One point that has not been made about safety is the meaning of crash tests. They run cars into barriers for front end collisions. This is not the same as hitting another car, and you can make a case that it is deceptive. When you hit another car, the ratio of the masses of the two cars becomes very important. In a collision between two cars of unequal masses, the car with the smaller mass has much more change in velocity, which is equivalent to a higher speed impact than the bigger car experiences. Therefore, looking at insurance company injury and death data is also relevant. (It is unfortunately biased by what kind of people drive the cars, too).
But anyway, if your government crash tests rate two cars as equal, you can be sure that the heavier one is safer in real life crashes.
I agree that a hybrid is unlikely to pay for itself and has unknown long-term durability. I observe that everything I own that has rechargable batteries has to have them replaced every few years. I used to have a Lincoln Town Car, and replaced it with a Toyota Avalon. If I were buying a car today, I would probably get a 4-cylinder Camry or Accord.
Another thing: when you compare cars, take one divided by the mileage–that gives you gallons per mile. That is a more sensible way to compare things. You might see that there would be a huge savings in gas going from a 15 mpg car to a 25 mpg car,
much less with 25 to 35, even less with 35 to 45, etc. Part of my reason for the kind of choice I list above. I balance it against my life. Also, I drive less, walk to work, etc. Lots of people can’t do that…