Resale value has a big effect on TCO. If you plan on keeping a car until it dies, it’s irrelevant, of course. The Prius hard to compare since nobody makes a car of similar size in a hatchback. It’s smaller than other intermediates but decidedly larger than a typical compact. Maybe the Jetta Sportwagen might match up, but it isn’t much of a bargain, either.
One question for the OP. You live in Denver. Do you do a lot of mountain driving? Many hybrids (not all) are low in lower, so not great for mountains. The Prius also handles poorly, with a squishy suspension that rolls a lot. That’s very noticeable on curvy roads. For your circumstances I’d definitely check out the Fusion, a better driver’s car. If you like hatchback practicality, the Fusion’s mechanical near-twin is the C-Max Hybrid, a tallish crossover/people carrier, in size between the regular Prius and the bigger Prius V. It’s a popular shape in Europe but rare here. I quite like it, but I’ve always been a sucker for practical vehicles like wagons, minivans, and hatchbacks.
Last car show I went to had a Corolla and a Prius side-by-side. The window sticker tells you the expected cost of gas for average driving - 12,000 per year, mixed city/highway. The cars are similar in size but the Prius is quite a bit more expensive and the break-even was 20 years if I remember correctly. The Ford Fusion had a much shorter break-even 6.3 years at 12,000 miles per year. If you want to save money buy the Ford, if you want to flaunt your “Green Cred”, take the Prius because everybody can recognize it as a hybrid.
I would probably pass, since it sounds like you’re looking for the most economical solution, and even though it does get good mileage in the city, with the relatively low miles that you’re driving, you’ll still be better off with a regular car. The “green” bit of hybrids - especially plug in hybrids - is purely marketing. The batteries that they use are very heavy (around 200 pounds) and full of heavy metals and other toxic chemicals that take a lot of energy to mine and refine, and have to be shipped all over the world to make the car. So while the car itself might not use as much gas, the production process certainly isn’t green at all.
I think I’m missing your point. The standard Prius is bigger then a Corolla and has an interior volume within 3 cubic feet of a Ford Fusion. It has much greater cargo capacity and equal passenger seating for 5. It has better gas mileage, one of the highest satisfaction rates of any car and a much better repair record then any Ford over the last ten years. Oh, it cost the same as a Fusion to begin with. It was rated by consumer reports as one of the most cost effective cars sold. And, if you trade it in, my money is on the Prius having better trade in value and more sale ability.
I think life is simpler with a non hybrid, but if I were to buy one, it would be a Prius over a Fusion for all the reasons mentioned.
@dagosa, I was comparing Prius (Hybrid) vs Corolla (similar size std engine) and Std Fusion vs Hybrid Fusion. (it is confusing to read!) The Toyota won’t allow an apples to apples (hybrid to std.) comparison. The Ford, does. KBB’s site shows the Corolla (92.1 cu-ft) and Prius (93.7 cu-ft) as very close in EPA passenger volume and within 3.6 inches in overall length. The Corolla is much cheaper than the Prius and as such can run many miles on the savings before the poorer mileage allows the Prius to catch up. The Ford hybrid, at 47/47 mpg, and a lower premium for its hybrid system will recover the additional cost much faster. Overall the Ford is cheaper than a Prius to buy and larger inside. That said, I buy a 2.0l turbo Fusion rather than a hybrid of either design.
Most people will gravitate to car lines they are both familiar with and succesful with. Your handle might indicate your predisposition to feel that the Ford hybrid is a better buy. My opinion is based upon CR comments and testing and the long term owner satisfaction. The Prius has an enviable long term reliability record while the Fusion Hybrid is yet Unproven…
A hybrid is a relatively new technology for many car makers but not for Toyota. Their success In making them, if I were to buy, would be lead me to buy the Prius. So far, my need for 8 to 12 inches of ground clearance has pretty much eliminated any thoughts of real economy cars.
The actual cost difference from what I have read between a Ford fusion hybrid ($28k)and a Prius ($24 to $29k) is negligible. In standard form, the Prius wins pricing, hands down. Come trade in time, the difference would be even more easily recoverable by the Prius.(and more). So you may be comparing Ford to Ford and Toyota to Toyota when the best way is direct…Prius to Ford Hybrid.
And while you might look at the turbo Ford Fusion, I would look first at the new Accord that tested 40 mpg highway by CR and goes 0 to 60 in less then 8 seconds auto cvt and in manual, 6.6 seconds by Edmonds, making it faster then any standard intermediate 4 cylinder and one of the most economical larger cars made.
You can easily do a calculation based on your expected mileage, proportion of city driving, how long you plan to keep the car, expected gas prices and depreciation, etc. but … there are many unknowns and “your mileage figures will vary.” you should probably expect a range of figures for your mileage, rather than a single mileage figure. We’ve occasionally nailed the EPA figures for our car, but most of the time our mileage has been over a fairly wide range of data, and mileage figures should probably be given as a range of numbers (actually, miles-per-gallon is less valuable than gallons-per-100-miles anyway).
A 1-30-13 Wall Street Journal article, “Why do cars fall short of EPA figures,” examined the accuracy of “real world” versus “EPA” mileage and found considerable discrepancy. The relative fuel economy of many cars also varied widely from how they did in the EPA tests. Most hybrids and turbocharged engines appear to have higher EPA numbers than real world mileage, but some makes also had higher “real world” than “EPA” mileage. The article also noted several anecdotes of people who wished they hadn’t made their purchase decision based on EPA numbers. You should almost certainly be skeptical regarding the EPA mileage figures, although they are arguably better than nothing, and probably better than the anecdotal numbers you will see scattered around the web.
I tried making the same calculations myself recently, but accurate mileage figures are just too unrealistic, and anyone who says otherwise is just using wishful thinking. Power and weight seem to be correlated with mileage – heavier cars are going to generally get lower mileage, regardless of doo-dads like turbochargers.