to make the car (not what they sell it to the dealer for, nor the MSRP).
When you make something, you need to take resources out of the earth in some way. For example: either you’re gatering iron to make steel, or you’re burning coal to make heat to recycle steel, both cost money that’s roughly proportional to the environmental impact. If you have an efficient mass production line (conventional cars), you need less energy to make the car, plus you use fewer workers (when you pay a worker you’re paying him for the energy he consumes to heat his house, drive his car, and for the food he eats). When you make a hybrid, (at least for now) the economy of scale is not there, so it takes more energy to make the car (including the batteries and all the stuff we know is bad for the environment).
This metric is good for looking at using resources, i.e. the stuff we take out of the environment. It’s not great at looking at what we put back into the environment because it’s always cheaper to pollute than it is to have clean waste. But if you’re looking within the same industry, you can assume that the pollution is close to constant. So comparing IC only cars vs hybrid cars with this metric is probably valid. (Although, I think making a hybrid actually pollutes more with all the nasty metals used in the battery production)
Now, I don’t have the real numbers for what it costs to make a hybrid vs the identical IC only car, but when you see these things selling for $5-$10K more, you can assume that they are actually more expensive to make (i.e. take more natural resources), all of that can’t be margin (if it is, then I’m impressed!).
That’s how I get a general idea of how good a new “save-the-earth” type product is. FYI: wholesale cost on 100W incandescent lightbulbs is about $0.42 in bulk. For the new CF bulbs the cheapest I could find is $3.79 in bulk. That means that CF bulbs take about 9 times the energy to make! Of course I still use them because it actually does save me money, but I can’t say that it’s better for the environment when you look at the full product cycle (especially when you consider disposal because of the nasty flourescent chemicals on the inside of the tube).
Why does the Prius sell? It’s the 4/5-place hybrid with the best fuel economy. Simple. When something else comes along that does better, it will sell.
Honda chose to use a V6 hybrid powertrain, compromising fuel economy in favor of performance. People who want hot quarter miles can get good performance other, less expensive ways.
Some of the people looking at the Prius will look at diesels when they come along, if they provide superior fuel economy without compromising things like cold-weather performance.
Well, they’ll look at diesels from manufacturers other than VW. I don’t think we need to go in to why VW might not be so attractive to them (as an ex-VW owner, I have my own reasons).
Well, they’ll look at diesels from manufacturers other than VW. I don’t think we need to go in to why VW might not be so attractive to them (as an ex-VW owner, I have my own reasons).
Constant Check Engine Lights?
I’m telling you — the Prius sells because… it looks like a Prius.
This Altima should have had wings and tentacles and seven wheels –anything to make it not look exactly like the other non-hybrid Altimas.
RF and I are the only people who can see this?
RF and Jonny: maybe so, because Toyota is selling some 3,000 Camry hybrids per month, about 10% of all Camrys. They don’t have wings and tentacles all over them.
Jonny,
You may be generally correct about why the Prius sells, although personally if I had bought a hybrid a couple of years ago, it might have been the Civic, which I think simply said “hybrid” on it but otherwise looked like a regular Civic from the outside. Some of us like a style of quiet, confident understatement.
RF and I are the only people who can see this?
No, I live in Boulder, CO (Trust fund hippy capital of the world) and I see it every day. I want the jacked up F-350 just so I can run over all the Priuses. If for no other reason, to reduce the smug cloud over town.
If they could switch to other vechicles with better fuel economy, they’d probably do that.
And that’s where the ‘poseur’ label comes in. Why spend all of this money on an Altima hybrid when you already have the Sentra and Versa which is nearly as effieicent? Same goes for the Camry hybrid. The Corolla and Yaris come to mind?
The technology is fine, it’s just being applied to the wrong vehicles. Put out a hybrid crossover or other vehicle that has a high fuel consumption rate and you’ll generate my interest.
The Prius looks like it does for a much more simple reason than is being bandied about here. It is functional and aerodynamic.
