Are the high-mpg versions of the Chevrolet Cruze, Ford Focus, and Honda Civic worth the money? In the print version (issue just arrived today for me), they have an article about these same vehicles titled "Small '40 mpg' sedans. The above URL basically mentions the city, highway and overall test results (remember, these are CR's tests, not EPA tests) but left it out on the Cruze Eco automatic, which got 17 city/40 highway and 27 mpg overall.
We looked at all of the 40 mpg highway cars but since the wifey does 90% in town driving they were NZOY going to pay for themselves anytime soon. Our Prius lease is $280 a month and when she first got 42 mpg (all in town) compared to the in town mpg of the 01 Voyager she saved $200 in fuel costs when it was $3.15 a gallon. Now she's modified her driving and getting high 48 to low 50s....when gas went up to $4.15 a gallon and with her new mpg figures she saved about the same as the lease payment! As far as highway, a lot of Cruise and Focus owners are getting in the mid 40 mpg range, but that doesn't compare well to the 62.1 that I got on a 170 mile trip with the cruise set at 55 mph. In a nutshell....no. I sat down and figured how far could we drive the Prius for the $10,000 Volt price difference....I think it was 84,000 miles!
Realistically, I don't think so. The 'eco' versions of those cars get, I believe, only 2-4MPG higher, correct? But the price difference from what I hear is something like $2K-$3K higher. If fuel economy is the goal, then the MPG/price ratio doesn't make sense.
The price difference is only $500 to $800 considering features. The eco trims include the goodies of the mid level trims. The difference might be in the thousands with the base trim. The differences in equipment, and possibly engine, make the comparison lopsided. The question of whether they are worth it depends on the individual. If their route is nearly all city, the aero improvements aren't going to help them. They also need to be willing to drive efficiently. The improvements on these cars won't help much with a lead foot. Likewise, a hypermiler will likely get a higher percentage over EPA than with the non-eco trims.
Yes, you have a point there. Still, I can understand why others would make that comparison. They were probably looking for cost savings, which meant they either wanted the lowest cost base model or the unique 'eco' model. Truthfully, during my own search (though I didn't look at 'eco' model cars), I ended up doing similar comparisons not taking other features into comparison. Anyway, moving aside, I have to question on the worth depending on the individual. I looked up the differences from the EPA: The Cruze is 1MPG, the Ford Focus is 2MPG, and the Honda Civic is 1MPG. Assuming we have an efficient driver that consistently get the full estimate, 15,000 per year driving, and gas price at $5, we're only talking of savings at $80. $150, and $70 respectively. What if we have a hypermiler achieving a great 50% increase? The difference increases to 1.5MPG, 3MPG, and 1.5MPG and savings increases to $120, $225, and $105 respectively. So in a very ideal situation, we're talking about a minimum of 2-3 years to justify the difference in cost (8-9 years if you're doing the other comparison), but more realistically, it is likely that choosing the 'eco' model over the regular model is going to take at least 4-5 years to justify as, of course, the situation probably isn't going to be that ideal. With such a small difference, it doesn't seem worth it to me.
Driving is only half of the equation for the individual. The other is route. Aero improvements have little impact on city driving. If the person's route is mostly highway, then the improvements will help more. Most hypermilers will also select the manual(I'd likely get a higher increase with a manual). In the Cruze, the eco manual is a 3 mpg improvement because GM actually changed up the gear ratios. Ford or Honda don't even offer a manual with their 'eco', or apparently change the ratios in the auto. So the Cruze eco might be worth the difference. I'd personally wait for the diesel though. Another consideration is the dealer. On another forum, a poster went to a Honda dealer for a fit, but drive off with a Civic HF because the incentives brought it much closer to the Fit they were looking at in price. I think CR's piece on the new Civic lead to many dealer incentives, and I think this article, and lower gas prices, will lead to some on these eco trims sitting on the lot receiving some.
An unusually useful article on HF models: http://www.boston.com/cars/news-and-reviews/2013/11/28/toyota-corolla-eco-honda-civic/RSG8H2zMDQSwHQlF7Ue2sM/singlepage.html
It depends on what trim you are comparing to. For me, the dollar costs would not make sense as I usually choose the lowest model trim. However, the environmental cost is another thing. I chose the lowest cost Prius with the highest fuel economy. It'll be many years and >100,000 miles before I make up the cost differential from the lowest model Prius 2 but it is worth the money.
You can buy two Cruises for what you pay for a single Volt. My cousin got a Cruise, getting 38 - 39.5 MPG. That is not shabby for the piece you pay. DBCassidy
