A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Honda
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The Art of Haggling and Other Questions About the Civic Hybrid



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 11th 05, 04:53 AM
Sskb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

TeGGer=AE wrote:
> If cost is not the issue but environmental correctness is, then you

have no
> choice but to bite the bullet and pay for the privilege of being

pious.
>
> Even at the prices these cars sell for, both Toyota and Honda lose

money
> overall on every hybrid they sell.
>
> --
> TeGGeR=AE
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/


I wonder if Honda is losing money on the Accord hybrid. In any case,
not all hybrids sell at a loss. I think Ford makes money on the Escape.

Ads
  #12  
Old February 11th 05, 05:03 AM
Sskb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

SoCalMike wrote:
> John Ings wrote:
> > Others have given good advice in this thread. Here are some

warnings
> > about sly tricks.
> >
> > If your wife is with you and the salesman leaves you alone in a

little
> > office while he "checks with the sales manager", watch what you

say.
> > Dealers have been known to bug such places so they can get hints

about
> > how ready you really are to buy and what your price is.

>
> dont buy based on monthly payments
>
> dont fall for the "up to" scam...
>
> salesman: how much can you afford a month?
>
> you: bout $300
>
> saleman: up to?
>
> you: well, maybe $350.
>
> theyll figure out a way to work the deal, but itll be in their favor.


That is a great tip. 48 month loan stretched out to a 60 month loan.
I've even heard 72 month loans but this was on a certain brand of
'luxury automobile'. Financial insanity.

  #13  
Old February 11th 05, 03:07 PM
Dan Beaton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



There is an excellent book on negotiating, called "You can negotiate
anything" by Herb Cohen. (http://www.herbcohenonline.com/) I see from
his web site he has a new book out. Time and information are two of
the major keys. Time being the amount of time you are willing and able
to put into it. If you want the car by this weekend, you will pay more.
If you are willing to visit many dealerships and ask many questions,
you will get a better price. Obviously your time is worth something,
so there is a trade-off to be made. Information includes what other
dealers are selling the car for, what their inventory level is, etc., etc.

Good questions about the batteries. I don't know the answer, but I
would be very surprised if Honda doesn't have a plan. Whether that
plan is carried out is another matter.

Good luck.
Dan


(This account is not used for email.)

"matt" ) writes:
> Hello All!
> My wife and I are very close to purchasing an '05 or '03 Civic Hybrid.
> Although this is not the first car my wife has purchased, it will
> essentially be the first I have purchased. I was wondering if anyone
> can offer any tips on haggling with the Honda dealership. We feel this
> is an important but somewhat unsavory part of purchasing a car. (I
> know that some people view haggling as a sport - I hope they will sound
> off here!) There may be some general rules of thumb to follow, but I
> don't know them and would like any tips anyone could give. We'd like
> to get them to come down off the price a bit - I think the sticker on
> the '05 is around $20,000.
>
> I was also curious to see if anyone knew the answers to the questions
> that the salesman couldn't answer, specifically:
> - What happens to the batteries after they are replaced? The
> ecofriendly nature of this car is a big selling point for us. But the
> fate of dead batteries is unknown to us right now. Would hate to think
> they'd end up in a landfill or something.
> - Has anyone any expereince with problems in extreme weather
> conditions? (tough starts in extreme cold, for example)
> - Can some one explain, in as plain a language as possible, under what
> circumstances the auto stop feature occurs in the engine? My wife and
> I read a little about it in the manual on the test drive, but we're a
> bit confused still. Do all of the conditions listed in the manual have
> to be present before the engine shuts down? Or just one or two?
>
> Any feedback at all on this car is appreciated. Just for reference,
> both of the cars we're looking at have the CVT transmission.
>
> Have great day,
> Matt
>


  #14  
Old February 11th 05, 05:05 PM
Elle Navorski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"TeGGer®" > wrote
snip
> At the end of the day, it's still debatable whether or not Toyota will
> actually end up making more than they spent on hybrid technology. And
> Toyota ain't sayin', except to state that if "development costs" are NOT
> counted, then they're "breaking even". That's straight from a Toyota

press
> release of a couple of years ago.
>
> If there's one thing definite about "green" technology, it's that the

word
> "cheap" does not describe it.