Yep, it’s well known that ‘conventional’ cars with excellent aerodynamics also save fuel over about 45 mph, particularly. Consider the Citroen DS, introduced in 1955. To say it flew in the face of “finned excess and chrome” typical of the era would be a king-sized understatement, would it not?
So we have the Prius, in which the high-efficiency Atkinson cycle engine is capable of propelling the car (with aerodynamic efficiency that Piper and Beech aircraft could only dream for) at 55 mph with 50 mpg efficiency.
I’ve actually seen with my own eyes, 65 mpg at 65 mph (drafting – NOT tailgating – a semi).
Back in the day, I used to draft semi’s in my Volare’ wagon and never got better than 20 MPG at 55-60 mph….
The other thing to recall is that, excepting HYDRAULIC hybrids, no other system other than electric hybrids has thus far been invented to recapture (some) kinetic energy which is otherwise totally wasted in heat in ‘conventional’ car brakes.
KixStart said
“Well, OK, people are free to “remain unconvinced” about these problems but they don’t need to belittle people who do believe these problems are real and are willing to pony up to reduce the impact of these problems. Hybrid owners are putting their money where their mouth is. I respect that.”
Thanks, KixStart. It’s not like I’m a person who goes around and says to everyone “hey you gotta get a hybrid.” But amongst us ‘car guys’ I can hope that my opinion about hybrids can at least be respected along with those who disagree with me. (I obviously own a Prius, a 2005. Best car I’ve ever had. Virtually no reliability problems in 34,000 miles since July 2005. My son’s 1992 Toyota is going on 170,000 miles, I’m personally expecting 150,000 out of the Prius or about 5 more years when it’s time to trade it on another car).
December 2006 Hybrid sales:
Camry hybrid- 10.1% of all Camrys
Highlander hybrid- 20.1% of all Highlanders
RX 400h- 15.5% of all RX
GS450h- 84.3%of 430-450h;11% of all GS series
Escape/Mariner- 11.2% of combined models
Total 2006 hybrid sales:261,000 (up 22% over 2005)
Prius: 106,971 = 41% of all hybrids sold.
Seems like looks and smugness isn’t the only thing selling hybrids.
yeah karesh, we can all cast aside data we consider garbage.
An example of such garbage would be the intellichoice study which shows the cost of operating hybrids versus their non hyrid counterparts to be significantly less..
Start with a substantially more expensive non hybrid model, ignore the obvious fact that you end up paying less than MSRP for it but cling to the resale idea – ignoring the.. wait for it, the true delta of your purchase. The difference between what you PAY (not msrp) and what it is worth after the depreciation.
I would consider garbage as well mentioning 2004+ results in reliability for toyotas when talking about sludge issues from years earlier – which does nothing other than attempt to pander yourself.
IF hybrids WERE the answer in their current form we would not see sales drop when the credits were done. We would not need to prop up sales with tax payer funding.
We would see hybrid sales soar in the worst gas crunch most people can remember..
miked said “That’s how I get a general idea of how good a new “save-the-earth” type product is. FYI: wholesale cost on 100W incandescent lightbulbs is about $0.42 in bulk. For the new CF bulbs the cheapest I could find is $3.79 in bulk. That means that CF bulbs take about 9 times the energy to make! Of course I still use them because it actually does save me money, but I can’t say that it’s better for the environment when you look at the full product cycle (especially when you consider disposal because of the nasty flourescent chemicals on the inside of the tube).”
Well, buddy, there are lots of ways of “cipherin’ and figurin’ ” aren’t there?
What about the fact that the fluorescent bulbs generally last some 5 times longer than incandescent bulbs?! Your calculations are absent any lifetime calculations and therefore anyone reading your comments would erroneously assume the same life for the bulbs.
Plus the benefits of using more fluorescent bulbs go well and truly beyond pure up-front costs. So much energy has been saved, that many power plants which would have been needed to have been built, were not needed due to conservation.
