If you are not unhappy with the Camry, keep it until 2010. Honda is introducing a dual fuel engine that will run on either hydrogen or gasoline. That is truly environmentally friendly - not just lip service like 1500 pounds of toxic batteries.
Source(s):
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FZX/is_5_69/ai_102165472

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977200540

Permalink | Report

Hybrid or internal combustion? I struggled with the same question when I sought to replace my 10-year-old Outback. Attracted by the allure of an environmentally friendly and economically reasonable 40-45 MPG, I elected to purchase a 2009 Civic Hybrid instead of another all-wheel drive guzzler. Unfortunately, after 1400 miles, I'm getting 31.4 MPG, not 42.I'm also experiencing the thrill of 0 to 60 in a mere 5.8 MINUTES and the loss of 4-wheel drive traction on slippery Pittsburgh streets. Environmentally sound or fool-hardy? If I had it to do over again, I'd buy the Subaru!
Permalink | Report

I can't find a lot of data one way or the other. My gut feeling is that from a green perspective it's better continue to drive your existing vehicle rather than cause another to be built. If your present car is reasonabley clean running.

From an economic perspective it makes sense to drive your Camry for a couple more years and save the amount you would have spent on the monthly payment.

If you can keep your present car for eighteen months or so you will be able to buy a 2011 model which hopefully will be more reliable, less polluting etc.

My advice, keep your car tuned up, drive it a couple more years and put a couple hundred a month aside for a new one.
Permalink | Report

I'd keep the Camry and wait until a more efficient and less dangerous car propulsion technology becomes mainstream (see the article I link below, which includes some of the negatives others here have mentioned including performance, stalling, and issues with declining mileage over time).

I own a '96 Chevy and although it too has an oil leak and much less than ideal mileage, I do feel safe in it. Not only is the construction solid, the gasoline engine still provides reliable acceleration, and in a situation where I'd have to react fast, that's the kind of car I would want, not the kind that might sputter or hesitate when I need to get myself out of the way.

I like the earth and all, but if I die for the sake of a hybrid, I'd hate for my only lingering contribution to be my corpse decaying into its component elements. I'd rather stay alive to be able to do more not only for the environment but also for people whom I care about, when an opportunity presents itself.
Source(s):
http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/14/Autos/tipsandadvice/hybrid_worries/index.ht...

Permalink | Report

It depends on the amount and style of your driving. Certainly it takes a lot of energy to build and deliver a car. If you have a car that is running well, it certainly makes sense to keep driving it.

One thing to consider with a hybrid vehicle is that it will cost more than a similar conventional vehicle. There is simply no way to get around the fact that adding an extra powertrain and battery adds cost and weight. A hybrid benefits most from stop and go driving where the repeated deceleration can recharge the batter through regenerative braking. The electric motor can drive the vehicle at lower speeds.

If you drive a lot of highway miles you will gain relatively little benefit from a hybrid. In that case a diesel would be better suited since it works great at steady state cruising.

All of this presumes you drive a significant number of miles per year, say more than 12-15,000 per year. If you accumulate relatively few miles (8,000 miles or less) you may be better off just driving the car you have or buying a conventional gas car that gets better mileage at a lower cost such as a Ford Focus or Honda Fit. Such a new car would cost significantly less than a hybrid or diesel which would take a long time to recover the cost in fuel savings.

One last factor to consider is that cars today produce substantially fewer noxious emissions than a 1987 Camry. Taking that in account may tilt the balance in favor of a newer (although not necessarily new) car.
Permalink | Report