People who drive hybrids - any regrets?

[hans007]

I've never owned a hybrid. But I've driven 3 ever. A Camry , an rx450h and a BMW 5 series hybrid.

I'd say if I owned them I'd regret the Toyota ones. Toyotas are already not too fun to drive but the hybrid drive kills it even more

 

[T2urtle]

Remind me why you need AWD again. Honestly, I don't recall why... Short of driving in severe blizzards or the dunes... I don't know if you need AWD.

One of the most common arguments here, the need/want of awd.

Before owning my g35x awd, I thought it would be amazing to have. But being in Chicago I can get by in snow storms in most cases but the fact that I can make in and out of parking spots with ease is great. Many fwd/rwd can't get into spots.

Yes I can get by with fwd with or without snows but awd puts a smile on ur face while doing it. It also gives u a false sense of security (good or bad). Makes a little sense around the Midwest. It makes no sense to me for people in Cali/tx/Florida to get awd cars. But I see plenty of quatrros and awd subies out there too.

I guess the awd+ hybrid is a empty segment, mainly because one kills the other. Awd takes away normally 1-3 mpg when I see those epa estimates. So a awd hybrid is a oxymoron.

I would still get it if I wanted it. However there was an article that stated how many people who bought a hybrid most likely will not buy another one anytime soon

 

[hans007]

One of the most common arguments here, the need/want of awd.

Before owning my g35x awd, I thought it would be amazing to have. But being in Chicago I can get by in snow storms in most cases but the fact that I can make in and out of parking spots with ease is great. Many fwd/rwd can't get into spots.

Yes I can get by with fwd with or without snows but awd puts a smile on ur face while doing it. It also gives u a false sense of security (good or bad). Makes a little sense around the Midwest. It makes no sense to me for people in Cali/tx/Florida to get awd cars. But I see plenty of quatrros and awd subies out there too.

I guess the awd+ hybrid is a empty segment, mainly because one kills the other. Awd takes away normally 1-3 mpg when I see those epa estimates. So a awd hybrid is a oxymoron.

I would still get it if I wanted it. However there was an article that stated how many people who bought a hybrid most likely will not buy another one anytime soon

I had a quattro Audi for my last car and lived in California. It was a little better in rain. And it plowed less than the fwd version would in the dry.

That said it is still a total waste. After my Audi experience I know they only put awd in to differentiate premium vs cheaper trim since honestly if you want a car that is really fun to drive in California well you'd probably just not get an Audi.

It does make sense if you go to Tahoe a lot as it snows and such. But its definitely still not needed much more of a nice to have.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Remind me why you need AWD again. Honestly, I don't recall why... Short of driving in severe blizzards or the dunes... I don't know if you need AWD.

Tons of skiing. AWD cars can just bypass chain control. Plus general traveling. There have been plenty of roads that I couldn't go on in national parks and forests due to having 2 wheel drive and little ground clearance. Getting stuck in the middle of nowhere is not where I want to be.

 

[NutBucket]

I agree that buying a hybrid purely for mpg reasons rarely makes sense due to increased costs and such. However, there are certain instances where the hybrid doesn't cost much. I was a bit torn between buying a Civic EX coupe and CR-Z. MSRP is within $1k of each other and the only feature the Civic had that the CR-Z didn't was a sunroof whereas the CR-Z had HIDs that the Civic didn't. I ended up buying the CR-Z since I drive about 15k a year and figured the hybrid would be beneficial. I'm averaging 40mpg in the thing. I highly doubt I'd be close to that figure in a Civic....probably closer to 30. So in my case the cost was basically a wash and I came out ahead.

And yes, I went with the 6MT.

 

[C101]

AWD cars can just bypass chain control.

With snow rated tires. In addition to snow rated tires, you will still need to have chains in the vehicle for at least one axle when chain control is in effect.

 

[TridenT]

One of the most common arguments here, the need/want of awd.

Before owning my g35x awd, I thought it would be amazing to have. But being in Chicago I can get by in snow storms in most cases but the fact that I can make in and out of parking spots with ease is great. Many fwd/rwd can't get into spots.

Yes I can get by with fwd with or without snows but awd puts a smile on ur face while doing it. It also gives u a false sense of security (good or bad). Makes a little sense around the Midwest. It makes no sense to me for people in Cali/tx/Florida to get awd cars. But I see plenty of quatrros and awd subies out there too.

