Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Earth Technology

Hybrid Car Owners Not Likely To Buy Another Hybrid 998

An anonymous reader writes "A new study has found that people who purchased a hybrid car in the past are not likely to buy a hybrid for their next car purchase. 'Only 35% of hybrid vehicle owners chose to purchase a hybrid again when they returned to the market in 2011, according to auto information company R.L. Polk & Co. If you factor out the super-loyal Toyota Prius buyers, the repurchase rate drops to under 25%.' The study also found Florida drivers to be a bit more loyal to the hybrid segment than elsewhere in the country. 'It's hard to know what's causing the low repurchase rate. One reason is that about 17,000 people purchased electric cars last year, and other data shows that many of those were trading in a hybrid vehicle. Honda has been hounded by high-profile class-action and small claims court lawsuits over fuel economy issues with older models of its Civic hybrid. ... Hybrid vehicles represent just 2.4% of the overall new vehicle market in the U.S., according to Polk, down from a high of 2.9% in 2008.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hybrid Car Owners Not Likely To Buy Another Hybrid

Comments Filter:
  • by Tyler Eaves ( 344284 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @06:10PM (#39624057)

    Get ride of all the complexity caused by the hybrids (battery packs, motors, etc).

    Clean diesel is here today.

    I drive a VW Golf TDI - It's not slow by any means (140hp, a bit below average for a hatchback, but 240ib/ft of torque, over a wide rev range, so it's very driveable, great passing power, etc), has great handling (no skinny fuel miser tires that ruin the driving experience), and gets great mileage. (30/42 EPA, but those are quite conservative. I get typically 33-35 around town, at 60mph constant speed I'm at 51-53mpg depending on how smooth the road is, dropping down to about 45 at 70, and 41 at 78-80).

    It also only costs about $25k, with plenty of standard equipment.

  • by flaming error ( 1041742 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @06:16PM (#39624133) Journal

    We bought a Prius for my wife because she had to commute through downtown Los Angeles, and at the time, solo Prius drivers were allowed to use the carpool lane. It worked great, she saved many hours of driving. But now California has ended that program, so if we had to replace the car today we probably wouldn't pay the extra cost to get a hybrid drive train and battery pack.

    But the Prius has been great. No regrets about that purchase.

  • by raydobbs ( 99133 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @06:19PM (#39624185) Homepage Journal

    "If you factor out the super-loyal Toyota Prius buyers, the repurchase rate drops to under 25%..." the summary mentions. Would that be kind of like saying, "If you factor out the number of humans alive on Earth right now, the human population of Earth is zero." or another favorite that might ring more bells for people, "Of course it's unlimited data. We only shut it off once you exceed 2GB per month."

  • by MDMurphy ( 208495 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @06:22PM (#39624229)

    People here in CA were nudged to get a hybrid in no small part due to the ability to get a sticker that allowed solo driver access to the HOV lanes. Once that went away, a big part of the incentive went with it. I know some people who sold their hybrids in advance of the change, anticipating that the car would sell for more while they still could use the lanes.

    So while hybrid owners might be unlikely to buy another, it could be due in part that without the HOV lane access they wouldn't have bought one in the first place. The story then would be "Car buyers follow temporary gov't incentive, move on when incentive goes away"

    Most hybrids didn't offer better economy in the long run, once the added cost was factored in. They relied heavily on other incentives to make them more desirable in the first place. I'm surprised that those incentives didn't show up in the survey, or at least weren't mentioned in the report.

  • by Chuckstar ( 799005 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @06:26PM (#39624309)

    The Volt is not really an electric car. It's better described as a plug-in hybrid -- i.e. a hybrid with a much bigger battery that can be charged from the wall. Chevy does a good job of obscuring that fact, though. My point is that the Volt would be counted as a hybrid in the referenced survey.

    BTW, don't get me wrong... I don't fault Chevy in any way for their marketing. They are very clear about what the Volt is and is not. They just have purposefully avoided using the actual terms "hybrid" or "plug-in hybrid".

  • Re:Diesel (Score:5, Informative)

    by Jah-Wren Ryel ( 80510 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @06:30PM (#39624371)

    I'd buy a diesel again in a heart beat. I get 40 miles to the gallon city in my Volkswagen Sportswagen. And diesel is 30 cents cheaper a gallon than petrol.

