Did say “stupid comaprisons” below?

Ah yes I did. Now here’s one a good one. From thegreencarwebsite.co.uk…

Which is better – the Prius or the Volt?

Hmmmmm, let me think about that for a moment…

Ah, I can choose a first generation car that doesn’t actually exist as yet with unproven technology from a company with dubious build quality and priced at somewhere between $30 and $40K

or

I can choose the third generation Prius with EPA rated 50 MPG combined, from a company that regularly wins top awards for customer satisfaction and reliability, for a model that has placed top in many of the same surveys and reports and should (guessing here) cost somewhere between $23 to $26K.

Now that’s a tough choice, isn’t it?

Still playing the same old numbers game

One would think, after looking foolish several times last year with Edmunds trademarked “true cost to own” analysis that they might ease off a bit in making pronouncement that would bite them on the back again.

Not Edmunds, in article published via BusinessWire, Edmunds claims that a recent Consumer Reports article claiming the Touring Edition of the 2009 Prius was “best value” amongst 300 cars they studied is wrong. Getting in between a slap fight between Edmunds and Consumer Reports isn’t really a great idea. Both behemoths of the auto world tend to make enromous mistakes from time to time but with that said, it was this quote that caused me to pause…

“Anyone truly concerned about their household expenses should ask some questions about any methodology that finds a premium hybrid vehicle to be an excellent value, especially when gas prices are so low,” warns Edmunds.com CEO Jeremy Anwyl. “It makes sense that value is top of mind for many car buyers; for consumers seeking the absolute best new car value, the 2009 Honda Civic is the best choice, not the Prius.”

Once again, Edmunds calling someone else’s methodology bizarre is a bit more than humorous. Their own figures have been questioned many times here and frankly, I’d take issue with CEO Anwyl on this one. I suspect, though I don’t know since we’re not privy to the inner workings of their “true cost to own” calculations that two factors are at play here. First, Civic vs. Prius isn’t really as direct a comparison as Edmunds would have you believe and second, I suspect their gas price calculations are fixed and would have to be thrown out the window is gas prices rise again (something we all know will never happen, right?). There’s no doubt the Honda a great vehicle but that it will really cost you that much less to own over a five year period is more than questionable.

Just as a side note, I question Consumer Reports picking the touring the edition as a “best value”. I would guess it’s based substantially on resale value but I would think that, for most consumers, the base model 2009 Prius would represent a better value.

As with any of these big company’s analysis, look carefully at as much of the raw data their using as possible when evaluating whether to pay attention to what they’re saying or not. Edmunds loves to blow smoke just like any of the car review companies. That they’re blowing smoke at Consumer Reports is funny and, I suspect, not nearly as on point as they would like to think.

And then there were two

Thanks to our government for enhancing the private enterprise system. It looks as though the fed is going to allow GM to borrow $5B that was designated to help the American car companies compete by making better, more fuel efficient cars to instead to buy Chrysler.

Even I can do the math here.

0+0=0

That first zero is GM, the second zero is Chrysler and third zero is what the US taxpayer is getting for their money.

But don’t believe me…

From the WSJ: GM May Get Loan for Chrysler Deal

The Department of Energy is working to release $5 billion in loans to General Motors Corp. …

The funds would come from a pool of $25 billion in low-interest loans approved by Congress to help Detroit retool its plants to meet new fuel-efficiency standards. It’s not clear how quickly the money could be made available or whether it would come with strings attached.
And from Reuters: US Treasury working on aid for GM, Chrysler merger

The U.S. government is considering direct financial assistance to facilitate a possible merger between General Motors Corp and Chrysler …

The Treasury Department is weighing aid of at least $5 billion, which could include capital injections and government purchases of bad auto loans …

It looks more and more likely that GM will acquire Chrysler.

Also of interest, just last week Daimler wrote the value of their Chrysler holdings down to zero according to a report in the Free Press: Daimler: Chrysler worth nothing

The German automaker has depreciated its stake in Chrysler to zero from $268 million at the end of June, the company said Thursday. A little over a year ago, the company valued its 19.9% stake in Chrysler at $2.2 billion.

And the worst part of the whole, we’re left with an even bigger, crappier GM that still can’t make a decent, high MPG vehicle.

h/t calculatedrisk

Bumped up

This report from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety was fascinating in that Prius was almost the worst performing vehicle they tested. No, the Prius isn’t unsafe, it’s just very expensive repair if involved in a low speed collision. And having been “bumped” twice on the road, I can attest to the veracity of that report myself. Body parts for the Prius are outrageously expensive and if somone “bumps” you there’s a good chance you’ll be learning about it directly, as I have.

Here are some of the conclusions of the report.