Are you talking strictly about the latest green technology, namely,
hybrids?

Or do you mean going back across all time? If so, then is it your
understanding that the substantial car emissions improvements since about
the 1960s has been 'expensive'?

It seems to me, based on buying cars for a couple of decades now, that it
has not been expensive.

I'm focused on small cars, because of course those tend to be the greenest.

Now maybe that's because car manufacturers were forced to mass produce
certain technologies, and the mass production aspect made prices not
skyrocket.

I've run the numbers in the recent past, and I agree hybrids currently are
not worth the money for the consumer. Gas prices would have to go up a lot
more. I haven't looked at whether the manufacturer is losing, too, but will
take your and others' word (here at the newsgroup) for it now.

I welcome citations on the cost of reducing automobile fuel emissions since
the 1960s.


  #15  
Old February 11th 05, 05:37 PM
Elle Navorski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"TeGGer®" > wrote
> Toyota has aggressively marketed their technology to other manufacturers,
> and that is with the aim of recovering their costs for what is definitely

a
> superior system.
>
> At the end of the day, it's still debatable whether or not Toyota will
> actually end up making more than they spent on hybrid technology. And
> Toyota ain't sayin', except to state that if "development costs" are NOT
> counted, then they're "breaking even". That's straight from a Toyota

press
> release of a couple of years ago.


But from Jan. 11, 2005:
-----
The Prius and Honda Motor's (nyse: HMC - news - people ) Civic Hybrid are
the two most financially successful hybrids on the market. They probably
don't make large per-car profits, but they aren't among their companies'
loss-leaders. Honda's odd-looking Insight hybrid, which has the highest
inventory on the market, is among Honda's loss-leaders, which would seem to
make the case for more conventionally-styled hybrids.
....
A major financial advantage for the [Toyota Lexus 2006] RX 400h is the fact
that Toyota's hybrid powertrain program began to break even midway through
2004 (a powertrain is a car's power-producing and transmitting components,
including engine and transmission). The tooling for the entire program has
not yet been amortized, but probably will be within a couple of years;
sales of cars such as the RX 400h will help offset such costs. More and
more Toyota hybrids, from this point on, will mean more and more
revenue--especially if Toyota continues to put its hybrids in existing
models, thus saving the cost of building new cars from scratch.
http://www.forbes.com/lifestyle/vehi...l_0111vow.html
-----
and
-----
The success of the Prius has taken Toyota by surprise. The average wait at
American dealerships is currently six months, even though the company
increased its sales target for North America from its initial estimate of
36,000 units to 47,000 for 2004. To meet demand, Toyota announced another
increase in August, saying it would push monthly global production up next
year by 50% to 15,000 cars, and double its allotment for America to 100,000
units. While that number is still only one-quarter of last year's sales for
America's most popular Toyota model, the Camry, it shows that consumers are
willing to pay a premium for clean, environmentally friendly cars-as long
as there is no need to compromise on performance.
http://www.economist.com/audio/displ...ory_id=3422941
-------

With this kind of demand, it's hard to believe Toyota is putting on some
kind of pretense when it comes to announcing its costs to produce the
Prius.



  #16  
Old February 11th 05, 06:07 PM
Elle Navorski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"TeGGer®" > wrote
snip
> "Green" technology IS expensive. Hybrids cost more than regular cars and
> still don't make the sort of profit regular cars do. "Green" technology

is
> most popular in wealthy contries that already have the best and cleanest
> living conditions, and the longest human lifespans.


I think I'll let the excerpts from the articles I posted speak for
themselves.

People can google for more info on whether going green pays for
manufacturers (and has been cheap or not for consumers) since the 1960s or
so.


  #17  
Old February 11th 05, 06:15 PM
Elle Navorski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"TeGGer®" > wrote
> "Elle Navorski" > wrote
> > I welcome citations on the cost of reducing automobile fuel emissions
> > since the 1960s.

>
> Are you saying that emissions laboratories, catalytic converters, engine
> controls and the costs of EPA certification are coming at no cost?


Are you saying that high performance improvements come at no cost?

Come on.

I'm questioning whether the cost of emissions improvements has been all
that expensive, particularly considering what we get back in return.

