2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid: Breaking Even

saturn95, if I could "Like" your comment, I would :)

Also, if you're talking about worst hybrid break-even points, what about the best? Lincoln MKZ Hybrid: instantaneous break-even.

Did this calculation account for reduced maintenance costs? And obviously, it's hard to give a price on time, but there has to be some value accounted for the time saved on refueling and maintenance.

No one buys an LS 600h to save money on fuel costs. It isn't a Prius; the hybrid system is designed to boost acceleration rather than turn it into a fuel miser. This approach didn't sell so well with the Accord hybrid.

If I were to get a hybrid, I'd go all the way--Prius. I just don't like the way hybrids drive. If I am going to put up with an all around compromised driving experience, I want maximum mpgs. The Fusion is a better drive, but the Prius is cheaper and still very roomy and useful, and at about $24K, the break even time is less of a concern.

Other than the Lexus example, paying extra to have a more fuel efficient car is like paying extra to get more horse power, or leather seats.

It is a feel-good item that may, or may not, get used to it's full potential.

I also suspect that even in the face of math that proves otherwise, some people will still develop a "gut feeling" that the hybrid will save them money somehow. Filling up your tank at the pump, watching the numbers increment is such an emotional purchase. This, while they're holding onto a paid for car...

It's not about the money!

"If I were to get a hybrid, I'd go all the way--Prius."

Can't say it any better myself...

The best part is that $24k is AFTER TAX!

The manufacturers sell the benefits of hybrids in terms of better fuel economy, but I believe that most hybrid buyers value that benefit in terms of lower emissions rather than lower operating costs.

The cost concious buyer factors purchase price into the equation along with fuel economy.

It's about polar bear hugs

Using a price of $3.11 for gas is as of now a bad data point. Not sure what the current national average is but it's probably at least $3.60. Locally I've seen regular from $3.89 to $4.05, so 25+% higher than the price used in the article's calculations.

Here's how I looked at it (recently bought a MKZ hybrid). If it pays out in 100k miles, I'm ahead, for these reasons:
- I get to fill up half as often as I would have, at half the cost
- I know with every price jump that I made a good choice
- I get to use the 'performance' aspect of my car every mile I drive it, unlike the Mustang GT I was considering, where I'd have maybe one time a week to really have fun with it.

I am not a greenie, in fact I'm a petroleum engineer. The two other folks I know best with hybrids (Prius and Insight) are the farthest thing from a 'greenie' you could imagine.

But the MKZ hybrid is extra cost - the rebates for other MKZs do not apply to the hybrid.

Lets not forget the some folks feel that anything to foster less dependence on oil is a good thing.

Arguably the rare earth metals required for the batteries tie us to a different non-US source of raw materials to power the car (i.e. China) with it's own set of environmental issues to produce, but the battery is a one or two time cost over the ownership cycle of the car (initial purchase and them possibly replacement) while the additional fuel required by a non-hybrid is a constant.

Shrug. GTI v. Golf TDI the break even point is almost instant. :) Seriously, 2 years and the TDI is essentially printing money.

No, to me the Golf TDI is not the same as the Golf with the 5 cylinder. It shares more in common with the GTI.

The trouble with calculating break even times is you are assuming varibles are constants. You assume hybrid owners drive the average number of miles, pay the average amount for gas and the price of gaswill stay the same.

All the hybrid owners I know drive a lot more then average and where I live (BC) gas gas is over $5.00 / gallon ($1.35/ Litre).... and it will only go up over the life of a car.

The difference in payments between the Fusion and the Fusion hybrid worked out to $170 / month. If you can save that much in gas each month then the payback time is zero. You save from day one and it gets better as the price of gas rises.

Being able to reasonably break even is getting easier as more and more hybrids are available and cheaper. Some people think that buying a hybrid will save them money, some think it will save the environment. Sometimes it will, sometimes it won't.

It is especially hard when you have a litter of ICE cars that get 40mpg. Not to mention the environmental impact of the extra batteries or manufacturing a new car.

Another illustration of the basic reality that putting a hybrid system in a small car that didn't use much gas to begin with is a wasted effort.

Assuming a more complicated car will cost less to maintain isn't obvious. Brake pads are a pretty small part of upkeep.