Most small cars aren’t economical for crash repairs: Ford Focus performs the best; Rabbit & Prius are the worst in bumper tests

ARLINGTON, VA — Low-speed collisions happen every day in commuter traffic and parking lots. These “fender benders” end up costing car owners a lot of money and aggravation because the bumpers on many cars aren’t designed to handle what should be a no-damage event.

In a series of crash tests, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety recently assessed how well the bumpers of 20 small car models would protect the vehicles from damage in low-speed collisions. The worst performers are the Hyundai Elantra, Toyota Prius, and Volkswagen Rabbit, each sustaining about $4,000 damage or more in a single test. The Ford Focus performed the best, with about one-third that amount of damage in its worst test.

“Small cars are supposed to be economical, but there’s nothing economical about three or four thousand dollars in repairs after a low-speed collision,” says Institute senior vice president Joe Nolan. “Ford did the best job of putting bumpers on a small car that largely do what they’re supposed to do. In 3 of the 4 tests, the bumpers on the Focus protected sheet metal and most other expensive parts from damage.

Why bumpers don’t bump: To assess and compare bumper performance in low-speed impacts, the Institute conducts a series of 4 crash tests — full front and rear into a barrier designed to mimic the front or back bumper on another vehicle plus front and rear corner impacts. The full-width impacts are conducted at 6 mph while the corner impacts are run at 3 mph.

The purpose of a bumper is to absorb the energy of a low-speed collision and slow the vehicles before there’s damage to expensive-to-repair parts like fenders and hoods. But there are multiple problems, the first of which is that the bumpers on colliding vehicles often don’t line up vertically so they don’t engage to begin with. Even some that do line up don’t stay engaged during an impact. Modern front-end styling results in bumper designs that can either slide under the bumpers of vehicles they strike or that simply don’t have enough room to absorb the energy of a low-speed crash. Even if they do engage the bumper of the vehicle they crash into, the bars underneath bumper covers often aren’t up to absorbing the energy. They may not be big enough to provide much protection from damage, especially if they don’t extend to vehicle corners, or they may be too flimsy to absorb much energy.

…

In the front corner test of the right side of the Prius, damage was much less, about $1,200, involving the fender and headlight. But had the test been conducted on the left side, the barrier would have crushed a coolant tank which costs more than $1,000 to replace, not including labor.

…

A taillight costs $205 to replace on the Prius compared with just $65 on the Focus.

…

To illustrate how small changes to bumper design can make a significant difference in repair costs, the Institute worked with Tech-Cor, the research division of Allstate Insurance, to modify the front bumper of the Prius. The reinforcement bar and foam absorber were extended another 10 inches on the passenger side under the headlight. When the Institute tested the Prius again, the headlight and fender were undamaged and the repair cost dropped from $1,200 to $254.

“There’s plenty of room under the bumper covers of most cars to make this simple change,” says Nolan.

…

Bumper performance in low-speed crash tests:
VEHICLE REPAIR COSTS
Front full Front corner Rear full Rear corner TOTAL DAMAGE
Toyota Prius $2,876 $1,208 $3,964 $1,022 $9,070

The Prius was the second most expensive vehicle to repair of the twenty that were tested.

Wallowing in the stupid

Given this station’s broadcasting I’m not all that surprised the web site contains misinformation. This is the tidbit that jumped out at me…

The Toyota Prius and Yaris are both good buys on sticker price and fuel, but both have high depreciation rates. The Jeep Patriot costs less than the Prius and ranks high for value on maintenance and repairs. All three just made Forbes’ list of the least expensive vehicles to drive.

eh?

The Prius, according some spuds at no-name places such as Automotive.com., Forbes, Consumer Reports, Edmunds and that source no one ever quotes, the Kelley Blue Book has one of the best if not the best depreciation rate of any car currently on the market.

So when the station above blathers about Prius depreciation being high I have to wonder if it isn’t someone at the station who might be high? Then we toss in the random Jeep Patriot reference and I wonder what the “reporter” was thinking? Operating costs on a Jeep compared to the Prius? Seriously?

This one liner about the Patriot from Motor Trend kind of says it all,

Sum Up: CAN’T BE AS BAD AS COMPASS. SURELY.

What do I keep saying?

From the Orlando Sentinel…

Have your eye on a gas guzzler? It’s a good time to buy
Steven Cole Smith | AUTOMOTIVE

“Automakers made some big changes to their production plans based on preferences in the second quarter,” said Jesse Toprak, executive director of industry analysis for Edmunds.com. “But if gas prices continue to recede to the long-term trend line, automakers may find that they overreacted to a temporary shift in consumers’ preferences.”

