Jump to content



Photo

Payback time for buying a Chevy Volt: 26.6 YEARS


  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

#1 Recliner Pilot

Recliner Pilot

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 48,134 posts

Posted 05 April 2012 - 08:07 PM

Better keep up with the maintenance if you want this fireball on wheels to last that long. :doh:

Keep in mind, these figures take into account the massive Govt subsidies to get this turd in the first place. :o


Savings come slowly for hybrid, electric car owners


Buyers of hybrid or electric-vehicles, such as Nissan's Leaf, hoping to save money have to wait years —or even decades in some cases— for the payoff.


If you're thinking about buying a fuel-efficient hybrid, electric or otherwise eco-friendly vehicle as a way to save money over time, do your homework — or be prepared to wait.

Buyers who choose Nissan's all-electric Leaf ($28,421) over its approximate gas-powered equivalent, Nissan's Versa ($18,640), will likely wait nearly 9 years until they break even, according to a new report by The New York Times that examines the cost of fuel efficiency.

For drivers of the Chevrolet Volt ($31,767), the wait is even longer— 26.6 years.


http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/2012/04/savings-come-slowly-for-hybrid.html

Obama really inherited a mess for his second term. 


#2 DankNuggs

DankNuggs

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 12,819 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 07:27 AM

About the same time it takes for it to merge on a highway on-ramp

Bruins > Habs


Spending cuts without any tax hike concessions are immoral

#3 Mike Honcho

Mike Honcho

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 4,299 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 07:50 AM

The Volt, which cost nearly $40,000 before a $7,500 federal tax credit, could take up to 27 years to pay off versus a Chevrolet Cruze, assuming it was regularly driven farther than its battery-only range allows. The payback time could drop to about eight years if gas cost $5 a gallon and the driver remained exclusively on battery power.
The Lundberg Survey, which tracks fuel prices, said in March that gas prices would need to reach $12.50 a gallon for the Volt to make sense purely on financial terms. It said the Leaf would be competitive with gas at $8.53 a gallon.


Still, in a recent survey by Consumer Reports, the most satisfied drivers owned Volts. The survey said 93 percent of Volt owners would definitely buy the car again — though there are only 12,000 of the cars on the road.

“There’s probably a percentage that is aware of the cost and benefit,” Mr. Schuh said. “It’s about helping the environment and it’s a good feeling to do it.”



From the original article

#4 NewbieJr

NewbieJr

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 45,611 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 07:52 AM

Why do you hate earth?
Mine is small, but the head spins.

#5 kutulu

kutulu

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 49,564 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 08:08 AM

What's the payback time on other types of cars? :unsure:

#6 JTB

JTB

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 3,529 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:02 AM


“It’s about helping the environment and it’s a good feeling to do it.”



From the original article



:thumbsup:

Although I think the idea behind the Volt is horseshit, only Mr. Pilot would be so blinded that he doesn't realize the "real" purpose behind the vehicle.

#7 shovelheadt

shovelheadt

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 24,093 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:09 AM

:thumbsup:

Although I think the idea behind the Volt is horseshit, only Mr. Pilot would be so blinded that he doesn't realize the "real" purpose behind the vehicle.


To his credit, payback matters more on a McDonalds salary.
JUNGLE FEVER BABY

#8 Bert

Bert

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,973 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:16 AM

:thumbsup:

Although I think the idea behind the Volt is horseshit, only Mr. Pilot would be so blinded that he doesn't realize the "real" purpose behind the vehicle.


What is the "real" purpose? If it is helping the enviroment they could do more for the enviroment by planting 100 trees.
You know we're sitting on four million pounds of fuel, one nuclear weapon and a thing that has 270,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder. Makes you feel good, doesn't it?

#9 shovelheadt

shovelheadt

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 24,093 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:18 AM

What is the "real" purpose? If it is helping the enviroment they could do more for the enviroment by planting 100 trees.


That's only a valid argument if you completely eliminate the need for cars.
JUNGLE FEVER BABY

#10 JTB

JTB

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 3,529 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:22 AM

What is the "real" purpose? If it is helping the enviroment they could do more for the enviroment by planting 100 trees.



