TV with DVR & Internet: $84.90/mo
- Average user rating: 4.0 stars out of 97 reviews Back to product review
- My rating: 0 stars
Full user review
-
17 out of 26 people found this review helpful
3.5 stars
"Everything should eventually come in a Hybrid option..."
Pros: Another car option, a normal looking car
Cons: not all that great on MPG, too expensive for the fuel savings
Summary: Eventually, all cars should be available in a more efficient HYBRID version, but buyers need to stop expecting the same performance as a standard car. This CAMRY would perform much better on MPG if Toyota didn?t need to make it go 0-60 in 8 sec.
The major problem with cars like the new CAMRY is that they are too expensive for the fuel economy. If you were to do the math, the money you save in fuel cost would not counter the additional $2,500 sticker price for nearly 7 years. That?s a long time to break even on the supposed ?savings of hybrid technology?.
If car makers and the government want to encourage better sales of the HYBRID technology there needs to be a price incentive to do it. A hybrid car should cost less then the ?gas guzzling? counterpart. Consumers should feel the savings when they drive off the lot, not 7 years in the future.
I gratefully accept the car makers who are trying to roll out more HYBRID cars, but there is no point in offering a higher priced vehicle that saves a negligible amount of fuel. Before this technology will truly take off, consumers must feel a greater value through ownership.
- 11 replies to this review
-
Depending upon when a hybrid is purchased a buyer is eligible for a tax credit. For the Hybrid it started at I believe, $2600.00 and goes down based on sales. Once 60000 are sold its gone.
So the sooner you buy, the faster it pays for itself. -
vehicle very accommodating in every way except the trunk space.Here on P.E.I.OUR PROVINCIAL GOV`T HAS ISSUED AN INCENTIVE TO THE PURCHASER OF THE HYBRIDS IN THE AMOUNT OF 3000 DOLLARS,OR IF YOU HAVE A TRADE THE REBATE WOULD BE 10% OF THE BALANCE
-
Are we missing the point here? Yes if you are willing to drive a tiny car you will achieve the same fuel economy as the Camry Hybrid with less initial cost, but not if you are an urbanite who must commute to work in heavy traffic, there?s no way; what about the environmental impact of all those idling motors, ?take a sniff next time you are out in a traffic jam? sick?. To go hybrid you have to be willing to make the change and not just focus on your initial cost, if you can afford it, you will have less environmental impact while enjoying the comfort of a Camry. .
-
if you bought this car before Sept. 31st your plus $ return is April 2007 at the latest. see a $2600 federal tax CREDIT is real dollars, not a tax deduction from your taxible income. that's a net savings of $100 (unless you pay no tax which i doubt). add state, county and city bennefits and it gets even better.
-
This opinion is a diatribe against hybrids in general and not a review of the car. It does not appear that the reviewer even has driven the Camry Hybrid judging from their lack of mentioning any first-hand experience with the car. The comment on the hybrid targeting acceleration more than economy applies more to the Accord than to the Camry. The Camry 4cyl actually has less HP than its non-hybrid 4cyl stablemate (and WAY less than the V-6 most people buy) due to some intake changes to favor fuel economy. The battery boost brings the overall acceleration up to a point where mainstream buyers will be willing to drive it in traffic.
-
First, I just want to say that several of the reviews have been helpful. However, the one guy that indicated that the $30,000 dollars for the hybrid 2007 Camry was a good deal really needs to look at other cars in the class. (I'll come back to this.)
Second, I have to agree with this person. Unless gas prices pass $5.00 per gallon, most hybrid vehicles just don't allow you to recover the extra several thousands of dollars you are initially spending.
I recently decided to replace my Honda Prelude with a more fuel efficient car. The Prelude got only 19MPG most of the time, and it requires 92 or higher octane gas (failure to use premium gas in ANY car made for it will eventually destroy the piston rings).
So, I started looking at all sorts of Japanese cars... Then, I started doing the numbers: MPG vs. Initial Cost vs. Production Numbers, etc.
When I bought the Prelude in 1998, I didn't consider that it was a low production number vehicle. In other words, Honda only sold about 25,000 of them in the US for the 5 years it was produced. They then had serious transmission problems, and most dealers had no idea how to fix them properly. (I ended up waiting 2 months because they needed to ship a transmission from Japan to fix my car! ...and yes, that was WITH the involvement of the NJ Attorney General's Office.) So when I started to seriously consider a Hybrid, I decided to look at their production numbers.
The original Prius numbers were 55,000 per year, and they are now 100,000 per year. These are low numbers. ...and something to consider when purchasing a vehicle. If something goes wrong with a low production number vehicle, most dealers are not equipped to handle the problem. Car manufacturers are also notorious for cheap fixes that will not greatly affect their bottom line, which usually results in the customer not being completely satisfied.