    People who use the word "petrol" often have a larger size gallon [wikipedia.org] than people who say "gas."
    If you are one of those people then you are getting closer to 35 miles to the gallon of most slashdot readers.

  • by Endo13 ( 1000782 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @06:38PM (#39624451)

    There's nothing wrong with his math, but there's clearly something wrong with your reading ability. The post SJHillman was responding to was wrong about the estimated MPGs as well as everything else. In fact, he has the correct estimated MPG amounts listed in his post.

  • by cpu6502 ( 1960974 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @06:40PM (#39624481)

    >>> it's becoming more and more obvious that hybrids are destined to be a short-lived stepping stone and not the long-term solution to our oil and pollution problems

    Yes because an electric car can really carry me 150 miles per day on my work commute. (Not.) By the way according to the GREET study performed by the government, the most efficient car would be a Hybrid diesel. The diesel provides the compact energy format (150,000BTU/gallon), the high-efficiency engine (22:1 compression), and the hybridization provides the constant power curve. Like a modern locomotive.

  • Re:expectations (Score:4, Informative)

    by orzetto ( 545509 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @06:41PM (#39624509)

    They STILL use outdated nimh batteries instead of lithium.

    I am not sure whether it's only a cost issue, but NiMH has the big advantage of being easy to recharge. Li-ion is very sensitive about high currents, and while it has a higher capacity per kg it has a current limit during charging. If the battery is supposed only to be a buffer on a car the size of the Prius, the weight/size savings is likely not worth it. On a full-electric car, though, you do need to squeeze all the energy you can get in the smaller battery, so they use Li-ion for electric cars even if it makes them slow to charge.

    they also don't use any of these new awesome ultracapacitors, so what the hell are they doing?

    I guess they are doing their math. Ultracapacitors have lower energy density than batteries (NiMH too), have high self-discharge, variable voltage as they discharge (so you need variable converters: trust me, they are mean beasts). The only advantage is faster charge/discharge, but the energy would be depleted in a matter of seconds. Not a significant buffer I guess.

  • I switched back (Score:5, Informative)

    by GWBasic ( 900357 ) <{moc.uaednorwerdna} {ta} {todhsals}> on Monday April 09, 2012 @06:55PM (#39624703) Homepage
    I switched back from hybrid to conventional. In 2003 I bought a Civic Hybrid, last year I considered an Insight but bought a Subaru Impreza Sport. Here's why:
    • I could only take the car to the dealer for anything more complicated then an oil change. Regular mechanics refused to look at the car. My check-engine light was on, and the dealer told me that I needed a new catalytic converter for $2-3000 dollars. (The guy who bought the car from me told me it was an inexpensive sensor that needed to be replaced.)
    • I wanted four-wheel-drive so I could go through CA chain checks when I go skiing.
    • My 7-year-old hybrid Civic was only worth about $2,000. Normally Civics hold their value.

    My 2011 Impreza cost me $20,000, and is a compact car. The only 4wd hybrids are large SUVs, which cost $30,000. Even at $4.00 a gallon, $10,000 buys a lot of gas. At 21 miles a gallon, $10,000 buys over 57,000 miles worth of gas!

    Furthermore, Subaru service charges a lot less money then Honda service, and their accessories cost less. Honda charged me $400 for rubber floor mats, and Subaru charged me $100 for rubber floor mats.

    Now, had I not wanted 4wd, I probably would have bought the Insight. I really prefer its quietness and smoothness over the Impreza. On the other hand, given that Honda service is expensive, regular mechanics won't work on Honda hybrids, and that the Insight would probably be worthless after 7 years, I'm probably going to spend less money owning the Impreza.

  • by Junior J. Junior III ( 192702 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @07:03PM (#39624769) Homepage
    150 mile commute? There's your problem.
  • by AK Marc ( 707885 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @07:28PM (#39625013)
    Nope. You'd have to pull out a number of safety features (likely illegal to sell, and possibly illegal to drive). Airbags that don't help belted passengers, bumpers designed to resist damage in 5 mph and slower crashes (yes, bumpers have damage resistance as a feature equal to or greater than safety), and loads of heavy and mostly ineffective sound deadening are burdening the modern car. The old ones had poor suspension, overly heavy bodies and such, but you could strip out almost everything (and even replace the frame with a light-weight tubular design), and have something lighter than today's cars.

