2012 Toyota Prius Plug-In: By The Numbers, Would It Work For You?

7 miles to work and 7 back. perfect car for me. savings? i'm just looking to promote electric driving and renewable energy sources. plus the cool factor!

 

Looking at the big picture, it's not much difference between other purchase decisions consumers have been making for decades... alway finding a way to justify the more expensive 6-cylinder model, even though it clearly uses more gas.

How much is that CO2 reduction worth? For those of us who get electricity from a cleaner source than coal, how much is that SMOG reduction worth? And of course, how much is your contribution to promoting plug-in hybrids worth?

Looks to me that the plug-in option falls within the pricing of a normal upgrade package, like the bigger engine... or leather & nav... or touring options...
.

 

Also, let's not forget how sweet the EV drive experience is.

I certainly enjoyed the 316 miles I drove with a PHV, like on this beautiful summer morning: video
.

 

+1 ^ !!!!!!!

 

Totally agree with the conclusions of this review.

quote: the Prius Plug-In probably won't pay off economically, ...
If you plan to charge it only occasionally, or drive longer distances, ...; consider a longer-range EV like the Nissan Leaf, a plug-in with a longer electric range like the Chevrolet Volt, or a hybrid like the Prius or the Ford Fusion Hybrid.

 

that goes without saying.

 

It would not do me much good, I never travel less than 50 miles if I get in my car.
However it would make my wife's commute all electric all the time unless she was driving to the airport. (122 miles each way, well beyond Leaf range)

 

Perfect car for me. 2 miles to work, 5.5 around town. Might consider it for my new car when I start shopping sometime late this year or early next.

It's a contest with this or a CT or even another Prius.

Hmmm and the Prius c is coming out about that time. too.

 

Lets see, I live 5 miles from work, all city driving. Depending on what the stickers is, yep, that should work out just fine.

 

The conclusions lack of payback aren't that different than what Energy/Environment - Automotive Engineering International Online found (posted in another thread).

As for the Volt, well, given Edmunds' numbers so far at 2011 Chevrolet Volt: "Fuel" Economy Update 2, the more battery he uses, the more he pays. If in CS mode, its mileage is far inferior to the Prius besides the Volt costing way more.

But back to john1701a's points, besides the possibility of being powered by cleaner and possibly renewable energy sources, even if the energy comes from coal, it's domestically produced. The US has plenty of coal vs. sending money for energy to other countries.

 

I'm not really worried about the "payback" because there's no car built anywhere that makes it viable over the car I drive now because my car has been paid for the last 5 years. And this would be true if I was still driving my truck which got only 18 mpg.

 

And yet, cars.com found it cheaper to drive than the vastly more expensive Volt.
http://priuschat.com/forums/prius-h...plug-ins-cost-drive-cars-com.html#post1291976

 

I was kind of surprised about the 22 mpg after the EV range was expended, I had heard here it was going to be higher than the Volt's mpg in CS mode (37mpg).

 

Hello...I'm new to the forums. I have placed a deposit for this car already.

I commute 100 miles a day. The reason I will purchase the PHV is because it qualifies for a car pool sticker here in CA. That alone makes it worth purchasing. I travel through the dreaded 405 on a daily basis and using the car pool will make life just that much better.

 

I really can not find where he got 22 mpg in the article. I have only heard that the Prius PHEV gets better mpg in CS mode then the regular hybrid, not worse.

 

:welcome: that's as good a reason as any!

 

They were well above the 62 mph limit, thus using the ICE in addition to battery during the "ev" miles?

 

I am continually surprised by "pay back" and "break even" arguments. Because we live in a universe that operates on positive entropy, everything has a cost. No one pays you to drive a vehicle. Transportation is never "free" in any mode.

While doing research for global reinsurers, we found that large industrial agricultural growers had large amounts of inputs and proportionally small "profits". We also looked at Amish agricultural operations - smaller amount of inputs with proportionally large "profits". We revisited all growers. We noted the Amish growers showed almost no costs for labor. When questioned as to how they could do this, the response is: "Because we consider labor a benefit, not a cost." This was humbling and gave us a fresh perspective.

Surface streets, highways and interstates are heavily subsidized. In addition we make use of taxes for construction and maintenance. No one pays us to drive. Yet we somehow expect to reach zero cost (or even earn a profit) while being propelled on ancient sunlight (oil).

Now comes the electric vehicle arguments. We have to look at net, not just short term costs. This immediately eliminates individual vehicles as being cost effective. Hence, can I cost effectively eliminate or minimize the use of gasoline, oil and batteries? But what is the electric energy source? Sun, hydro, geothermal, wind, regeneration, conservation - all have a cost and all result in some energy loss. I can make use of photovoltaic panels at home, plug in, and show a net gain over time. I can put electrons into the grid and show a net "gain" over time.

Conservation and efficiency are the most cost effective, then renewables. Single-use sources based on extraction rank last.