Automotive Forums

I'm seriously thinking of buying a hybrid vehicle as a third car for my family. I've taken a look at both Honda and Toyota and I really like the Honda Accord. Any experience or comments on this vehicle.  

If the Camry and Accord hybrids are the only two you're seriously considering, then you should be aware of the fundamental differences in the way their respective hybrid systems work, and how it effect economy and performance.  

First, the Camry, and all other toyota hybrids use an arguably more sophisticated type of hybrid drive, usually referred to as a "full" hybrid.  In the camry, a relatively ho-hum 2.4L 4 cyl engine provides primary power, and drives the generator, which charges the batteries.  The generator also doubles as the electric drive motor, and the computers decide whether to use the electric motor, the gas engine, or both at the same time.  In the camry, a typical slog through urban or suburban commutes will employ the electric motor during low speed and/or low-levels of demanded acceleration, and kick the gas engine on to provide extra power, to maintain cruising speed, and to charge the battery.  Typically, this system is the most fuel efficient (compared to the honda) because it allows the car to run solely on electric power when the batteries are charged and the drive demands low spee/low loads.  Performance-wise, this system is slower than Honda's in part because it employs a standard 4cylinder engine "boosed" by an electric motor, thus equalling the acceleration capabilities of most 3.0L V6 sedans of the 90s (0-60 in the mid to high 7 second range), which is certainly not slow.  

Honda's approach is very different.  The Accord couples the top-of-the-line 3L 240HP V6 with an electric "boost" motor that assists acceleration at all throttle applications.  The electric motor never operates independent of the gas engine, but does help accelerate the car, and (like the camry) the gas engine stops when the car is stopped, unless it needs to run accessories like the AC.  This setup is less efficient than the Camry's because the Gas engine never stops unless the car is at rest, and because it's a bigger, more powerful engine to begin with.  However, because the alredy-quick V6 accord is boosted by the electric motor, it is a genuinly fast sedan, able to do 0-60 in under 6 seconds--fast by anyone's standards at that price.  

So the question is whether you want the performance benefit of the Accord's Hybrid, or the efficiency benefit of the Camry's hybrid drive.  Note that the Accord is plenty efficient, reaching well into the 30+ MPH range.  But the Camry promises around 30-40MPG, and is about as fast as the V6 sedans of just a few years ago.  It's also generally less expensive, with the base model offered for well under $30K, and loaded with various standard equipment that's optional on most other Camry models.  The Accord is similarly loaded, but I'm pretty sure it starts around $30K.  

Forgot to mention:

Personally, I think the Camry is a more sensible choice.  While I certainly like the Accord, respect its credentials as a reliable, well-engineered, fun-to-drive car, and I certainly a great whack of power from under the hood, I feel like spending the extra few thousand for a hybrid should yeild a considerable efficiency benefit.  IF you're going to spend in the upper $20Ks for a hybrid sedan, why not buy the one that's more efficient?  The camry is an all-new design with fresh styling and a particularly fresh interior, and offers the performance of a "regular" V6 with the gas mileage of a subcompact.  The Accord, however, is still just an accord, now a 4 year old design (still a good one, though) costing $30K and offering Big-bore V6 (or maybe V8) performance for a mild increase in economy over the standard V6.  There's no doubt that the accord is a great car, but if performance is the issue, why not spend far less, get one of the many sedans available with a powerful 3.5L V6, and spend the savings on gas?  You'd come out even in the end, and you'd probably have a more stylish, more fun car.  

I think that all hybrids available today are not good deals. Put some serious pencil work to this. How much does it cost compared to similar models that are not hybrids? How much will it cost to maintain compared to similar models? Don't forget to factor in inconvenience if these do not catch on. Who is stuck if they don't catch on. A friend of mine drove up in a nice Cutlass diesel a few years ago. I could tell he had already bought it, so I didn't tell him what I thought of the decision and only told him it was a  nice looking car, which it was. I personally was only stranded in this car twice in the first 6 months he owned it. He and his wife were stranded several more times. He later traded it in for about 25% of what he paid for it.  