Because, as we all know, betting that gas prices will go down in the long term is always a good bet.

Right Jesse?

Uh, maybe not.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/

You tell me what the safe bet is here, “long-term”.

Look, Smith is right and he makes his case well enough that yes, now is a great time to buy a guzzler. Assuming you don’t have to actually drive and fuel it, sale prices on large vehicles are better than ever.

I wonder why?

Proving that stupid sells

Hart Seely of the Syracuse Post-Standard coughs up all the cliches and misinformation in this little tome to the Hummer. I’ll add some commentary interspersed with Seely’s tedious reportage…

Is it smug vs. smog?
By Hart Seely
Staff writer
These days, it’s not easy being king of the road.

Consider the Hummer H2, the four-wheel, four-star hotel. The thing goes anywhere with the quaint modesty of a Pershing tank. Of course, there is that 11 miles-per-gallon gas problem. Now and then, somebody accuses the owner of wrecking the planet.

Even Hummer dealers will say the Hummers get about 8-10, assuming you’re very lightfooted on the gas pedal. Nothing like driving your Hummer around town at 20 MPH to save fuel.

Then comes the Prius or, as some prefer, “Dorkmobile.” It fits into “green” parking spaces at the Carousel Center shopping mall and can ride in some cities’ carpool lanes. But now and then, somebody accuses its owner of secretly being happy about the price of gas.

Yes, because Prius owners don’t but gasoline. Why would Prius owners be happy about high gas prices? That’s about as stupid an accusation as I’ve read yet but I will say, at least it’s original.

Prius owners may not be impacted as much as Hummer owners by gas prices but neither group is cheering on $5 a gallon gas.

“There is the group that dislikes the Hummer and the group that dislikes the Prius,” said Ray Wert, editor of Jalopnik.com, a Web site that covers the auto industry. “And it’s for almost the same reason: the marketing of lifestyles that are almost nonexistent.”

Blather. Jalopnik is consistently one of the dumbest auto blogs running. And what does, “marketing of lifestyles that are almost nonexistent” mean anyway? I can’t comment on the Hummer lifestyle, whatever that is supposed to be but I know why I bought my Prius. I wanted a five passenger car that eat me alive in gas costs. It’s not a lifestyle, it was a very practical need that I had.

So goes the invisible duel between America’s two most loved and hated cars.

It’s Hummer vs. Prius, smog vs. smug, HOG vs. POG. (FYI: that’s Hummer Owners Groups v. Prius Owners Groups.)

Hey!

On the nation’s paved and social highways, the two cars embody starkly different views of patriotism, opulence, personal freedom, ingenuity, lifestyle and say both sets of owners misunderstandings.

Honestly, this is grievously stupid. The idea that these two vehicles somehow embody the totality of the owners feelings about the issues above is ridiculous. It’s a car. It’s a transportation tool.

Take the anti-Hummer crowd, which includes environmental groups, left-leaners and mischief-makers. Web sites such as ihatehummer.com encourage motorists to give Hummer owners the one-finger salute. Last year, vandals smashed up a Washington, D.C., owner’s Hummer and scrawled an environmental message on its side. They denounced the car as a symbol of decadent wealth and waste.

Nice. Although, I have to admit I did think the Hummer salute thing was funny. For the first few minutes.

Never having been in the “I express my sense of self through my vehicle” crowd I really don’t understand a lot of this.

“They don’t know us,” said Joseph Contini, of Jordan, who runs Hakuna Matata Tanning Salon in Solvay and loves his 2005 H2. “That’s the biggest problem. They don’t know us.”

Then there are the anti-Prius legions. They include Rush Limbaugh, who once called Prius owners “phonies.” Web sites such as ihatetheprius.com rail about political correctness and pretentious Hollywood celebrities. Last spring, somebody in Santa Rosa, Calif., went on a Prius-bashing spree over several nights. To some, the hybrid symbolizes smugness.

Smug. Smug. Smug.

Seriously, it was funny once, when it was South Park. Since then, it’s like the annoying five year old that repeats something over and over again.

“All I can say is if anybody knows me, they won’t think that,” said Lois Bolton, 69, of Liverpool, who loves her 2004 Prius.

The notion of cars as socio-political icons goes back decades, says Syracuse automotive historian Walter Miller. In the 1960s, the Cadillac embodied wealth and conservatism, while the Volkswagen mini-bus became the hippie van of choice. In the 1980s, as U.S. car plants began closing, a cultural divide grew between people driving American made cars and Japanese imports.

Miller, who founded the now-closed Museum of Automobile History, says both cars could be future museum exhibits. The Hummer will fall to high gas prices, the Prius to technological advances.

Which will be most remembered?

