2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid: At What Price?

I would absolutely be more inclined to consider the hybrid version of a vehicle if it were priced identically (and of course if the standard and optional features were identical). You would be getting an identical vehicle (other than the powertrain of course) that has a lower cost of ownership fuel-wise over the length of ownership. Pricing them identically in the first instance makes the hybrid cheaper over the long term.

Obviously the maintenance costs would probably not be same between a hybrid and conventional gasoline engine, but that's the case regardless of whether the price of entry is the same or not.

With fuel costs approaching and in some cases exceeding $4/gallon, pricing hybrids the same as conventional gasoline engines would definitely result in a huge increase in the hybrid take rate.

I think few people that look at hybrids worry about the price (which Honda learned the hard way with the new Insight). They buy them for either image or to save the planet or a combo of both. Although, for me I'd buy one as a way to give the countries of the world that hate us, but we buy oil from, a giant middle finger.

First of all, Ford can do this with the Lincoln because the MKZa have a huge stash of pure profit built into the MSRP. The Fusion doesn't have that.

I might be more tempted to buy a hybrid if it were priced at the same price as the non-hybrid equivalent. But, you can get a fairly mid-sized Prius in the low twenties and I don't want that car.

The bottom line is that I am not ready to give up the things that are important in a real car. The Prius is a form of transportation, but it is not a real car. Some day it might be, of course, especially if it came with an automatic transmission.

There is only one hybrid with a manual transmission (CR-Z), and it seems to come the closest to being a real car. Its looks say sporting, but the overall car is still a hybrid.

Someday....

The same thing goes for a diesel engine. If I could get a decent diesel in a Focus or Cruz for a similar price as the gas engine I would absolutely think hard about doing it.

Yes, right now some (many?) hybrid buyers are likely not concerned with price. Several sources, including Edmunds, have run the numbers showing the iffy financial case for purchasing most hybrids (savings on gas vs. extra cost, etc.).

However, making them the same price would mean that other buyers who would otherwise pass over hybrids based on price would then buy them, thus changing the game.

I'm sure this has plenty to do with the cost difference between the gasoline and hybrid versions of each car, but I bet it also has a lot to do with the Fusion's high-volume status. The MKZ doesn't sell at such a rapid rate, so the Hybrid can be a greater percentage of its total sales. But the Fusion sells more, especially considering fleet and rental sales, so it makes sense that the Fusion Hybrid would be such a lesser percentage.

On the surface, I think we'd all say "heck yeah!".

However, if I think about this more, I see the problem. I doubt Ford, or any other car maker, is going to sell hybrids at a massive loss to bring them down to the price level of a gasoline engine. So, the only way I see this working, is if the gasoline engine is brought up in price to match a hybrid model.

And in that instance, I feel like the customer is getting screwed.

Why would I EVER choose the gasoline version then? It offers little to no benefit, costs the same, etc. Essentially Ford, or anyone else, is forcing people to take the hybrid option, or laughing to the bank when people choose the gas version (and they probably pray people will buy the gas version...).

Essentially instead of passing on savings, actual costs, whatever to the customer, they charge everyone a higher price whether they want gas, hybrid, whatever.

It might work. And frankly, with the new MPG standards, I don't see any other option for automakers to force people to buy the hybrid, diesel, electric cars than to make the lower mpg cars far far more expensive to discourage their purchase.

In the end, the consumer loses.

Yet more proof that the government and its silly mandates always screw something else up in the long run, and at a minimum cost all of us more money somehow. In this instance, the $23,000 I4 gasoline family sedan is a goner...

Hybrids are an interesting case study to watch. With many new technologies, ( HDTV, DVD players etc) the price starts high, more companies get involved, more are sold, price goes down. I probably don't have the order correct, but you get my drift. Hybrids have been around for awhile and you really don't see the price going down, although you are seeing more companies producing more.

To answer Warren's original question, yes if there was a vehicle I was looking to purchase and the price was the same for gas or hybrid I would most likely buy the hybrid. One caveat to that: The hybrid would need to show a significant savings at the pump, none of this pseudo hybrid crap that Honda tried to pull with the Accord.

"I think few people that look at hybrids worry about the price (which Honda learned the hard way with the new Insight). They buy them for either image or to save the planet or a combo of both. "

Everyone I've ever met with a hybrid has bought one because they get great mileage.
Maybe it's different in California but the only people that seem to think of them as some sort of eco status cars are the people who don't like them.

Some sort of reverse inferiority complex.

I don't agree that that strong take rate is because of the price difference.

You aren't seeing MKZ shoppers weighing the pros and cons and choosing the hybrid drivetrain. You're seeing greenies who otherwise wouldn't shop a Lincoln at all showing up because of that hybrid drivetrain.

The Fusion gets those too but they're a much smaller percentage of sales because the regular Fusion is a class competitive product. The regular MKZ is an also-ran.