As for the nasty chemicals, well, wow! Try living on an Amish farm and sitting behind a methane-producing ton of Belgian horseflesh and tell me about nasty chemicals!
Fluoresent bulbs have been in use for decades, I can’t recall seeing one single knee-jerk lame-stream media account of horrific pollution from them…
Our lives are nothing more than continued calculated risks and decisions, in one sense.
# KixStart:
January 17th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
I think it’s a bit obnoxious to call hybrid owners “posers.”
Some hybrid owners just want the latest and coolest technology. In any other situation, purchasing the latest tech wouldn’t get you a “poser” label.
Of the rest, some think that our dependence on foreign oil is a strategic problem. Some recognize that some of the oil money flowing off shore is funding terrorists. Some think that global warming is a serious problem. If they could switch to other vechicles with better fuel economy, they’d probably do that.
As far as I can tell, the “poser” label comes from people who are denial about the problems our oil thirst causes; strategic oil dependence, funding of terrorists and global warming.
Well, OK, people are free to “remain unconvinced” about these problems but they don’t need to belittle people who do believe these problems are real and are willing to pony up to reduce the impact of these problems. Hybrid owners are putting their money where their mouth is. I respect that.
That CNW study, by the way, is ridiculous. The cost of energy input into a vehicle can not be any larger than the cost of the vehicle. And is that the same study that figured the life of a Toyota was 100K miles and the life of a GM vehicle was 300K miles? As if!
—————————-
It is always a picky subject to try to inject sense into the environmental debate as far as hybrids are concerned. Hybrid owners in large parts, in my “web” experience, are a rabid bunch. They know they’re superior and they’ll brook no opposition to the orthodoxy that they are a sophisticated peoples with a simple love for the environment.
They are very quick to respond to any allegations of inconsistency.
For example, I should think that any research purporting to show that the Prius is less energy-efficient than it appears to be would be greeted with earnest curiosity from people eager to do right by the environment.
But such studies are almost always immediately scorned. Why is that?
Why must the Prius be the savior of mankind before the facts are in?
Mr. Lieberman is absolutely correct:
It’s about the image. Consequently, hybrids only do well when they scream their identity from the rooftops.
There is one solid reason why hybrids can be argued to be “poser” vehicles:
Anyone who really cared about the environment wouldn’t be driving anything. Period.
Hybrid owners are usually more affluent than the rest of the population and here that almost always means that they use more energy by default.
They invariably live in larger houses–or own more than one. Buy more expensive (and more energy intensive) items–and have more of them.
They have more time for leisure–which is also energy-intensive.
Since I can already see the fire, let me just run toward it.
Anyone who really cared about the environment would move to a city, live in a multi-family dwelling and walk, bike or take public transport.
Ironically environmentalists are in a better financial position to afford this than anyone else.
You don’t get extra “points” for driving a hybrid.
Environmentalism is a commitment that always requires more of you. If you consider yourself to be one, take a hard look at yourself before you sign up to join the New Crusades.
Lastly, just a comment about this:
———-
# GS650G:
January 17th, 2007 at 8:21 am
If it’s like most hybrids the estimated mileage will be much lower than advertised. But it should at least compete with the other offerings.
This deal shows Toyota is willing to spread the tech on hybrids and negotiations with Ford may be circling around such a deal.
I’m not sure about engines cutting out and back in while driving slow, that would get on your nerves after a few months.
———
That is to be expected. Toyota’s “sharing”:
1. Brings in revenue to help cover development costs.
2. Reduces the number of potential competitors, since people who buy from them are unlikely to have parallel development going on.
It’s strictly business.
Thanks for the kind words on my first TTAC review.
Nissan claims 9.1 feet of trunk space, down from 18.0 in the non-hybrid model. The Camry suffers similarly: 10.6 cubic feet for the Hybrid, versus 15.0 for other models. The Prius’ hatchback trunk (16.1 cu. ft.) dwarfs both, with a folding rear seatback to boot.