“It’s about helping the environment and it’s a good feeling to do it.”


As stated, I disagree with the whole notion, but the red is what it's about. I know it's being billed as saving the earth and whatnot, but to the "I feel like I'm helping the environement" people, it feels good to own a Volt.

#11 Bert

Bert

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,973 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:24 AM

That's only a valid argument if you completely eliminate the need for cars.

These "environmentally" friendly cars are not significantly better than most cars of similar size.
You know we're sitting on four million pounds of fuel, one nuclear weapon and a thing that has 270,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder. Makes you feel good, doesn't it?

#12 Bert

Bert

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,973 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:26 AM

“It’s about helping the environment and it’s a good feeling to do it.”


As stated, I disagree with the whole notion, but the red is what it's about. I know it's being billed as saving the earth and whatnot, but to the "I feel like I'm helping the environement" people, it feels good to own a Volt.


Fair point. I guess I personally find the notion of thinking you're helping the enviroment when you really aren't to be stupid but to each his own.
You know we're sitting on four million pounds of fuel, one nuclear weapon and a thing that has 270,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder. Makes you feel good, doesn't it?

#13 JTB

JTB

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 3,529 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:14 AM

Fair point. I guess I personally find the notion of thinking your helping the enviroment when you really aren't to be stupid but to each his own.



Agree :cheers:

I DO NOT believe the type to own the Volt are doing so because of the fuel savings. That's where RP want's to hang his hat though. :rolleyes:

#14 penultimatestraw

penultimatestraw

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,042 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:18 AM

What's the payback time on other types of cars? :unsure:

Immediate, but mostly to the Middle East.

#15 penultimatestraw

penultimatestraw

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,042 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:21 AM

What is the "real" purpose? If it is helping the enviroment they could do more for the enviroment by planting 100 trees.

Are they swinging from the trees for transportation?

#16 NorthernVike

NorthernVike

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 26,791 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:30 AM

Immediate, but mostly to the Middle East.

Realy? How much oil does the United States of America import from the middle east? :rolleyes:

Being an ass hole is all part of my manly essence

 

 



You guys have no focking clue what happened so you really should just shut it..

 


#17 Bert

Bert

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,973 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:32 AM

Are they swinging from the trees for transportation?

Come on try to keep up. I don't believe the "real" purpose of the "environmentally friendly" cars is transportation.
You know we're sitting on four million pounds of fuel, one nuclear weapon and a thing that has 270,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder. Makes you feel good, doesn't it?

#18 penultimatestraw

penultimatestraw

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,042 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:32 AM

Realy? How much oil does the United States of America import from the middle east? :rolleyes:

I don't care - how about partly?

#19 penultimatestraw

penultimatestraw

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,042 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:36 AM

Come on try to keep up. I don't believe the "real" purpose of the "environmentally friendly" cars is transportation.

Pretentious BS aside, of course it is about transportation. If it makes owners feel better about themselves to buy 'green', how is that any different than wasting money on any other car, say an overpriced status symbol like Mercedes, for example?

#20 parrot

parrot

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 24,158 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:46 AM

Why do they state the payback in terms of years rather than miles driven? It just introdouces an extra assumption into the equation.

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.   - Hanlon's Razor. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


#21 Bert

Bert

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,973 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:47 AM

Pretentious BS aside, of course it is about transportation. If it makes owners feel better about themselves to buy 'green', how is that any different than wasting money on any other car, say an overpriced status symbol like Mercedes, for example?


A Mercedes is significantly more luxurious than a Toyota corolla.

A "green" car is not significantly greener than a Toyota corolla.
You know we're sitting on four million pounds of fuel, one nuclear weapon and a thing that has 270,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder. Makes you feel good, doesn't it?

#22 penultimatestraw

penultimatestraw

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,042 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:55 AM

A Mercedes is significantly more luxurious than a Toyota corolla.

A "green" car is not significantly greener than a Toyota corolla.

Luxury is in the eye of the beholder. Is the Mercedes more luxurious than a comparably priced, but far more reliable Lexus? Both cars (Volt and MB) are way overpriced for what they have to offer.

