4 ms·

> The error in this is in assuming the analogs have equivalent reliability The majority of my comment points out how the equivalent analoge on the pure ICE is

> The error in this is in assuming the analogs have equivalent reliability The majority of my comment points out how the equivalent analoge on the pure ICE is massively less reliable than the hybrid. Who is ignoring the reliability of the different components here again? Sure, there is a HV and a LV battery. They're both solid state devices and thus generally pretty reliable when it comes to cars. The LV battery faces far less wear. The overall system is considerably more reliable in the hybrid than the same in the ICE. It's near impossible to generally talk about the prices of something like the HV battery, it varies greatly based on what models you're talking about. One car might have a replacement used battery that's good for many years be $700, another might be extremely bespoke and rare and be $10k. If I were to judge prices of pure ICE transmissions based on extremely rare hyper cars I might say an ICE transmission replacement costs $20k or more. The details matter greatly when judging TCO on potentially low market cars.

bumby 1y ago
If your point is you can’t talk specifics about price of ownership, you’ve wasted both of our time during this entire discussion. That’s what it’s about. A better answer would have just been like the commenter below, who said the information is hard to come by. A hardliner stance where there’s a lot of uncertainty isn’t a great hill to die on.
- Retric 1y ago
  That’s not quite what they said, in 98% of hybrids sold these components are significantly more reliable than in ICE cars. He can’t speak to the last 2%, but I doubt your in the market for a hyper car and really this concerned about TCO.
  - bumby 1y ago
    The hyper car argument is really just a digression and it cuts both ways (which I think was the posters point). If you want to compare hyper car prices, you need to compare hyper gas-only to hyper hybrid. But that’s not really germane to the generalizations being used here. Where is your 98% claim coming from? The other poster made no such claim. The irony is there is published info on TCO from companies like Edmunds and Kelly Blue Book. We can take umbrage with some of the factors or weighting, but it’s a better starting point in real data than anything bright up so far. A claim could easily be crafted using such information that addresses everything I’ve raised (maintenance, depreciation, different designs, etc). Yet the discussion seems almost wholly based on vibes and near-ideological bias. It reads to me as conclusions searching for data instead of the other way around. The best I can tell from that information, TCO is largely a wash. For comparable manufacturers/designs, TCO over the first 5-10 years seems to be about the same. You can pick some designs that favor one side or the other, but in general they are roughly within 10% (usually considerably less) of one another. Given the uncertainty due to the variables in question, it seems reasonable to conclude there aren’t strong conclusions on TCO differences between them.
    - Retric 1y ago
      98% just meant not rare, as the person referenced “rare cars” vs everything else. I’ve already looked at that those real work TCO numbers for a bunch of cars, that’s part of why I’m saying they’re reliable and lower TCO. But there’s a big difference between saying that on average these things break down less across all hybrids and saying every single hybrid model is more reliable.
      - bumby 1y ago
        I agree there’s a difference. The OP I originally responded to made the claim “Hybrids have a lower TCO even though they have a higher initial purchase price.” That’s a general claim, and I was seeking information that can support it. I’ve largely received strong general conclusions based on weak general evidence. When pushed, people will seem to cherry pick specific cases, which to you point, isn’t good enough to support the original general claim. Perhaps we’re looking at different data (in which case I’d be interested in understanding why you like one set over the other), but in aggregate, I couldn’t find strong evidence that supports on side or the other.
        Retric 1y ago
        The majority of hybrids ~70% fall under these models: Toyota RAV4 Hybrid, Toyota Highlander Hybrid, Toyota Prius, Toyota Camry Hybrid, Honda CR-V Hybrid, Ford Escape Hybrid, Ford Fusion Hybrid, and Honda Accord Hybrid which have a lower TCO than their gas’s equivalents. I don’t think we need to consider low production edge cases, to make a statement about the general case.
        bumby 1y ago
        We may be seeing differences in locality, but the first one I checked (Escape) did not support your claim. The gas variant was cheaper than both the hybrid (8% lower) and the plug-in hybrid (24% lower) in TCO. I think this just speaks to my previous point about variance impacting our ability to make strong general claims.

bumby 1y ago

If your point is you can’t talk specifics about price of ownership, you’ve wasted both of our time during this entire discussion. That’s what it’s about. A better answer would have just been like the commenter below, who said the information is hard to come by. A hardliner stance where there’s a lot of uncertainty isn’t a great hill to die on.

Retric 1y ago
That’s not quite what they said, in 98% of hybrids sold these components are significantly more reliable than in ICE cars. He can’t speak to the last 2%, but I doubt your in the market for a hyper car and really this concerned about TCO.
- bumby 1y ago
  The hyper car argument is really just a digression and it cuts both ways (which I think was the posters point). If you want to compare hyper car prices, you need to compare hyper gas-only to hyper hybrid. But that’s not really germane to the generalizations being used here. Where is your 98% claim coming from? The other poster made no such claim. The irony is there is published info on TCO from companies like Edmunds and Kelly Blue Book. We can take umbrage with some of the factors or weighting, but it’s a better starting point in real data than anything bright up so far. A claim could easily be crafted using such information that addresses everything I’ve raised (maintenance, depreciation, different designs, etc). Yet the discussion seems almost wholly based on vibes and near-ideological bias. It reads to me as conclusions searching for data instead of the other way around. The best I can tell from that information, TCO is largely a wash. For comparable manufacturers/designs, TCO over the first 5-10 years seems to be about the same. You can pick some designs that favor one side or the other, but in general they are roughly within 10% (usually considerably less) of one another. Given the uncertainty due to the variables in question, it seems reasonable to conclude there aren’t strong conclusions on TCO differences between them.
  - Retric 1y ago
    98% just meant not rare, as the person referenced “rare cars” vs everything else. I’ve already looked at that those real work TCO numbers for a bunch of cars, that’s part of why I’m saying they’re reliable and lower TCO. But there’s a big difference between saying that on average these things break down less across all hybrids and saying every single hybrid model is more reliable.
    - bumby 1y ago
      I agree there’s a difference. The OP I originally responded to made the claim “Hybrids have a lower TCO even though they have a higher initial purchase price.” That’s a general claim, and I was seeking information that can support it. I’ve largely received strong general conclusions based on weak general evidence. When pushed, people will seem to cherry pick specific cases, which to you point, isn’t good enough to support the original general claim. Perhaps we’re looking at different data (in which case I’d be interested in understanding why you like one set over the other), but in aggregate, I couldn’t find strong evidence that supports on side or the other.
      - Retric 1y ago
        The majority of hybrids ~70% fall under these models: Toyota RAV4 Hybrid, Toyota Highlander Hybrid, Toyota Prius, Toyota Camry Hybrid, Honda CR-V Hybrid, Ford Escape Hybrid, Ford Fusion Hybrid, and Honda Accord Hybrid which have a lower TCO than their gas’s equivalents. I don’t think we need to consider low production edge cases, to make a statement about the general case.
        bumby 1y ago
        We may be seeing differences in locality, but the first one I checked (Escape) did not support your claim. The gas variant was cheaper than both the hybrid (8% lower) and the plug-in hybrid (24% lower) in TCO. I think this just speaks to my previous point about variance impacting our ability to make strong general claims.