It's just like the enormous diesel take rate on the Jetta. Because the gas Jetta is crap.

Price isn't what turns me off a hybrid now. At $4/gallon with $5 around the corner a several thousand dollar premium would be a smart buy. Free would be even better than that.

My problem is that all of the affordable takes on a hybrid start with a car I'm lukewarm to in the first place, bundle it with a weak gas motor and CVT, and sour the pot further with bad electric steering, hard skinny tires, and effete touches like digital leaves growing out of the speedometer. No thanks at any price.

But the price is NOT the same.....I just checked and the V6 MKZ has a $3000 rebate......that is a lot.

@bodyblue

Thank you for spelling 'a lot' correctly (massive pet peeve..)

I'll keep my 4-on-the-floor 350 V8 Iskenderian-idling @ every red light on my 35mph/average daily commute until the Obama Adminsitartion takes it away from my cold dead Sweet Crude Shell (TM) Visa Rewards Points Card !

BTW I've got almost enough points to buy a new .454 Casull for, you know, home defense. Or bear attacks. After all you never know when those Saudis in Audis are going to attack.

Opec set for $1,000bn in export revenues: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7fa28b96-5a2f-11e0-86d3-00144feab49a.html#axzz1I2J8lDTl

Nope. Look at the resale on Civic Hybrids vs Gas. Same with Camry Hybrid vs Gas. The hybrids lose value rapidly once they start heading toward 100k. Why? People don't trust high-mileage hybrid batteries. Everyone knows they'll need to be replaced at some point, and that's in the thousands of dollars.

People buy Civics and Camrys because they are very reliable and cheap to fix when they do break. Not the case with the hybrid versions. Also - that could explain why the MKZ has a higher take rate. Lincoln owners are more tolerant of future repairs and regular dealer visits than your typical appliance-car owner.

Priced the same, no. Hybrids tend to all be far heavier than regular cars. Weight is the opposite of fun in dating and in cars.

I agree with bankerdanny; I'd be more inclined to get the diesel rather than the hybrid, given the same price scenario.

I would not buy a hybrid even if it was much cheaper than gasoline model. Several reasons:

1. No manual transmission. Three pedals are an absolute and non-negotiable requirement for me and my wife.
2. Significant increase in weight. Weight is very, very bad. For everything, except killing others with your car when you get into an accident.
3. Weird brake feel.
4. Does not work in cold climate. Which is where I live.

I do like auto stop/start and wish more automakers would allow US consumers to have it. It is especially bad considering this technology is widely available on equivalent European models.

ed124c's opening statement is spot-on. Lincoln probably offers the hybrid MKZ at-cost while the "standard" car (you know, the one with the far more powerful engine and a much more engaging driving experience - the very attributes that have garnered a premium for decades) is offered with the usual profit buffer in it's MSRP.

Accounting aside, I'm not surprised at the higher take rate for the MKZ. If you're in the market for a Lincoln, fast and fun are probably not high on your priority list, so the hybrid is a more distinctive option.

Could Ford do the same with it's Fusion? Not at the moment.

And if you're comparing to the base 4-cyl car, not _ever_. It is literally impossible to add more content (e.g. batteries, regenerative braking systems, electric motors, circuitry, software, and all the engineering hours to make it work safely, reliably and effectively) at no additional cost.

But I do see a day when hybrid technology comes down in price such that auto makers can offer a base car and two ideologically-opposed "performance" models; the sporty one that improves numbers at the track, and the hybrid one that improves numbers at the pump.

Right now, the Fusion hybrid is $1500 more expensive than the 3.5L V6 Sport model. Look for that disparity to shrink in the future.

I wonder, how does the Fusion hybrid's take rate compare to the Fusion Sport's?

@ caroftheweek

+1, you are correct

The Editor writing the post misleadingly told us that the Fusion Hybrid is much more expensive than the regular Fusion..........but he is comparing apples to oranges because the MKZ is basically a Fusion Sport which has the 3.5 V6.

As caroftheweek points out, Fusion Hybrid is only $1500 more than Fusion Sport 3.5. And as someone else points out, there is a rebate on MKZ V6 making it cheaper than Hybrid.

Warren Clark, these Ford people are smarter than you thought. :)

-Rod

There are some good argument above especially regarding the reliability of high-mileage hybrids. I'd probably shy away from those, too.

But, yeah, I'd be more likely to buy a hybrid model if it was price the same as the conventional one.

For me, it all depends. I personally don't like hybrids. But it's not because of the price. It's because of the poor driving dynamics and bad looks that usually come along w/ them.

However, w/ that said, what keeps me from BUYING one is indeed the price. If my wife wants a hybrid for her car, that's fine, so long as I keep my fun, sporty sedan for the same duties. So basically, while I don't like them, I see the merits of one. And I would buy one for her, except for the prices.