I guess the awd+ hybrid is a empty segment, mainly because one kills the other. Awd takes away normally 1-3 mpg when I see those epa estimates. So a awd hybrid is a oxymoron.

I would still get it if I wanted it. However there was an article that stated how many people who bought a hybrid most likely will not buy another one anytime soon

False sense of security is a real problem. Makes drivers hubris about what their car can do when it's really about what they can do.

Tons of skiing. AWD cars can just bypass chain control. Plus general traveling. There have been plenty of roads that I couldn't go on in national parks and forests due to having 2 wheel drive and little ground clearance. Getting stuck in the middle of nowhere is not where I want to be.

So, you're going off-road a lot then? If you're on any reasonable road, you should very likely be fine with 2wd and a set of chains/snow-tires. I'd be very surprised if a skilled 2wd driver failed on routinely traveled paved road where an AWD skilled driver succeeded. (Assuming they both used chains and/or had snow tires) Seriously, you have to be in some serious shit for AWD to really be worthwhile... Not just some "Oh, it's snowing a few inches. The world is ending." But, if you're really going through deep shit on a regular interval then AWD+proper tires and gear sounds up your alley...

With snow rated tires. In addition to snow rated tires, you will still need to have chains in the vehicle for at least one axle when chain control is in effect.

Yeah. I'm thinking the OP doesn't care about that small detail.

 

[NutBucket]

With snow rated tires. In addition to snow rated tires, you will still need to have chains in the vehicle for at least one axle when chain control is in effect.

Uh, no. CA doesn't differentiate between snow tires and all-season. Yes you need to carry chains but under R1 and R2 conditions you aren't required to install them. If R3 hits the road is closed anyway.

Our last trip to Tahoe we saw plenty of RWD/FWD cars with chains struggling to go up some of the "steep" side roads. Our AWD with all-seasons had no issues at all. But then again, maybe there was some driver error involved too...hard to say.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

False sense of security is a real problem. Makes drivers hubris about what their car can do when it's really about what they can do.



So, you're going off-road a lot then? If you're on any reasonable road, you should very likely be fine with 2wd and a set of chains/snow-tires. I'd be very surprised if a skilled 2wd driver failed on routinely traveled paved road where an AWD skilled driver succeeded. (Assuming they both used chains and/or had snow tires) Seriously, you have to be in some serious shit for AWD to really be worthwhile... Not just some "Oh, it's snowing a few inches. The world is ending." But, if you're really going through deep shit on a regular interval then AWD+proper tires and gear sounds up your alley...



Yeah. I'm thinking the OP doesn't care about that small detail.

Don't want the trouble of putting on chains and then taking them off. Just want to drive and go. I've got over a decade of real snow driving experience and I know what's what. Even a bit of off road experience as well getting stuck in mud, snow, sand, being high centered, etc.

AWD is simply more convenient for anything that may come up (except replacing tires). And if the gas mileage is just a couple MPGs off from something like a Honda Fit, then hell yeah.

We're not debating whether or not I need AWD. I've already decided that that's what I'm getting. This thread is about the new hybrid.

 

[Capt Caveman]

False sense of security is a real problem. Makes drivers hubris about what their car can do when it's really about what they can do.



So, you're going off-road a lot then? If you're on any reasonable road, you should very likely be fine with 2wd and a set of chains/snow-tires. I'd be very surprised if a skilled 2wd driver failed on routinely traveled paved road where an AWD skilled driver succeeded. (Assuming they both used chains and/or had snow tires) Seriously, you have to be in some serious shit for AWD to really be worthwhile... Not just some "Oh, it's snowing a few inches. The world is ending." But, if you're really going through deep shit on a regular interval then AWD+proper tires and gear sounds up your alley...



Yeah. I'm thinking the OP doesn't care about that small detail.

Shut-up!

This winter we had a 30" of snow storm in Boston. Main roads were plowed but many side roads still had 12+ inches b/c they were only plowed a couple of times during the beginning of the snow storm. My gf's bf needed to get to the airport but taxi's couldn't get to their house. I was able to drive right down the street where people in their civic's/etc were stuck. AWD and 9+ inches of clearance make life a whole lot easier.