I agree with the sentiment that, if one’s goal is to save gas, a modestly powered, manual-transmission compact makes a great deal more financial sense. But given the hybrid demographic–their buyers are among the wealthiest of any vehicle segment–their standards for room, feature content, and novelty value are likely too high for them to realistically consider a plain-wrapper Corolla.
And if they can afford it, why not? I find the “it’s-my-money” argument much easier to swallow when it’s applied to an innocuous hybrid than a vision-blocking H2.
As for hybrid purchases being based solely on their image–and, hence, the popularity of the Prius–name recognition is almost certainly a contributing factor. Ask a non-enthusiast to name a hybrid (and non-enthusiasts are the people buying them), and one name comes up: Prius. Most people seem unaware that other hybrids even exist, which makes sense: the Prius was the first (and, arguably, still the only) hybrid to benefit from high-profile TV and radio ads.
There is a Honda civic hybrid in my family – I drive it occasionally. It is not a sports car, like other civics, its about comfortable efficient transportation. The only way you would know that it is a hybrid is that the engine shuts off when u stop, then restarts. This is a little eerie when u first drive it, but you get used to it. It is also defeatable if you want to say, keep the air conditioner running in the summer, which i do.
The owner of this car bought it because she is seriously interested in our enviromnent, and wants to burn as little gas as possible, she also wants to pollute as little as possible. The hybrids emit significantly less pollutants into the atmosphere. In the city, this is very important, as I dont like choking to death.
The civic has one problem for me – it is not a hatchback or wagon – and you cannot lower the rear seats because the batteries are there. I need a place to put my bike. If they made this car as a hatch or small wagon, i would consider it. Also, the mileage in the city is GREAT!!! Beats the living hell outa me 4 cyl VW Golf, which in mixed driving gets about 30 mpg, but in the city returns only about 25.
Again, its not just about purchase price vs. return on investment. A recent article here marvelled at the way Apple can sell so many music players, even tho there are lots of other players in the market, some selling a comparable product for 1/3 the price. Nevertheless the Apple products sell like hotcakes. Is it that much better? Are ipod users poseurs? depends on your point of view, and the amount of cash rattleing around in your pocket, and how much u want one, for whatever reason.
I am glad there are people who are concerned about our environment so much that they choose to put their money where their mouths are. It sends a clear message, one that I hear and appreciate. Do all the drivers of these vehicles need flawless envio cred? NO. Even if it turns out to be a small contribution, its OK. Better some than none.
Maybe we all will pay more attention, before all the polar caps melt and we are left drowning in our self righteous need for ever faster gas guzzleing cars NOW because, we can.
Ah, missed the last comment there.
Regarding the rabid Prius owners populating blogs and web forums, the sort of buyer who goes online to discuss his/her vehicle is rarely representative of the greater population. Whether they’re devotees of VTECs, Hybrids, or Hummers, the ones online are usually the rabid ones who are either passionate about the product, or need to justify their purchase.
As an example, consider that the majority of Mustangs sold are equipped with the V6 and automatic, and that their buyers are most likely to be female. But the forums and owners online are mostly devoted male power junkies.
They should simply drop an oil-burner in it.
Somethingtosay:
Anyone who really cared about the environment wouldn’t be driving anything. Period.
Exactly. Anyone who thinks they’re ‘doing their part’ always thinks what they’ve done is enough and everyone should do the same. If you’re contributing anything to a problem, you’re still part of the problem just to a lesser degree. It’s like a heroin addict getting counseling from someone who only uses half as much heroin. Abstain or get off my case.
Jonny Lieberman.
For a second there I thought you wrote the the Altima should have wings and testicles. That really caught my attention.
P.J. McCombs -
Thanks for the numbers – can’t seem to find them anywhere. BTW, does your info from Nissan say which CVT the Altima Hybrid has, belt (Nissan) or epicyclic gear (Toyota)?