Lucky161, I agree that hybrids fuel economy doesn't automatically make them great deals.  After all, most hybrids command a few thousand dollar premium, and starting this summer, the tax refund for buying hybrids will be canceled.  As a result, the extra 10-15 MPG extra saved by driving a hybrid could take 100,000 miles to make up for the extra cash shelled out in the beginnning.  But I think there's more to the hyrid case than that, and comparing American automakers' pathetic dable in Diesel "fuel savers" in the late 70s is wholly irellevant.  

Firstly, buying a hybrid, although it may cost more in the short term, guarantees years of far lower fuel costs over the course of the car's life.  With today's gas prices, and especally those of a few months ago (when them  were at a 3-year low), then sure, the hybrid will take years to make up the premium with reduced fuel costs.  But no matter where fuel prices go, the hybrid will always get great gas mileage, and the premium paid may very well become suddenly VERY worthwhile if prices spike.  

Secondly, any questions about the future of hybrids or their techonology have pretty much exceded their shelf-life.  First generations hybrids, such as the Honda Insight and more importantly, Toyota prius, are now reaching 6-7 years old and well beyond 100K miles.  Battery life and other reliability/maintenance questions that were valid 5 years ago are now being answered, and the verdict seems to be that batteries are longer-lived than expected, and no legitemate problems have surfaced with the sophisticated systems that incorporate electric and gasoline drive systems into one drivetrain.  And although a limited number of hybrid cars are available today, the number is rapidly increasing, and most major carmakers are developing hybridity into the majority of their lineup.  We haven't seen their widespread use yet because it takes time and resources to get it right, and many automakers are behind the curve set by Honda and Toyota.  

Thirdly, and not to be underestimated, buying a car is nearly as much an emotional event as it is a rational one. Heck, even a good, sensible purchas is emotionally rewarding for that very reason.  Thus, while Hybrids don't necessarily mean instant multi-thousand dollar savings at the gas pump, they are perfectly valid options for people who are as emotionally satisfied with low-polution and energy conservation as they are with "a good deal."  

Lastly, your comparison of hybrids with Diesels of the 70s and 80s opens up an entirely new point of discussion.  Americans are largely skeptical of Diesels in automotive applications, often because of the bad memories of cars like your friend's olds.  But Diesel technology has made enormous strides towards practical application in cars.  Current diesels offered in europe (and trickling in here from Mercedes and VW) are nearly as powerful as gasoline powerplants of simlilar size, MUCH more torquey, nearly as quiet and smooth, and roughly as efficient as hybrids.  They also produce less greenhouse gasses, and partical filters and urea injection all but eliminate the sooty exhaust emmisions we remember from early diesels.  But they cost more to buy, so the case is somewhat similar to hybrids.  Then again, a Diesel will always get better gas mileage than a gasoline engine of similar power, so like a hybrid, the savings will only become greater as fuel prices go up.  

I wouldn't argue any of that except for fine points. But many people are thinking of purchasing the hybrids thinking it's a good economic move and for most people it's not even close on that count.
I consider most of the calls for better fuel economy almost comical except that we have known for over 20 years how to get much better economy than we get now, but refused to persue it. Mid 80s Honda Civics got close to 50 mph on a regular basis. True they weren't very fancy or even very comfortable but they were reliable and stingy with gas. I had one and my dad had one and one of my cousins did too. I personally hated mine, but that was because I missed my comfortable powerful Buick Regal. But the Honda did what it claimed to do.  

If most of your driving is in traffic jams, then get a hybrid, especially one that can run in electric only mode. If you drive on the open road, you will get similar mileage-about 40 mpg--from a non-hybrid economy car. Do not get a stick shift unless you are an accomplished stick driver--the AT will do better.  What about the Ford escape hybrid is it reliable?  

FYI-Honda announced on 6/5 they are going to discontinue making the Accord Hybrid.  Here's the link from MSN:

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=AP&Date=20070605&ID=6998797[/url]


Tim
onlinecarconnection.com