“Probably the Hummer, assuming that we don’t ever go back to $10 a barrel gas,” Miller said. “It’ll be just like the ridiculous big fins of the 1950s that people kind of laugh at now. . . . It’ll be, ‘Those foolish Americans, look what they did!’ ”

Over the last 12 months, Hummer sales have plummeted 59 percent, despite a slimmed-down H3 model that gets better mileage than a few SUVs. General Motors might sell the Hummer line.

But Priuses are in such demand that Toyota upped their price last spring and still has a waiting list. The Prius gets an estimated 48 mpg in city driving.

The 2008 H2 15 feet long, nearly 7 feet wide, and with a chrome grill the size of a snow plow retails for $58,325, according to the Kelley Blue Book directory. But gas prices are taking their toll. A 2005 H2 with 60,000 miles is worth half the current price $28,665, a drop of 51 percent according to the Blue Book.

A new Toyota Prius Touring Hatchback costs $23,700. The used 2005 version, with the same mileage, comes in at $19,230 a drop of 18 percent.

Actually about $21K used. It depends on the source you’re quoting and whether you’re looking at retail or trade-in value but that’s a hair low.

As Hummers grow rare and Priuses common, their enemies likely will move on. Congress in 2003 closed a Hummer tax loophole that infuriated the anti-Hummer crowd. Since 2005, the tax breaks have gone to the Prius, with other incentives.

Eh? That credit, for the Prius, expired some time ago and, as far as I know, there are not any other current federal rebates or credits on the Prius. There are possibly some state incentives but none that I am aware of.

Last year, the Carousel Center in Syracuse as part of Destiny USA’s vision of an energy-efficient shopping mall began offering hybrid and economy cars choice parking slots near the entrances. Soon, protest letters to The Post-Standard singled out the Prius. Their owners caught the blowback.

“green” parking spots? Come on, that’s just childish. I understand what they’re saying but that’s really a terrible application.

“I used to get the comments like, ‘You stupid tree-hugger,’ ” recalled Richard Pietrafesa, a managing director of Destiny, who drives a Prius. “Now, people are a little more reserved.”

Pietrafesa said he’s sensed at times a view that Prius owners are smug. He gets it at the gas pump, from the 12-mpg crowd. Pietrafesa says he has no right to be smug, because his wife drives a big, gas-chugging Chevrolet Suburban.

“You look at the amount of gas she uses to get our family from one place to another, compared to what I use, and it’s ridiculous,” Pietrafesa said. “Either one, we’re just getting to the same place.”

Of course, no motorists endure more hairy eyeballs than those in the Hummer. Some develop a stock answer to critics.

“I’m 75 years old, and I didn’t get my first car until I was 55,” said Nancy Rifken, of Fayetteville. “As far as I’m concerned, I have about 30 years of gas coming to me. . . . I never had a chance to use up my portion.”

May as well take all that nasty oil with you, eh? A wonderful paean to the use it before you die crowd.

And don’t get me wrong, Rifken can use whatever she can afford. But I don’t have to respect her consumption for consumption’s sake attitude.

At 5 feet tall, Rifken said she enjoys being able to see the road in her H2.

“When I get out, what I usually find are guys laughing at me,” she said.

Many owners view their Hummer as more than a car.

“Some people spend their money on a boat, or an ATV, or on a camp,” Contini said. “Our thing is the Hummer and, believe me, it’s a lot of fun.”

Last January, he and his wife Kris bought a used H2 for about $32,000. It had just 13,000 miles on the odometer. They travel to off-road trail parks, where they drive a style called “treading lightly,” no easy feat in a 6,614-pound beast. Their CNY Hummer Club (http://cnyhummerclub.com) attended a Hummer jamboree this summer in central Pennsylvania. They plunged through mud holes, rolled down hills and up huge boulders, boldly going where no Jeep can go. They went places they couldn’t go having to pull each other out.

“There’s nothing like it, when the water is coming right over the top of the hood of the Hummer,” Contini said. “It’s amazing the power that these things have.”

But with $4.20-a-gallon gas, one owner brought his H1 to the Pennsylvania jamboree on a trailer, rather than drive it.

On a trailer? There’s a message there.

Contini and Brewerton Fire Department Chief Michael Stassi hope to launch a local chapter of HOPE: Hummer Owners Prepared for Emergency. The group can serve as a backup force to help public agencies during disasters, such as remote area searches. They trained at the Pennsylvania event.

At a Hummer Club meeting, members wore Hummer shirts, caps an entire Hummer line of gear. And behind Driver’s Village in North Syracuse, there is an obstacle course just for Hummers.