Fvck, if every car purchase needed to be rational half the cars on the road would cease to exist.

#23 Mike Honcho

Mike Honcho

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 4,299 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:57 AM

A Mercedes is significantly more luxurious than a Toyota corolla.

A "green" car is not significantly greener than a Toyota corolla.



Based on what metrics?

#24 Recliner Pilot

Recliner Pilot

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 48,134 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 11:00 AM

“It’s about helping the environment"

It's debatable about it's smaller environmental impact once you factor in:

1. You are most likely burning coal to charge the car.
2. Battery disposal
3. Batteries that catch fire in crashes. Burning plastic and batteries can't be good for the hole in the ozone.
Also, firefighters have to be trained on how to cut you out of that inferno without getting electrocuted.



"and it’s a good feeling to do it.”


Fine. I have no problem if it makes you feel good.

So, according to the lefties here, it's not about the cost, or payback time. It's about feeling good and helping the environment. If that's the case why is there a government subsidy if you buy one? Seems like that is not necessary since economics are not a factor in the buying decision.

Dump the govt handouts and I won't give a ratsass about this turd. :thumbsup:

Obama really inherited a mess for his second term. 


#25 Recliner Pilot

Recliner Pilot

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 48,134 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 11:02 AM

Based on what metrics?


It didn't even make the Top 12 Green Cars of 2012. :doh:

Obama really inherited a mess for his second term. 


#26 penultimatestraw

penultimatestraw

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,042 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 11:06 AM

“It’s about helping the environment"

It's debatable about it's smaller environmental impact once you factor in:

1. You are most likely burning coal to charge the car.
2. Battery disposal
3. Batteries that catch fire in crashes. Burning plastic and batteries can't be good for the hole in the ozone.
Also, firefighters have to be trained on how to cut you out of that inferno without getting electrocuted.



"and it’s a good feeling to do it.”


Fine. I have no problem if it makes you feel good.

So, according to the lefties here, it's not about the cost, or payback time. It's about feeling good and helping the environment. If that's the case why is there a government subsidy if you buy one? Seems like that is not necessary since economics are not a factor in the buying decision.

Dump the govt handouts and I won't give a ratsass about this turd. :thumbsup:

I agree RP, though I'd bet a lot of the people who buy Volts have other green energy like PV systems to offset some of the coal burning to charge their cars. Just a guess, but the demographic is wealthy environmentalists after all.

#27 Recliner Pilot

Recliner Pilot

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 48,134 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 12:52 PM

I agree RP, though I'd bet a lot of the people who buy Volts have other green energy like PV systems to offset some of the coal burning to charge their cars. Just a guess, but the demographic is wealthy environmentalists after all.

That's fine.

Let the wealthy environmentalists pay for the whole car. Don't make the rest of us borrow money from China so you can feel good about yourself.

Obama really inherited a mess for his second term. 


#28 Bert

Bert

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,973 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 01:45 PM

Let the wealthy environmentalists pay for the whole car. Don't make the rest of us borrow money from China so you can feel good about yourself.

:thumbsup:
You know we're sitting on four million pounds of fuel, one nuclear weapon and a thing that has 270,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder. Makes you feel good, doesn't it?

#29 Me_2006

Me_2006

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 15,431 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 02:44 PM

That's fine.

Let the wealthy environmentalists pay for the whole car. Don't make the rest of us borrow money from China so you can feel good about yourself.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

#30 NorthernVike

NorthernVike

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 26,791 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 06:02 PM

That's fine.

Let the wealthy environmentalists pay for the whole car. Don't make the rest of us borrow money from China so you can feel good about yourself.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Being an ass hole is all part of my manly essence

 

 



You guys have no focking clue what happened so you really should just shut it..

 


#31 Mookz

Mookz

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 4,242 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 08:11 PM

That's fine.

Let the wealthy environmentalists pay for the whole car. Don't make the rest of us borrow money from China so you can feel good about yourself.