In FBB's situation, based on when a storm hits to how crapping an off-road maybe, one doesn't have to worry about puting on chains or having proper tires on at the time. AWD drive is useful in more than just serious shit conditions. Foot of snow in the driveway? I'll just pull right out and worry about shoveling it later. Good luck with your civic.

 

[NutBucket]

Your gf has a bf? To each his own I guess 😛

Oh, and to actually answer your question FBB, I would stick with the non-hybrid. Unless you do lots of city driving there's very little benefit to be had.

 

[ElFenix]

i'm just going to guess that subaru is using a lot of toyota parts in the hybrid system

 

[NutBucket]

Maybe electronics but the drivetrain hardware would have to be pretty different as the transmission is completely different than anything Toyota has in their parts bin.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

I'm actually pretty curious to know why people are so against avoiding the first model of anything new. I understand the reasoning completely, but is the risk really that big?

Subaru is a very conservative car maker.

The Crosstrek is its best-selling car but all it really is is a lifted Impreza.

The new hybrid keeps the same gas engine. All it seems to have added is an electric motor, battery, and regenerative braking. Even if the entire hybrid system fails I would think that it would just revert back to driving like the normal gasoline configuration?

But I guess little things could go wrong, and little things are plenty capable of causing a lot of headache, huh?

 

[smackababy]

Suburu is also already having problems with their BRZ right?

I'd stick with a tried and true ICE before a first gen hybrid. I don't think if the hybrid system fails it reverts to normal operation, but I am ignorant on how they are implementing the electric motor.

 

[xBiffx]

But then again, maybe there was some driver error involved too...hard to say.

In CA that is always a safe bet. 😛

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Suburu is also already having problems with their BRZ right?

I'd stick with a tried and true ICE before a first gen hybrid. I don't think if the hybrid system fails it reverts to normal operation, but I am ignorant on how they are implementing the electric motor.

Bah, what kind of problems do they have with the BRZ?

I'm pretty ignorant of the config as well. I'm saying this based *entirely* on the fact that they have the complete specs for the normal ICE Crosstrek in their hybrid version. Same 148HP engine, so theoretically the thing should be able to chug around just like normal even without the hybrid system. I don't know if they have it configured in such a way that completely borking the hybrid system won't bork the ICE half of the vehicle and prevent it from driving, braking effectively, et.

 

[C101]

Uh, no. CA doesn't differentiate between snow tires and all-season. Yes you need to carry chains but under R1 and R2 conditions you aren't required to install them. If R3 hits the road is closed anyway.

Our last trip to Tahoe we saw plenty of RWD/FWD cars with chains struggling to go up some of the "steep" side roads. Our AWD with all-seasons had no issues at all. But then again, maybe there was some driver error involved too...hard to say.

I do see that I was partially mistaken, thank you for correcting me. R1 does not require any special preparations if you do have an AWD vehicle, but R2 does require chains or snow tires. Nonetheless, AWD just means you can get going when the road is slippery, it does nothing special for you if you need to stop in a hurry.

 

[smackababy]

Bah, what kind of problems do they have with the BRZ?

They are having a bit of issues, there is a thread about it. I haven't followed much of it, but I know there are problems that will most likely be worked out in the future.

I'm pretty ignorant of the config as well. I'm saying this based *entirely* on the fact that they have the complete specs for the normal ICE Crosstrek in their hybrid version. Same 148HP engine, so theoretically the thing should be able to chug around just like normal even without the hybrid system. I don't know if they have it configured in such a way that completely borking the hybrid system won't bork the ICE half of the vehicle and prevent it from driving, braking effectively, et.

From my understanding, hybrids use an electric motor for movement and the gasoline engine to recharge the battery pack powering the electric motor. So, it might have the same engine as the ICE Crosstrek(although that would probable be rather inefficient), but the application is probably very different for the drivetrain.

The problem I have with hybrids is they aren't tuned like say a Tesla. They are particularly boring and based entirely on efficiency rather than fun. I am not even someone who is a "driver" per say, but the sluggishness is something that is off putting.

The AWD argument always amuses me. I love seeing people out behind their cars in the morning shoveling the snow because they can't get enough traction to make it over that small hump behind them to back out. I'd not have that problem the few times I've parked outside in the winter in my A5.