“I have a love for these vehicles in my heart,” said Mike Sweetman, sales consultant at Burdick Hummer at Driver’s Village, as he swerved an H2 around the steel gate and onto the course. He navigated a set of steel rollers, ascended a 16-inch vertical wall, then climbed a 60-degree peak, a mini roller-coaster ride.

“I could drive up onto the hood of that car, if somebody would let me,” he said.

For the record, he was not pointing toward a Prius.

But Hummer owners have taken their share of grief from the hybrid crowd.

“Wait until they have to replace the battery,” Contini said. “I’d like to see how these hybrids will hold up after a few years.”

Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. The classic ignorant comment about the Prius. The batteries we use last a very long time and all of us have great warranties on the hybrid systems in our cars. If it helps t believe something else, please, feel free to. Just don’t delude yourself that you’re making a salient comment.

You’re not.

Two years ago, Hummer owners rejoiced when an Oregon-based research company claimed that, over the course of the cars’ lives, the Prius actually used more energy than the Hummer. The study didn’t hold up. Last year, the company refuted its findings.

Ah yes, the fully debunked and ridiculous CNW Marketing piece. Nice call. Just in case I wasn’t sure that the writer here was intellectually atrophied and otherwise off their game, now I can be sure.

But there is still the smugness. The TV show “South Park” has skewered Prius owners for contributing dangerous levels of “smug” to the environment. The car has relentless critics online.

“What is a Toyota Prius good for?” asked a headline in the popular Web site fark.com. “Target practice.”

Two things.

-No one is required to buy a Prius.

-I shoot back.

Wert said the Prius’ popularity stems from what has always sold cars: image. “You’re not saving the environment by driving a Toyota Prius,” Wert said. “There is an internal combustion engine under the hood, just like there is one under the hood of a Hummer. The question is, is one car really morally superior? I don’t really know the answer. But I do know that if you talk to strong proponents of mass transit, or of really green living, they’ll tell you that it’s just a way to make people feel like they’re doing something for the environment.”

Morality? Of the Prius? You’re joking. Look, I can only speak for myself. I bought the car because it was, by far, and still is, the very best alternative for me to move adults around in reasonable comfort and not chew up a bunch of gas doing so. If you want Hummer, more power to you. You obviously have more money to waste than I do. But this isn’t a moral issue insofar as one person being better than another merely by owning a particular vehicle. There’s much more to it than that. So reducing this all down to cartoon proportions is not only simplistic but really rather childish.

Saving fuel, being more environmentally conscious isn’t a game one wins or loses. At least I think the idea is to improve where you stand. Do a little better. Contribute less waste, save a little more. It’s not a shallow contest where one person is crowned “green” and the rest of us are terrible people.

But maybe that’s just me.

And then there is the secret dream of Hummer owners: The mini-tank that gets 50 miles to the gallon the cross between the Hummer and the Prius.

Hummus, anyone?

It would certainly get their attention in the Middle East.

Hart Seely can be reached at hseely@syracuse.com or 470-2247.

ZzZ zZzz zzZ z Z zzZ Z Z z zzzZzZZ z z z zzZz Z Z z

Why read Forbes?

I mean, you have to be really dull to say this in print…

Similarly, the popular Toyota Prius hybrid claims a spot on the list, with a markedly low 17.9% of the five-year costs going to fuel. But this car also depreciates quickly (though only just less than half the rate of the Yaris), as those in the market for a hybrid want the latest and newest technology, not a car that’s a few years old.

The Prius depreciates quickly? Really? Is this more astute predicting on Forbes part or just their unique ability to completely ignore thousands of market reports of used Prii selling for what the owners paid for them (or more)?

Honestly, either Forbes is dumb or lying, I’ll let Forbes decide which it is.

Rising costs and cutting costs

Rising vehicle fuel bills dog city of Des Moines
BY MELISSA WALKER • MEWALKER@DMREG.COM

More than 150 city employees continue to drive taxpayer-owned vehicles between work and home, even as high fuel costs force Des Moines officials to look for ways to conserve.

It’s been almost six years since officials first talked about how to reduce the number of “take-home” vehicles in an effort to cut mileage, save fuel and lower repair bills. Few changes, if any, have been made.

Meanwhile, fuel costs, which rose $784,000 in the budget period that ended June 30 compared with the previous year, have come in higher than planned for two straight years.

“Something has to give,” Deputy City Manager Merrill Stanley said. “We can’t continue to overspend the budget.”

The 163 vehicles used for employee commutes represent about 20 percent of the city’s fleet. The fuel they use is a drop in the bucket compared with the city’s overall bill. The public works and police departments consume the majority of fuel. Snowplows, garbage trucks and patrol cars, among other vehicles, sucked up about 700,000 gallons last year.