In so far as gas mileage is concerned: Only two Hybrid vehicles actually get sufficient gas mileage to warrant purchasing them on that basis alone. First is the Honda Insight, and second is the Toyota Prius.
The Insight is simply not a car for any normal person with a family. It is a good distance highway commuter car.
The Prius is a great car, and several of my friends have them, from the lowest trim level to the highest "fully loaded" trim level versions. It's more family oriented, but not huge either. (Fully loaded it cost about $30,000 including sales tax, so it?s also pretty expensive.)
Estimated gas mileage numbers are a funny thing in the auto industry, and not supposed to be corrected until 2008 (I think).
If the Camry Hybrid is seeing mid 30's to high 30's in gas mileage, then it's really no better than many less expensive vehicles.
For instance, I replaced the Prelude with a FULLY loaded 2006 Honda Civic EX w/ Navigation for $22000.00 including a 100,000 mile / 10 year OEM warranty.
The Civic EX gets 34MPH ALL THE TIME, to my surprise, without regard for how I drive. (Stop-and-go traffic, cruising on the highway, etc.)
So, if we compare a $30,000.00 Camry Hybrid to a $22,000 Civic EX... We start with an $8000.00 difference in price. Then you consider that on the BEST day the MPG difference is going to be 5 MPG, or 60 miles per tank. This means that the difference between the two cars (based on a 12,000 mile driving year) is about 50 gallons of gas. That means, at $5.00 a gallon, there is a difference of $250.00 per year if you drive the Civic. If you keep the car for 6 years, it costs you $1500.00 more in gas to drive the Civic. As such, over all, it's about $6500 less expensive to get a Honda Civic EX with every option in the book than it is to purchase a Hybrid Camry.
This is not a Honda vs. Toyota thing; these numbers will work out the same for MANY other cars vs. the new Camry Hybrid.
The numbers for the gas savings here are actually pretty good, but there are not high enough to beat other Camry models or cars marketed by other manufacturers, especially Honda, in long term savings. If you start looking into the Hybrid SUV?s, you can reach no conclusion other than that they are a waste of money.
At current gas prices it REALLY doesn't pay to buy the new Camry for gas price savings.
One more thing:
The last thing to consider is performance. If gas mileage is not the only consideration, perhaps performance is. However, my test drive of the new Camry Hybrid yielded the EXACT results that the very first reviewer got When I compare that to the Toyota Prius, I?d MUCH rather have the Prius? and the Prius moves into the traffic QUITE well and certainly seems to be faster off the line. (I liken it to driving a car with a Turbo charger: You have to wait for Camry to ?spool up? before it gets going.) So maybe justification could be made if the Camry was a good performer, but the Prius cleans its clock. The same is going to be said for many ?conventional? cars getting similar gas mileage. -
I'll stick to my Nissan Minivan for now that gets 30 MPH highway. The cost is too much for it to be a real alternative to fuel economy. You really want to save money I pre-ordered
http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/10/the-wheel-turns-your-bike-into-a-moped/
200mpg!! -
Don't you get a Federal Tax credit for a Hybrid? So if you redo the math..... if I bought this car and with the price of gas at $3.00 my ROI it 4.3 years. Still a little too long to break even.
-
No real savings if the future battery replacements costs will negate any small fuels savings. How long do the batteries last before they need to be replaced? I have yet to see that in ANY article about Hybrids!
-
I agree w/ you Jason, it would be cool to see the hybrids sold cheaper than the regular versions, but really if they were the same cost that would at least make a level playing field and then I believe the hybrids would start outselling the gas powered cousins. You're right, the higher purchase costs for the hybrid technolgy doesnt save you $$ like they should.
As far as the performance 0-60 stuff, this is the same sort of deal w/ the V6 accord if u take a look at that model, they use the hybrid technolgy more as a power boost instead of what it really should be, ie: a super gas miser such as a mated 3 or 4 cylinder gas engine would create. Yes, you'd sacrice the power end 0-60mph stuff, but I'm sure you'll agree most people who are interested in hybrids aren't looking for mustang/corvette type power. We want to save BIG BUCKS at the pump w/ much improved longer ranges & 50+ mpgs (as well as being "greener" to the environment)
anyways, good stuff...late
Go Hydrogen !! -
Some States are providing a tax incentive with the purchase of a hybrid. If you do most of your commuting around town, the savings will come in two years, rather than seven. Lets tell OPEC, we really don't need them or their oil! That's enough incentive for me.