    The only thing you get from today's cars is a smaller package with better aerodynamics. But the available improvements are smaller, so it's hard to get the same level of improvements. Intake/exhaust and computer change will get most non-turbo cars 10% to power and efficiency, but beyond that, it's harder to get more. I left out turbos because it's easier to trade efficiency for power or vice versa, and the percentages depend on the vehicles (you won't get much more efficiency out of Audis and Saabs with efficiency tuned turbos, but Chevy's turbo-Diesel trucks have loads of capabilities from things like a DuraMaximizer).
  • by the_humeister ( 922869 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @07:31PM (#39625049)

    Sorry, it won't be a Prius or Volt; much as I'd love to go the green route, they are not particularly green when factoring in the factory footprint, and I can't use them for much more than commuting.

    Actually, about 80-90% of a vehicle's environmental impact is due to the fuel usage over its lifetime.

  • by AK Marc ( 707885 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @07:33PM (#39625065)
    Chevy wants it marketed as a pure electric vehicle that carries a gasoline-powered generator for occasional use. Most "hybrid" cars can drive the wheels directly or solely from the gasoline engine, rather than the Volt that's completely incapable of running on the gasoline engine and must use electric-only to move the car.

    It's a silly distinction, and they aren't selling the idea well, but it is distinct from all other hybrids.
  • by cpu6502 ( 1960974 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @07:38PM (#39625111)

    That's called a serial hybrid (energy flows from engine to battery to wheels). It is not "different" or new, but was invented nearly 100 years ago.

  • Base rate fallacy (Score:5, Informative)

    by Lulu of the Lotus-Ea ( 3441 ) <mertz@gnosis.cx> on Monday April 09, 2012 @08:01PM (#39625313) Homepage

    It seems good to read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy [wikipedia.org] (or other articles on the topic). If the article is correct that 2.4% of new cars sold are hybrids (which sounds reasonable) then the base rate expectation for a "random person" buying a hybrid is low. If the probability of a previous owner of a hybrid buying one next time is 35%, that's still around 14 times the base rate expectation.

    Now clearly, car buying habits are hardly monte carlo style distributions. There is a considerably greater "loyalty" to specific cars than just the random assignment of an available vehicle to a driver. Most of that is probably pretty closely tied with income and socio-economic status. Also, obviously occupational effects matter; and also regional ones do. But consistency in brand or style in repeated car purchases is most certainly far lower than 100%.

    It is not at all clear from the evidence given whether hybrid-loyalty is greater or less than other types. For example, I *just* bought a Honda Insight (which seems a lot less common than Toyota Prius, despite what seem to be even more favorable reviews; name recognition does seem big here). Like literally days ago, so I'm probably not good evidence in any direction about next vehicle purchase. But prior to that (and still), my partner and I own an Audi A4--a brand that probably sells no more than 2.4% of cars in the US (i.e. the brand as a whole, not the specific model which must be lower still). Even if a hybrid were out of consideration and I could only consider a conventional gasoline engine, I think there's much less than 35% chance I'd choose an Audi for my next car. Not because I have any particular criticism of Audi, but just because there are lots of other choices, even given similar driving patterns and socio-economic status. I could buy a Saab, or Volvo, or Acura, or maybe on a bit pricier side a BMW, Mercedes, Lexis, or slightly downscale a Buick or Lincoln, or a VW which comes from the same factory even. All of these are pretty comparable, and brand loyalty might lean my decision slightly, but there's a long way to go between the base rate--even of only "semi-luxury sedans"--to get to 35% brand retention.

  • by Savage-Rabbit ( 308260 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @08:06PM (#39625361)

    I get tired of this bitching like everyone needs a car that can drive tons of miles so that is a reason electrics can't work. No, not at all actually. Some people do. For them, electrics are out. However most other don't, for them it is an option.