But the take-home program – employees who live outside the city limits repaid $55,650 to the budget last year – is among the potential cost-cutting moves on the table, even though City Manager Rick Clark acknowledged that the budget stress from high fuel costs will require more than simply ending the practice.

“We’re going to have to look at all kinds of measures to keep the costs low,” he said.

File download: See a spreadsheet of City of Des Moines vehicles and mileage (3-page Excel document)

Councilwoman Christine Hensley said the number of vehicles that employees drive home each day is a good place to start.

“If you have an emergency and need to go to the scene, go ahead and drive your car,” she said. “How often does that happen? Not enough to justify having a car 365 days a year.”

City inspectors, traffic signal engineers, horticulture employees, school resource officers and police detectives are among those who drive home city vehicles. No price tag has ever been put on the program.

Inspector Bob Reynolds said he understands the need to cut costs but sees advantages to take-home vehicles that don’t show up on balance sheets.

Reynolds said he puts tires and other debris found in or along city streets in his work truck on the drive home, and goes to some inspections as early as 7:30 a.m., straight from home. He has assisted motorists with broken-down vehicles who might be hesitant to accept help otherwise, he said.

“It benefits the neighborhood groups,” Reynolds said. “Even though it’s not a police car, people do slow down when they see us.”

Most metro-area cities already limit take-home vehicles to ranking public safety and on-call employees. But leaders say meaningful fuel savings will require bolder approaches.

“When we start the budget, we’re in trouble on day one as far as fuel,” said Dennis Henderson, city manager in Clive, where the first electric car will join the fleet this year.

Cities across Iowa have dealt with the fuel crunch in various ways.

Alan Kemp, director of the Iowa League of Cities, said most extra costs can be absorbed, but elected officials might eventually require employees to drive less or move to more efficient vehicles.The alternative is service cuts.

“That’s how you make your savings. You do less,” Kemp said.

Council Bluffs also overspent its fuel budget the past few years, finance director Linda Andersen said. Cutbacks in other areas will probably make up for the shortfall, she said. About $815,000 has been set aside for the budget year that began July 1, a 15 percent increase.

Dave McDermott, Council Bluffs’ fleet maintenance supervisor, said workers ride together and take fewer vehicles to complete jobs, and mapping systems are used to find the most efficient routes. Officials will reconsider employee take-home vehicles and examine more alternative fuels and hybrid vehicles, he said.

Davenport officials have downsized vehicles and purchased hybrids. Construction equipment is left at work sites. Take-home vehicles are supplied only for public safety and on-call employees.

Dozens of U.S. cities have tried creative ways to curb fuel consumption and save tax money, according to the National League of Cities:

- In Raleigh, N.C., Chicago and Oakland, Calif., city vehicles are equipped with tracking devices to monitor unauthorized use.

- Berkeley, Calif., officials share five hybrid vehicles with residents. The city uses the vehicles during the day, and residents use them at night and on weekends. Officials estimate the total savings at $400,000.

- Residents in Denton, Texas, save deep-fryer oil, which a biodiesel facility recycles to fuel the city’s garbage trucks.

- Employees in Monmouth County, N.J., no longer drive home about 70 vehicles.

- Newport Beach, Calif., leases 12 electric vehicles, which has saved about $15,000 in fuel costs.

Des Moines leaders this fall will consider a handful of ideas, such as longer fuel-purchase contracts to lock in rates. Employees’ driving habits will be examined, and more hybrids are on the horizon.

Of the city’s 15 hybrid vehicles, 12 are owned and three are used in partnership with a car dealer. Eight diesel engine vehicles that are designed to be more “green” were purchased in February, for $46,000 more than regular vehicles.

Public Works Director Bill Stowe said an automated recycling program should also reduce diesel consumption by about 15,000 gallons a year, a savings of $60,000.

Officials in Ankeny and West Des Moines have purchased trucks with room for more employees to cut down on trips to job sites. West Des Moines has also tested a new patrol car that allows engines to be turned off without shutting down computers, and it has a vehicle location program to find the most efficient routes.

Councilman Robert Mahaffey, who represents Des Moines’ northeast side, said city employees will have to find ways to reduce fuel use because “we don’t put a lot of fluff in our budget anyway.”

The half truths you’re supposed to accept at face value

In a movie filled with great scenes and legendary one liners there is a scene almost at the end of “Animal House” where our heroes have started a riot during the homecoming parade as revenge for being kicked off campus. During that riot, a very young Kevin Bacon, playing an ROTC officer (who is pledged to the evil fraternity) stands in the middle of the chaos, visibly shaken shouting, “Remain Calm! All is well!” right before he’s mowed down by the rampaging crowd.