The new Lexus CT200h is a perfect example. I actually like the car's looks, and hear it drives quite nicely, to boot. But it starts at $30K. A decently equipped one is $35K+. I'm sorry, I know it's a Lexus and all, but in my mind, it's just too much money for what is still a hatchback w/ barely enough power to get out of it's way. And when I look at it for that, I think "Why not just buy a Golf, Focus, Mazda 3, etc and save $10K??" Because $10,000 will buy a lot of gas. On the other hand, if that car were upper $20's, right at $30K equipped well, I would no doubt have one in my driveway as we speak.

Although I'm not overly enthusiastic about them, if I were to buy a hybrid, it'd be a Fusion or MKZ because I'm a Ford employee and I get a nice discount on them.

But all other things equal, if price was the same, of course I'd buy the hybrid. Why wouldn't I??

"Thank you for spelling 'a lot' correctly (massive pet peeve..)"

No problem......my mother held a Masters in English......I still have scars from saying "yeah" and "aint"....my pet peeve? "ANYWAYS" I cannot believe that folks actually type that word!

My family are one of the few who bought a hybrid because of cost.

My wife's insight is priced comprably to a civic, and on the freeway, its a better cruiser, because of its noise levels over the civic and its rear end feels more planted. Weighs the same too.

The only problem with the insight is that the only other affordable mainstream hybrid is the prius and the prius is bigger. Maybe hybrid buyers are more likely to purchase what they do to make a 'statement', and they are probably driving the toyota. For a family of three, the same-payment-as-a-civic insight made more sense than the more expensive prius. We felt it drove and looked much better to, but that's preference.

Anyway, yes, some of us exist.

The Fusion Hybrid with the luxury package is $33,195...the MKZ Hybrid is $34,455...and the Fusion comes with more stuff...sunroof, navigation, blind spot monitor, rear view camera...the only boondoogle here is the suckers paying a premium for a Lincoln badge or thinking they're getting the hybrid for "free".

Unless there was a serious design flaw with they hybrid version (Lexus-absolutely-no-trunk-space comes to mind) and the equipment levels were the same, sure, why wouldn't I purchase the hybrid version at the same price as the fuelie? If there is a still a tax credit involved ... sorry other tax payers ... the hybrid would net out less expensive.

I wouldn't be buying it for fuel cost savings though; I still argue that with my family's driving habits I'm not seeing any appreciable cost savings at the pump with a mild-hybrid. Our family would benefit greatly though from a full EV that could do an honest 120 miles of city driving on a charge with a realistically quick recharge rate. As soon as that comes to market in an entertaining realistic package, not a tin bread box, we'll be making the switch.

Yes.

I think they should be the same price if the automotive companies and their influencers (e.g federal government, eco/green groups) hope for this technology to be widely adopted. Sell more models and the R&D and engineering costs will decline on a per unit basis. Also, why should the consumer pay extra for a technology that is not as proven as good ol' internal combustion when applied to automobiles? There is a significant risk for the consumer and the consumer will perceive this risk as less if the two drivetrains are priced the same and they are not forced to fork over extra dough for trying to do the right thing.

"Also, why should the consumer pay extra for a technology that is not as proven as good ol' internal combustion when applied to automobiles?"

The tech is well proven on the Ford and Toyotas.......it is cars like the volt that it is not proven on.

Of course, why the hell wouldn't I if the standard options are the same I would most likely go for a hybrid because honestly, despite being a major car enthusiast, sometimes its very fun and rewarding driving a hybrid and it becomes a competition to try and get as much MPG's as possible out of that hybrid.
In the case of the Ford fusion, it has around 190 HP combined and that thing aint weak, so I'm sure its not as boring as driving the weak Honda Insight!

alinmyhead, the Fusion Hybrid is *not* a mild hybrid. It's basically *the* most efficient non-plug-in hybrid system currently in production, accounting for the size and the horsepower. (This is shown by the fact that the Prius's system, when placed in the Lexus HS250h, which has a similar engine to the Fusion Hybrid, gets less fuel efficiency despite the fact that the HS250h is smaller.)

My 08' M5 set me back $34k. I'd rather have a V10 than either a V6 or a I-4 hybrid thank you very much.

How could Ford even consider such a thing? It is like kicking someone while they are down, and toyota is down and just announced price hikes! They are soooo mean!

Seriously Ford, do it, kick'em while they are down. I worked for a chain of car dealers and the toyota sales people were always the cockiest of the bunch because people would come in because they were so accustomed to their boring toyota products that they didn't want to be excited by any future cars and would go right back to the toyota dealer for their next appliance on wheels. FORD WOULD BE VERY SMART if they chose that pricing strategy, especially considering the direct competitors all have the same big drawback in the trunk, with exception to the Prius which is not really a direct competitor as it is hybrid specific and a hatchback body style instead of a sedan. Value minded pricing hasn't hurt Hyundai and Kia yet has it? And doesn't the Fusion Hybrid get better mileage than the Camry and Altima Hybrids, only building on the value even more?