Featured DOE findings on TCO: ICE, HEV's, PHEV's, & BEV's

ILIWAPCT:

 

Yes absolutely.
The dealer gouging on the rav4 prime (girlfriend is in the market for an SUV, they are discounting the regular rav4, not the rav4 hybrid, and won't even sell a rav4 prime right now in austin, would have to go to an out of city dealer) makes them a bad deal in terms of tco.

Analysis would have that prius prime lower cost of ownership than any other members of that class including the non- plug-in prius liftback.

The rav4 prime definitely has a higher tco than the rav4 hybrid. Maybe when toyota gets battery production up or more competition in this class it will not be that way. Still people are paying it, and it is a different animal than the hybrid, with a lot more hp, and plenty of plug-in power and range.

UPDATE: Tesla Model 3 Vs Toyota Camry Hybrid: 5-Year Cost Of Ownership
Low depreciation on the tesla model 3 standard + makes it have a lower tco than a toyota camry hybrid. Sales price will be even lower when the new cheaper batteries are used. Still some of the assumptions seem bad here, and YMMV if a camry hybrid or model 3 has a lower tco.

 

i have yet to meet anyone who shops with tco in mind. maybe it's just me. everyone i know gets a car in mind and goes after it when they can. function, utility, looks, sometimes mpg's. maybe they are enamoured by a hybrid like i was, a bev, or a uge suv, who knows.

i just can't picture many people choosing between the above power trains because of all the work done by the doe. maybe there is a political reason for all this research.

 

It sound like it was looking at generic cars, not actual models, from quoted bits of the study.

I know cars can last to 15 years, but how many cars have a single owner for that time?

 

Even under $150. The whole report seems to fly in the face of prior reports saying that several BEV's are already at a lower cost over all.

 

Just to clarify a bit.... The dealer gouging changes the total cost of ownership, but does not, in and of itself, make it a "bad deal in terms of tco". There is nothing intrinsically bad about a price. After all, a car that's marked up can still be cheaper to own (overall) than it's competitors.

 

Most of the people that I know who were car shopping were very concerned about TCO, especially if they were considering hybrids or BEV. You may not call it TCO, but you are already considering the TCO when you start evaluating cars in terms of price and resale value. You are also considering the TCO when you worry about how much it costs to replace the traction battery or how much fuel is going to cost.

The TCO is strongly influenced by how long you keep the car. There is often a sweet spot after owning it for a few years where the depreciation is minimal and nothing's had a chance to break yet.

 

I am assuming in a car like the rav4 prime, the gouging will not take place even 2 years from now. That gives a implied much larger depreciation. Of course this is only an assumption.

It may be worth it to people and that is why dealers get away with it. It is a fairly unique car. The Escape phev and rav4 hybrid or regular rav4 are closest competitors - but these have a lot less hp, the escape doesn't have awd, the hybrid doesn't have electric miles. I expect the redesign outlander phev will also be competitive when it comes out. I would expect it to depreciate faster than these cars or the tesla model Y, but again that is just my feeling from past dealer gouging.

Compare Side-by-Side

 

Good time for us - on realizing this. Our current plug-in when I first found out what the value would be if we turned it in on trade in was $14,000. Yey - several months later it was $16,000. Now? $18,000. Prices unfortunately are massively tied to the ever downward spiraling dollar as evidenced by our car with its ever-increasing mileage & price. Based on that, I'm sure many besides us or unwilling to sell in order to upgrade to a better TCO.
.

 

We must share an adult beverage someday. <GRINS> ... NOT in Florida.

Bob Wilson

 

No help from Goggle, I finally came up with:

TCO = Total Cost of Ownership.

Now, on to DOE...

 

nice one mendel, i think you nailed it

 

Someday I'll catch up.

 

i screwed that quote up, sorry. ^^^

my purchases have never been about tco. i do limit purchase cost. the rest is what i need and want.

next one might be a bev, for environmental reasons and to promote the tech and because i love driving ev. but no one has made one that interests me yet.

 

I suspect that major elements of the TCO do factor in, but not in a formal way such as using a spreadsheet to track expected expenses. In many ways it expresses itself as common metrics such as MPG.

Other examples of subliminal TCO consideration is when you are offered a 10 year, 150,000 mile warranty on major parts like traction batteries. Or when you buy a car with a reputation for "lasting forever". Or when you select a make that traditionally has a high resale. Notice that many of these common factors come into play even if you buy a new car every few years.

It works in reverse too. Anecdotally, my wife's top of the line Camero Berlinetta needed a new transmission (out of warranty) before 50,000 miles. It needed another transmission at 80K. She sold the car and never considered buying another Chevy product.

 

sicu

 

Years ago prior to buying a car I did a TCO spreadsheet over a 10 year ownership assumption. Got fancy and included gas at various prices. None were accurate over the life of the vehicle.

Now I buy on comfort, probable reliability, features, dealer location, dealer service experience. And when she says she wants one of "those in that color".

 

As a general rule of thumb, operational costs are ~5x the capital expense.

Bob Wilson