In a typically equivocating and bet hedging piece we learn that large vehicles are “safer” and cheaper. Lucky for us the car lots are packed full of bargain priced enormo-mobiles.

Buying smaller car may not be a bargain
A new study suggests that switching to a smaller, more fuel-efficient car will likely result in higher insurance premiums.
Driven blog | Soooo cute, but is it Smart for Florida?
By G. CHAMBERS WILLIAMS III
San Antonio Express-News

In the rush by consumers to find more fuel-efficient vehicles, one aspect of switching to a small car from a pickup or SUV easily can be overlooked: It generally costs more to insure the smaller vehicle.

The real question to ask here, one a real journalist might have asked, is why?

A new study released recently by the auto insurance consumer website insure.com shows that the difference between premiums for a large pickup or SUV versus a small car can be large enough to help pay the extra cost of gasoline for that bigger vehicle, even with fuel at $4 a gallon or more.

So the insurance support the use and more oil as a safety measure? How nice.

The study also underscores another point: The bigger the vehicle, the safer it is.

”Small cars tend to increase insurance costs because they get into more crashes,” Russ Rader, spokesman for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, said in an insure.com news release on results of the study. “There’s a myth that a smaller car is more nimble and helps you avoid crashes, but smaller cars tend to have more collision losses.”

I question Mr. Rader’s honesty or at the very least, his intelligence. To wit: smaller cars more nimble. That’s physics. All you have to do is sit in any parking lot and watch the folks trying to park their Expedeitions, Navigators, Escalades, Hummers and whatnot to see this in action.

Sadly, Mr. Rader doesn’t give us all the information we might need to make an informed decision. For instance, could the higher accident rate on smaller vehicles be because there are more of them on road? Could it be because smaller cars tend to be cheaper and driven by younger drivers who, in general, are involved more accidents? Curious that we only get one, off-the-cuff reason from an industry absolutely obsessed with and in the business of keeping statistics for causes.

For the past three months, the compact, fuel-efficient Honda Civic has been the nation’s best-selling vehicle, replacing the Ford F-series pickup, which had held the top spot since the early 1990s. Sales for the F-series are off more than 40 percent this year (through June) compared with 2007, although the vehicle still ranks quite high — it’s the fourth best-selling vehicle now.

But the average national premium to insure an F-series pickup is just $1,194, compared to $1,670 for the Civic, the study showed.

I don’t think this necessarily proves one vehicle is safer than another. It’s just proves, conclusively, that insurance companies charge less to insure the F-150.

Even the popular Toyota Prius gasoline-electric hybrid, with the best fuel-economy ratings of any new car on the market (48 mpg in the city and 45 mpg on the highway), costs more to insure than the F-series pickup: an average of $1,382 a year.

So the implication in this seriously misguided example of contemporary journamalisming is that we’re supposed the Prius won’t use less than $200 less fuel than an F-150? You’ve got to be kidding, right?

Premiums for the Toyota Camry, the third best-selling vehicle so far this year, average $1,302 a year. But two other popular larger vehicles that offer fuel economy that’s much better than that of most pickups also had insurance premiums much lower than those of many small cars: the Toyota Sienna minivan, at $1,266 a year, and the Honda CR-V compact SUV, at $1,258.

The difference is in the vehicle’s bulk. The Sienna and CR-V are heavier and sturdier than cars like the Civic and Prius, offering better protection to their occupants in a collision. But they are lighter than big pickups and SUVs, thereby using less fuel.

While the overall differences in premiums between small cars and larger vehicles might not be enough to justify sticking with a big vehicle and its higher fuel costs, this study does provide more evidence that switching to a smaller vehicle as a knee-jerk reaction to the high gasoline prices might not make financial sense to many consumers.

“Might not”?

“Knee jerk”?

Knee jerk reactions are bad, we all know that. I guess. That said, ignoring what’s going on around you isn’t a really great bit of counseling either.

Because resale values of bigger vehicles — particularly full-size pickups and traditional truck-based SUVs — have dropped dramatically since fuel prices began their record climb in the spring, many owners of these vehicles owe much more on them than they’re now worth.

“Many”? Or nearly all?

That alone can make it financially infeasible to trade. That’s because even if you could fold several thousand dollars of negative equity into the loan for a new, smaller car, the resulting monthly payment for the new vehicle, coupled with such expenses as the higher insurance premium, could end up costing you more than the extra you would pay at the pump if you just kept your current vehicle.

Look, there are number of reasons that small cars are perceived as “more dangerous” than larger vehicles. One big reason is the millions of dollars the big three have spent inculcating this into the American psyche. You’re only safe with three tons of Detriot steel around you has been the message for thirty years. When congress was considering the federal CAFE bill that was passed earlier this year was the big three spent a ton of money, a ton, in commercials on radio and on television explicitly telling people that big cars were safer.