:doublethumbsup: :doublethumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

#32 Voltaire

Voltaire

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 23,936 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 09:42 PM

I don't know why the right obsesses about bashing this car so much.

It's not economical (yet). Everybody knows you can get a better ride for the same money with a gas car. The money you save on gas won't offset the upfront costs. That'll change; every forthcoming innovation will lower the 26.6 years.

At present the main function of the car -and others like it- is to spur innovation to make the electric car experience compatible with the gas ones. Each innovation lowers cost/improves the car. Someday, hopefully soon, the 26.6 years will be down to ~four or less and the transition off of gas and onto electric will be actually for cost-economy reasons rather than merely feel-good green ones. Folks won't willingly give up any features or driving experience en mass to do so. They'll only make the switch en mass when they get a better ride for the money to do so.

“The problem is that you Americans think every problem has a solution.”- former German chancellor Helmut Schmidt

 

The amount of time you clowns will spend, and brain cells you will exhaust trying to come to a conclusion other than the one I just proposed simply proves in my working brain what focking morons you all are. ~ Mahan Day

 


#33 Recliner Pilot

Recliner Pilot

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 48,134 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:03 PM

I don't know why the right obsesses about bashing this car so much.

Because we are paying for it. Personally, you get out of my pocket and I wouldn't care about this care in the least.

Obama really inherited a mess for his second term. 


#34 Voltaire

Voltaire

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 23,936 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:18 PM

Because we are paying for it. Personally, you get out of my pocket and I wouldn't care about this care in the least.

The subsidies are provided because the car isn't economically viable right now. To get from "here" to "there", is a transition phase. Hopefully the car can stand on it's own in the not so distant future.

“The problem is that you Americans think every problem has a solution.”- former German chancellor Helmut Schmidt

 

The amount of time you clowns will spend, and brain cells you will exhaust trying to come to a conclusion other than the one I just proposed simply proves in my working brain what focking morons you all are. ~ Mahan Day

 


#35 Recliner Pilot

Recliner Pilot

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 48,134 posts

Posted 06 April 2012 - 10:25 PM

The subsidies are provided because the car isn't economically viable right now. To get from "here" to "there", is a transition phase. Hopefully the car can stand on it's own in the not so distant future.

Ever heard of the Toyota Prius? Nissan Leaf? The dozens of hybrids out there?

What makes the Volt worthy of tax dollars?

Obama really inherited a mess for his second term. 


#36 penultimatestraw

penultimatestraw

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 6,042 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 04:41 AM

That's fine.

Let the wealthy environmentalists pay for the whole car. Don't make the rest of us borrow money from China so you can feel good about yourself.

I have no problem with this, though where do you think this ranks among poorly utilized government funds?

#37 Recliner Pilot

Recliner Pilot

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 48,134 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 09:58 AM

I have no problem with this, though where do you think this ranks among poorly utilized government funds?

It doesn't matter where it "ranks". It makes the list of sh1t we shouldn't be spending money on. Get rid of it, we're broke.

Obama really inherited a mess for his second term. 


#38 edjr

edjr

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 81,142 posts

Posted 07 April 2012 - 10:10 AM

About the same time it takes for it to merge on a highway on-ramp

:overhead:

posty


#39 Recliner Pilot

Recliner Pilot

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 48,134 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 09:06 AM

Awesome!


(Reuters) - General Motors Co sold a record number of Chevrolet Volt sedans in August — but that probably isn't a good thing for the automaker's bottom line.

Nearly two years after the introduction of the path-breaking plug-in hybrid, GM is still losing as much as $49,000 on each Volt it builds, according to estimates provided to Reuters by industry analysts and manufacturing experts.



http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/10/us-generalmotors-autos-volt-idUSBRE88904J20120910

Obama really inherited a mess for his second term. 


#40 Little Rusty

Little Rusty

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 5,928 posts

Posted 10 September 2012 - 09:56 AM

Payback time for buying a Chevy Volt: 26.6 YEARS


:nono:

The payback is INSTANT.....when you buy a Volt, you're "saving the world" :doh:

Check out some of my ART and maybe even buy something ! B)

 

http://cristophers-d...try.pixels.com/