> Emmissions certification is a significant part of a car's development
> costs, which is why cars now generally come with only one or two engine
> choices, when in the old days they may have come with six or seven.
>
> The only reason you don't see the cost of emissions compliance is becuase
> manufacturing methods are much more productive than they used to be, and
> the costs of compliance are buried in the resulting cost reductions.
> Basically, were it not for emissions compliance, cars would be cheaper,

as
> you'd then see the entire cost reduction.


The issue I'm raising (and which I thought you meant) is whether what we've
had to pay for fuel emissions improvements has been cheap or expensive.

> Even if emissions regulations were rolled back to 1985 levels and OBD-II
> were not mandated, that would be a significant saving right there. By

1985,
> emmisions level had already been decreased about 95% from 1970.
>
> It's no coincidence that poorer areas of the world are not saddled with
> catalytic converters and unleaded gas, and sometimes even still have
> carburetors and Kettering ignition systems. It's CHEAPER.


What's Los Angeles smog like today compared to 1965, Tegger?

What about the miles per gallon cars average in poorer areas of the world?
Is that lower or higher? If lower, then you need to factor in the higher
cost of operation of the cars in poor countries.

I am interested in citations. I don't know what the truth is, but I'm not
simply going to believe a Usenetter opining on X, Y, and Z, which don't
necessarily pass the common sense test, without more to back up his claims.


  #18  
Old February 11th 05, 06:35 PM
John Ings
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 17:07:07 GMT, "Elle Navorski"
> wrote:

>People can google for more info on whether going green pays for
>manufacturers (and has been cheap or not for consumers) since the 1960s or
>so.


Well I'll tell you what grates on me! Suppose when I was still driving
my 1987 CRX in Ontario I took it in for a check by the pollution
police and it failed the test by 20%. Suppose further that right
behind me there was a year-old SUV that passed its test with 20% to
spare. Who's polluting the air more, me or him?

The answer is that he is! His damn SUV has a lower percentage but
twice the volume of pollutants because his engine is three times as
big. But I'm the one who has to spend all the money on getting my car
up to standard!

If manufacturers really wanted to go green they wouldn't be ducking
through that legal loophole that classifies those bloody great things
as trucks.

  #19  
Old February 11th 05, 06:50 PM
Elle Navorski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"John Ings" > wrote
> > wrote:
>
> >People can google for more info on whether going green pays for
> >manufacturers (and has been cheap or not for consumers) since the 1960s

or
> >so.

>
> Well I'll tell you what grates on me! Suppose when I was still driving
> my 1987 CRX in Ontario I took it in for a check by the pollution
> police and it failed the test by 20%. Suppose further that right
> behind me there was a year-old SUV that passed its test with 20% to
> spare. Who's polluting the air more, me or him?


I agree this is a failing of the emissions laws.

This past year as I try to look over all the "damn SUVs" and other consumer
trucks on the road, with typically empty rear compartments, I cuss our
society that has this pathological need for status symbols that are often
neither safe on the roads nor good for the environment.

I salute those who buy the Prius, Honda Hybrid, or any car that gets at
least 32 mpg city and highway both.

> The answer is that he is! His damn SUV has a lower percentage but
> twice the volume of pollutants because his engine is three times as
> big. But I'm the one who has to spend all the money on getting my car
> up to standard!
>
> If manufacturers really wanted to go green they wouldn't be ducking
> through that legal loophole that classifies those bloody great things
> as trucks.


Or governments would legislate gasoline automobile engine displacement,
conditioning it upon the consumer's transportation, not ego, needs.


  #20  
Old February 11th 05, 07:35 PM
SoCalMike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

TeGGer® wrote:
> "Green" technology IS expensive. Hybrids cost more than regular cars and
> still don't make the sort of profit regular cars do. "Green" technology is
> most popular in wealthy contries that already have the best and cleanest
> living conditions, and the longest human lifespans.
>


think "halo effect".

im sure theyve gotten some purchases from people who have never tried a
toyota (or an import), and there may be some spillover to the echo and
scion lines from people who are impressed but want a gas-powered car. as
well as people who keep toyota in mind for other purchases, like if they
need a truck or large SUV.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.