Toyota Camry Hybrid vs FFH

[acdii]

Now That is a smart way to do it. If you dont know what your talking about, STFU. I like it!

[acdii]

I just watched a toyota commercial for the Camry. Safe, reliable, and they left out one other description BORING

:)

[bcrisp]

While I still await delivery of my '13 FFH, I'll be trading in my '05 Camry XLE (non-hybrid). I picked it up in '08 with 32k miles and have since put another 103k on it. To date, the Camry has easily been the best, most comfortable vehicle I've ever owned (I've had many). In all the time I've owned it, I've only had to replace the rear catalytic converter other than routine maintenance. I'm confidant I could ride this puppy well past 200k miles no problem. We can all agree that Toyotas are reliable, if nothing else. I'm certain we all share the hope that these technologically superior Fords develop such a reputation.

 

I did look at the TCH in 2012 and seriously considered it. I figured I really didn't 'need' a new car at the time so I moved on. I agree, the TCH is rather bland so there was nothing jumping out at me to prompt a purchase. Then I was smitten with the '13 FFH story; it was too compelling to ignore. I must admit that with all the time and miles I spend in a car (~20k/year), the 47/47/47 deserved my attention. I normally get 30 - 33 in my Camry (non-hybrid). After I placed my FFH order in November, my bubble burst when I read all the articles (Consumer Reports, other magazine editors, owners) indicating real-world numbers being much less. In any event, I'm encouraged by all the good reports in this forum. Back to my story, the technology offered in the Fords gives us a taste of amenities (primarily safety) that one normally sees in richer vehicles, like the Audi A6, at a working-class price. While I still didn't 'need' a new vehicle in November, I placed my order, much due to the styling, comfort, room and technology.

 

In fact, the Ford story was so compelling (one big reason is Ford didn't hold their hand out for our tax money like other Detroiters), I ordered a '13 Explorer Ltd for my wife the same day. She took delivery in March while I still await my FFH. Many people knock the MyTouch feature as being complicated. IMO, it's like anything else you're not used to: given a little time to become familiar with its layout, it's fine. I'd rather have those features than not; simplicity be damned. I'm sure they had similar complaints when complicated smart phones replaced regular cell phones and bag phones (oh they're so complicated). Remember VCRs? I don't know anyone that did NOT have one yet no one really knew how to work it with the remote.

 

The features that Ford offers make the TCH/FFH comparison rather easy (Ford wins, hands-down). Styling is always subjective but the FFH is appealing to more people (see Ford's market share increase and Toyota's decrease). I've read that FFH owners get better city mileage (vs TCH) while highway goers will see better in the Camry. However, even compared to my '05 Camry with 30-33 mpg, the advertised 47... or the difference between TCH and FFH mileage isn't worth a $30+k payout in itself. There has to be more to the story than mileage and the FFH owns that story on every count.

 

On a related note (I may start a thread if it's not here already), even with all the extra safety features on these FFH (and Explorers), the insurance companies are not decreasting premiums. I called around to many providers and one let me vent a while about how the Explorer (and my yet-to-be-delivered FFH) has the BLIS, adaptive cruise, inflatable 2nd-row seatbelts, yadda-yadda-yadda, which makes them that much safer yet the insurance industry isn't offering any discounts. She politely explained that until they get substantive data suggesting these vehicles are involved in that many less crashes, they won't be discounted for these features. For now, they're more interested in whether your car has automatic seatbelts and essentially don't care about BLIS, adaptive cruise, etc. The problem is, as she explained, that when they ARE involved in crashes, the expense of all that technology that needs to be replaced outweighs the lesser incidents (if lesser eventually shows up in the data). Makes perfect sense but it's still hard to swallow.

[rico567]

<snip>

 

On a related note (I may start a thread if it's not here already), even with all the extra safety features on these FFH (and Explorers), the insurance companies are not decreasting premiums. I called around to many providers and one let me vent a while about how the Explorer (and my yet-to-be-delivered FFH) has the BLIS, adaptive cruise, inflatable 2nd-row seatbelts, yadda-yadda-yadda, which makes them that much safer yet the insurance industry isn't offering any discounts. She politely explained that until they get substantive data suggesting these vehicles are involved in that many less crashes, they won't be discounted for these features. For now, they're more interested in whether your car has automatic seatbelts and essentially don't care about BLIS, adaptive cruise, etc. The problem is, as she explained, that when they ARE involved in crashes, the expense of all that technology that needs to be replaced outweighs the lesser incidents (if lesser eventually shows up in the data). Makes perfect sense but it's still hard to swallow.

 

 

 

What insurance companies do (or don't) is based entirely on what their actuaries cough up. All these "driver assist" features are too new to have yielded any crunchable numbers (however great the theory may sound) so they won't do it, period. The whole problem with statistics of various kinds is that they are politically unpalatable in other areas of our society, and so the facts are ignored.

 

We know a couple, both actuaries, who work for big insurance companies in Philadelphia. Over the past several decades, there have been several standing jokes among actuaries:

 

1. The mortgage / banking fiasco that precipitated the present economic malaise. Our friends say that people at every corporate leadership level and every level of government were told by actuaries throughout the 1990s and up until the debacle in 2008 that the way real estate investments were being done simply couldn't work, and when it ended it would be very bad. They were ignored, because the brave new world of U.S. politics decreed otherwise..

 

2. The system of defined-benefit pensions as practiced by the Fed and many state governments since the 1930's. Our friends say that any actuary they know will tell you that these are just government-mandated Ponzi schemes, and in fact these kinds of pensions are literally textbook examples of such when one is taking actuarial classes.

 

The reality is that we embrace the facts when we reap the benefits, and we reject them when they're unpleasant. It's because we're human, after all.

[acdii]

Well at least a Ford with Cross Traffic Alert will be far less likely to get hit while backing out, unlike that Proven by VW in their commercial. I really think VW screwed themselves with that commercial, and if Ford is paying ANY attention to their competition, they will make a similar commercial touting the Cross Traffic and how it can AVOID getting hit while backing out of your driveway.

[hybridbear]

Insurance rates are based on past data and so far those features have not proven their value to insurance companies. The only features they really care about are ABS brakes, traction control and security alarms.

[dalesky]

Insurance rates are based on past data and so far those features have not proven their value to insurance companies. The only features they really care about are ABS brakes, traction control and security alarms.

My rates for the FFH are actually almost exactly the same as my 2004 Maxima! I was kind of amazed actually. I think there are a number of reasons for this, not the least of which includes the many safety features compared to an older model. In any even event, I was very pleased. The are actually in some areas less than my 2006 Mustang GT convert!

[hybridbear]

My rates for the FFH are actually almost exactly the same as my 2004 Maxima! I was kind of amazed actually. I think there are a number of reasons for this, not the least of which includes the many safety features compared to an older model. In any even event, I was very pleased. The are actually in some areas less than my 2006 Mustang GT convert!

Our FFH insurance is barely any more than we were paying for our 2006 Honda Accord Hybrid and is less than we were paying for our Saab 9-5 Aero