    I wouldn't buy an electric car for all sorts of reasons and range is the least of my worries. The reasons at the top of the list mostly boil down to infrastructure... For one thing live in an apartment building with first-come-firs-served parking and I can't very well lay 150m+ of electrical cable out of the window of my apartment on the 3rd floor. But assuming I could to secure my own private parking space and install a charging station next to it. How long before the local hooligans wreck it? Or if they nick the thing, charging stations are not exactly cheap to install (checked). What do I do if the idiot in 2C parks his tank^H^H^H^H SUV in my spot (and the two on either side of it), refuses to move it and thus ensures I can't charge my car? I have had the problem before of some asshole parking in a space I was renting and such a problem is neither easy nor cheap to solve. Lawyers cost money. Another point is that the government here has not lowered the taxes and tolls on electrics like they promised 3 years ago during the last election. Finally range is an issue, true you don't need it most of the time but there are times when you really miss it.

    At the moment electric cars are nice if you live in your own house in the suburbs with a garage to charge your electric commuter car and a second gas powered vehicle you can fall back on for long range travel. What I want is a pluggable hybrid that enables me to do most of my commuting, say 75-100km on electric power but leaves open the option to go diesel or gas once in a while. Unfortunately few such cars are available and the ones that are are either expensive or they just suck ass. When the selection of cars improves and the Infrastructure is there I'll be the first to sign up for the electrics, until then I'll keep my tiny diesel hatchback.

  • by j-beda ( 85386 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @09:21PM (#39626033) Homepage

    I've shied away from hybrid cars because of things I've heard from other owners. I drive a LOT of miles. Typically around 200,000 before I trade to the next car. I typically own the car about 6 or 7 years. I've been told by other hybrid owners that the battery pack is only good for about 100,000 miles and then has to be replaced. I'd be curious as to the experience of other hybrid owners.

    Yea?
    Nay?

    I'd question "owners" who told you that the battery pack is only good for that long. That's typically the warrante time, and the reported lifetimes seem to be significantly above that. Basically, the battery pack seems to last at least as long as typical transmission lifetimes.

    Vancouver seems to have completely switched to Prius taxis. A taxi driving pattern is probably one of the toughest you would typically find, so they can't be too bad for more regular use.

    http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1023454_toyota-prius-taxi-tops-340000mi-dispels-battery-myth [motorauthority.com]

  • by j-beda ( 85386 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @10:46PM (#39626619) Homepage

    Seriously, it is INSANE to buy a car with parallel hybrid. You inherit the worst of both ICE and Electrical. That is just crazy. For cars, you should either buy electric (like tesla model S), OR an ICE using gas/diesel. You would buy ICE if you are going to be traveling more than once a month more than the distance of the electric car.

    Why are so many taxis I see in Vancouver Priuses? Are all of those business people INSANE? And they keep replacing them when they wear out with new hybrids?

    I suppose they are not technically "parallel hybrid" as the nifty planetary gearing system can be used in a manner similar to parallel or series, but I think your "INSANE" statement is a bit strong even with that.

    A hybrid has at least the potential to gain the best of both ICE and Electrical, in that the ICE can provide extended range, while the efficiencies in energy recovery and low speed torque from the electrical system can also be achieved.

  • by tlambert ( 566799 ) on Monday April 09, 2012 @11:11PM (#39626741)

    And so what? That trafic signal is there only because a car is a danger for everything around it. There is no need to control the bike (and the ciclist will even control hinself if he wishes to live - what's not granted).

    That's incorrect; bicyclists tend to believe it, but there are a lot of pedestrians getting run down by bicyclists. Here's an article on a fatality in San Francisco last year, resulting in vehicular manslaughter charges:

    http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/03/12/bicyclist-sentenced-to-probation-in-fatal-sf-embarcadero-crash/ [cbslocal.com]

    And here's a study About pedestrian-cyclist accidents from 2007-2010 in New York state. Basically bicycles send ~1000 pedestrians a year to the hospital in New York alone. Also, it's mostly kids and teens being run over.

    http://gothamist.com/2011/09/19/pedestrians_are_hit_by_more_bicycli.php [gothamist.com]

    -- Terry

And it should be the law: If you use the word `paradigm' without knowing what the dictionary says it means, you go to jail. No exceptions. -- David Jones

Working...