 

[NutBucket]

I do see that I was partially mistaken, thank you for correcting me. R1 does not require any special preparations if you do have an AWD vehicle, but R2 does require chains or snow tires. Nonetheless, AWD just means you can get going when the road is slippery, it does nothing special for you if you need to stop in a hurry.

No, you're still missing the point. From the CHP website:

R1: Chains required - snow tread tires (MSS on side of tire) allowed.

R2: Chains required on all vehicles except four-wheel drives with snow tires.

R3: Chains required - all vehicles no exceptions.

Per R1, a snow tire is defined as having MSS markings. All-season tires are marked MSS. Therefore in R2 conditions an AWD vehicle with all-seasons doesn't require chains.

 

[xBiffx]

No, you're still missing the point. From the CHP website:

R1: Chains required - snow tread tires (MSS on side of tire) allowed.

R2: Chains required on all vehicles except four-wheel drives with snow tires.

R3: Chains required - all vehicles no exceptions.

Per R1, a snow tire is defined as having MSS markings. All-season tires are marked MSS. Therefore in R2 conditions an AWD vehicle with all-seasons doesn't require chains.

I concur as well. Lived in Reno for the first 24 years of my life. I can remember trying to make it over Donner Pass in snow storms. Never had to chain up with all season tires. I never saw R3 conditions either. At that point they just closed the road.

The biggest issue wasn't the road/snow either. It was the multitude of idiot drivers, most of which thought four-wheel-drive meant no need to slow down.

 

[Topweasel]

False sense of security is a real problem. Makes drivers hubris about what their car can do when it's really about what they can do.



So, you're going off-road a lot then? If you're on any reasonable road, you should very likely be fine with 2wd and a set of chains/snow-tires. I'd be very surprised if a skilled 2wd driver failed on routinely traveled paved road where an AWD skilled driver succeeded. (Assuming they both used chains and/or had snow tires) Seriously, you have to be in some serious shit for AWD to really be worthwhile... Not just some "Oh, it's snowing a few inches. The world is ending." But, if you're really going through deep shit on a regular interval then AWD+proper tires and gear sounds up your alley...



Yeah. I'm thinking the OP doesn't care about that small detail.

People do know that their are states that get heavy snow but don't allow chains because they tear up the roads right? About the most you can get away with in those states is plastic/rubber studded tires.

 

[smackababy]

The biggest issue wasn't the road/snow either. It was the multitude of idiot drivers, most of which thought four-wheel-drive meant no need to slow down.

I see this every winter. "Oh, I have a Range Rover, I can do 10MPH over the limit with snow on the road just fine!" Funny thing is, these morons drive like that in snow, but if it is just raining during the summer: 15MPH below speed limit...

 

[C101]

No, you're still missing the point. From the CHP website:

R1: Chains required - snow tread tires (MSS on side of tire) allowed.

R2: Chains required on all vehicles except four-wheel drives with snow tires.

R3: Chains required - all vehicles no exceptions.

Per R1, a snow tire is defined as having MSS markings. All-season tires are marked MSS. Therefore in R2 conditions an AWD vehicle with all-seasons doesn't require chains.

In my original point, I said one needed snow rated tires. If all-season tires are snow rated, there is no problem. I myself do not use all-season tires on my vehicle, so I do not know the semantics. All I am trying to make clear is that AWD does not make one invincible, and that one should drive appropriate to their vehicle and surroundings.

 

[ElFenix]

From my understanding, hybrids use an electric motor for movement and the gasoline engine to recharge the battery pack powering the electric motor.

no, they don't. all hybrids so far have used both for motion. the volt was disappointing in part because GM had promised that the car would work the way you described, but then delivered a car that still used the engine for motion at times. in fact, honda's hybrids are capable of using the engine for motion even if the battery pack is removed (or, at least, they were).

The problem I have with hybrids is they aren't tuned like say a Tesla. They are particularly boring and based entirely on efficiency rather than fun.

that's because the vast majority of hybrid drivers want increased fuel efficiency rather than increase fun. honda tried the increased fun route with the accord hybrid and it flopped.

tesla is selling to a completely different market from that, and arguably needs to break the image that electric power means no-fun.