40 mpg from a tiny engine? Sure. Ok, now show me 50.

You can't?

What a shocker!

I'm averaging 38 mpg, every tank. I'm sure 50 mpg in a Prius or Insight is no problem, my friends get 55+.

Edmunds should do a comparison test between the Fusion Hybrid and a Chevy Cruze ECO with the 6 speed manual.

Fusion: 41/36...39 combined
Cruze: 28/42...34 combined

My argument is that you can't tell from these numbers which car is more fuel efficient. However, Road and Track did a first drive of the ECO, and got an average of 37.7. I think that is higher than the LT Fusion.

As far as "break even", and assuming that, over all, the Fusion got better mileage than the ECO, I don't think realistically that the Fusion could catch up, simply because the ECO costs under 20K, and the Fusion Hybrid is probably at least 7K more.

Then again, the Fusion Hybrid is a midsize car, while the Cruze is a bit smaller. The Fusion Hybrid doesn't have a very big trunk, compared to the ECO or a non-hybrid Fusion, (due to batteries, of course.)

I have to look up the LT Fusion's overall average MPG, if it is listed somewhere.

I checked the last 3 months of the Fusion's overall mpg, and it is under 32 mpg.

IL sure beats their cars. Look at the EPA web site, average reported is right at 38 mpg, like mine, 1 mpg off the EPA's 39 rating.

But yeay, if you want to drive a car like you didn't pay for it or the gas (like IL does), a hybrid's a bad choice.

The 600h is clearly a V12 replacement, not a V8 competitor. Apples to oranges.

Break-even is a pretty weak parameter IMO because it only considers fuel economy and costs. What about the effect of hybrid component production on the environment? How about considering how well a hybrid fits your driving patterns (traffic/no-traffic, urban/rural, city/highway, short-distance/long-distance, etc. etc.)? And then how much do you weight that fuzzy "enjoyment" factor with your vehicle?

Drive what you like...enjoy.

Some people just enjoy bashing hybrids. They somehow feel it is a threat to their gas guzzlers and their way of life. Maybe it is, who knows? I do know this however: The ere of cheap gasoline is finally over. Stick your heads in the sand but this is the new normal. Every single drop of fuel saved is a good thing, wasting something is never good.

@ bb,

Bashing hybrids is like bashing Toyota/Lexus, it's a fashion within the so-called enthusiast community. If you don't bash them then you are not cool.

@ed124c

I just checked out several Cruze Eco reviews and the mileage appears to be the real deal. Color me surprised and impressed. Edmunds should just trade-in the LTZ for a $19k Eco 6-speed. I suspect they would be even more impressed with it than they are with the Kizashi.

I bought a 2007 Nissan Altima hybrid when there was a tax credit. My breakeven compared to a similar 2.5 SL is a little under 6 years. Currently my average price paid for gas is $2.75. I do have TCS/VDC that the ICE Alty didn't have though so I offset that feature with the smaller trunk.

"Bashing hybrids is like bashing Toyota/Lexus, it's a fashion within the so-called enthusiast community. If you don't bash them then you are not cool."

Indeed. I am amazed that machines can create so much emotion from people. In the case of machines such as that long-term 911, I can understand that. Getting pissed off at the existence of a Camry or Prius? Well, that's a little odd. I would think enthusiasts would just focus on the cars that make them happy and ignore the appliances.

"I suspect they would be even more impressed with it than they are with the Kizashi."

I rather doubt that. The biggest reason they like the Kizashi is the way it drives....not a big point with the Cruze...it is very nice inside for sure but it is hardly a drivers car. C/D just tested an LS auto and was underwhelmed.

Look at Popular Mechanics, Car and Driver, Road and Track and MPG-o-matic for real world impressions. According to Road and Track, the Eco out slalomed and out-skidpadded and even out-accelerated the Honda CR-Z (they got 8.1 0-60 for the Eco manual). So the dynamics are still present. Owners appear to be getting the mileage, too. Even I thought the Eco was mainly EPA test trickery but I don't think so now. Of course, I'm referring to the 6-speed manual. I suppose this makes the car irrelevant for the vast majority of people. Too bad. Because a $19k Cruze Eco with actual chassis dynamics but excellent real world fuel economy is a compelling package.