It’s bunk. You know it and I know it. You can be crushed to death in a minivan or roll an SUV just as easily as you can be hurt in a small car. What’s more, as we downsize our vehicles and fewer and fewer of these internal combustion tugboats are trawling the roads, those of us in smaller vehicles will be safer because they’ll be fewer of them to see around and to run over other people.

Don’t believe the hype. Bigger isn’t better. If you need a large vehicle for work or something else, that’s one but to buy one from pathetically induced paranoia is just sad.

Some more stout advice from your local television station

(sarcasm) I just love this stuff. (/sarcasm)

A Good Time to Purchase a Vehicle?
Reporter: Sam Provenzano
Email Address: sam.provenzano@wbko.com

A Good Time to Purchase a Vehicle?

S-A-L-E

It’s 4 letter’s catching the eye of anyone shopping for a car, and local dealers have plenty of them.

“We got 0% financing going on with a lot of stuff right now,” said Nick Narramore, salesman at Leachman Buick.

“We got manufacture rebates,” said Powell, sales consultant at Leachman Buick.

And most people have one thing in mind these days when looking for a new car…

“Something that gets very good gas mileage!” exclaims one car shopper.

“I’m just looking for small and good gas mileage,” adds another.

But for Lindsey Hendricks and her husband, they’re looking for an SUV and this could be a great time to buy one.

“It’s a good time because gas prices are so bad, so companies know SUV’s aren’t gonna sell as well so the prices are down,” says Hendricks.

And she’s right.

“It’s the best time to buy it,” adds Powell.

“Some of the large SUV’s we have over $10,000 off some SUV’s,” says Pirtle.

But what about the role of the hyped up Hybrid?

“As far as difference you would pay for a Hybrid and what you would pay for a non-hybrid is a pretty huge expense,” states Pirtle.

“You’re really not gonna make your money back with a Hybrid because you won’t use enough gas to make up that money because it’s so expensive,” said Hendricks.

But before you go out and buy yourself a vehicle– there’s something you should remember.

“Look at your finances. Make sure you’re doing a budget, make sure you’ve called the insurance company to see how much that insurance is gonna cost me then look into how much you’ll need to pay for gas and so forth, said Mark Gilliam, financial consultant.

Gilliam also says when you purchase a car or any expensive item, it is key to pay attention to your own personal economy and not the national economy.

The only thing that makes sense here are the last two paragraphs the rest is drivel and incomplete drivel at that. At $10K off most new SUVs are still worth less than what you paid as soon as you drive them off the lot. Don’t get buyer’s remorse, no one wants to take that boat back in trade. And enjoy your operating costs as they will only increase.

I’ve been over this a hundred times or more so I won’t waste your time now other than to say, yes, your hybrid or fuel efficient car may not “pay back” in gas savings in the next 90 days. One thing I am sure of though is that SUV will never “pay back” anything.

Hybrid repair costs higher?

I suspect there are other things going on here that this article doesn’t address for instance, how were the costs of repair figured? What cars were compared to the hybrids when coming up with the figures they quote? I’d be very interested to see some of the details here.

Hybrid cars more expensive to fix

Parts and labour costs are higher for hybrid vehicle repairs than for repairs to gas-only vehicles, according to Mitchell International, Inc.’s latest Industry Trends Report.

The 2008 Q3 edition of the Mitchell report features a report by Jamison Day entitled ‘The Average Severity of Hybrid versus Gas Vehicles.’

The study shows average part costs for hybrid cars is more expensive across the board than for gas-only cars in the same seven categories (including sheet metal, engine, drive train, installation panel, electrical, specialty and ‘other.’)

Engine parts for hybrid cars cost $59 on average ($43 for gas-only cars) and the drive trains for hybrid cars cost an average of $454, versus only $334 for gas-only vehicles.

Labour costs to fix hybrid cars are also higher than those to fix gas-only cars. In particular, average hourly labour rates were at least $10 per hour higher to fix a hybrid’s glass, structural or mechanical parts than to fix the same types of parts in gas-only cars.

The report surmises the higher labour costs may be due in part to the additional training repairers require to work with hybrid vehicles. They may also be a result of repairers needing more time to familiarize themselves with fixing hybrid vehicles.

Day, senior director of information services, found hybrid severities were consistently higher across different states.

“The ever-increasing gasoline prices have affected virtually every aspect of our economy, including increasing the demand for hybrid vehicles,” Day said in a release. “Given their increasing popularity, we thought it would be interesting to see how the hybrid’s average estimate amounts compared and explore what might be driving the differences.”