Hybrids are coming...get your name on the list

[Carl 1 Lucky Texan]

Plus, in hot states like Texas, if you use the air conditioner the gas
engine is 'on' almost continually anyway - further reducing the benefits
or the system.
BTW- is there an option on either the Toy or Honda for overnight battery
recharging from the grid?

Carl
1 Lucky Texan

 

[Dominic Richens]

Screw hybrids and their costly batteries, go Diesel:

Using today's average gas price here, the typical 20k kms per year
and city consumption (the hybrid forte), yearly gas costs are:

Civic Si (gas only) $1456
Civic Hybrid $892
Insight $710
Prius $728

VW Jetta Diesel $600 (US)

I would say the Prius (or any hybrid) makes lots of economic sense.


Gas today here is 91¢/litre
Consumption, city, from CanadianDriver.com
Civic Si 8.0l/100km
Insight 3.9l/100km
Civic Hybrid 4.9l/100km
Prius 4.0l/100km

Jetta Diesel 5.1l/100km

 

[Dave Null Sr.]

Screw hybrids and their costly batteries, go Diesel:


VW Jetta Diesel $600 (US)

So more like $824 but

Jetta Diesel 5.1l/100km

Consumption is listed at 5.6l/100km

So $905. Plus maybe a higher price.

And diesel in North America is still dirty
compared to European.

Diesel does have a big edge for longevity
and proven track record.

 

[Steve Bukosky]

I bought the Forester over the Honda CR-V because of the gas economy,
among other things. So, I am interested in economy. At this time, it
gets the same or less mileage than my 94 Pontiac Bonneville. But, I
wanted a wagon and AWD.

I've thought about hi-breds but as my miles pile up on the highway,
question what the economy versus payback would be then. Currently, I
think diesel is the way to go. I might consider a Jetta wagon. I find
the AWD without locking axel is ineffective when the going gets tough.
Why would Subaru put limited slip on the Outback and not the Forester
where such a feature would be expected?

Sorry about changing the topic but hopefully Subaru corporate is
reading and understands some catching up is needed. I'd love a turbo
but will not pay for premium fuel. So, if I can't have a snorting
power wagon, I want fuel economy.

 

[Ignignokt]

Plus, in hot states like Texas, if you use the air conditioner the gas
engine is 'on' almost continually anyway - further reducing the
benefits or the system.
BTW- is there an option on either the Toy or Honda for overnight
battery recharging from the grid?

Not in the Prius. I don't believe the Honda has this ability either, but I
don't have first-hand knowledge of that car like I do of the Prius. BTW, my
folks both absolutely love my Mom's Prius. My Dad has a really nice Dodge
Caravan, but unless they have more than four people to carry, they *always*
take the Prius on all their trips. Now that my Dad's retiring, I expect
that his Caravan will probably get driven something very close to never.

- Greg Reed

 

[Ignignokt]

And diesel in North America is still dirty
compared to European.

When I watched a Jetta with "TDI" on the trunk pull out in front of me
yesterday (illegally), I rolled my eyes in anticipation of having to smell
diesel exhaust for the next 8 miles (the likely distance before I'd have an
opportunity to pass). I neither smelled nor saw anything in those 8 miles
that would lead me to suspect the car had a diesel in it. Diesel engines
have come a long way since the black plume-spewing 1978 Rabbit my friend
Mark sometimes drives. But he gets 45 mpg in it, and pays about 70 cents
less per gallon for his fuel than I do -- all this being US dollars and
gallons. And miles. (Does anybody else still use miles?)

- Greg Reed

 

[Ignignokt]

I find
the AWD without locking axel is ineffective when the going gets tough.
Why would Subaru put limited slip on the Outback and not the Forester
where such a feature would be expected?

My XT has a limited slip differential on the rear axle, though I'm not sure
of exactly what variety. Since you've indicated a distate for the turbo,
you might want to check Subaru.com to find out whether the XS also has a
limited slip. I know it has many of the XT's other upgrades (but not the
turbo).

- Greg Reed

 

[Top Sirloin]

The Toyota Echo can be had for under $10,000 at 38 MPG combined.
The Volkswagen Golf and Jetta TDI models get 32/41 respectively (combined
city and hwy) and cost thousands less than the hybrids.

And the TDI's would get even better numbers if
they had a CVT.

 

[Steve Bukosky]

My XT has a limited slip differential on the rear axle, though I'm not sure
of exactly what variety. Since you've indicated a distate for the turbo,

Yes, I might be out of date with my objection. My Forester is a 2002
and I think I got caught up in the AWD sales hype. In fairness, I
have taken it through some deep snow and had a blast. However, I once
got stuck where only two diagonal wheels would move. I used to have
that problem plowing airport runways with an old Jeep CJ5. I learned
the importance of axel locks then.

 

[BRH]

Not true....The legal requirement is to not post numbers that are HIGHER than the
EPA tests. The CAN legally post lower numbers. But, of course, they would be
crazy to do so.

 

[Al]

Not true....The legal requirement is to not post numbers that are HIGHER than
the
EPA tests. The CAN legally post lower numbers. But, of course, they would
be
crazy to do so.

Not worth the extra cost. My gas cost for my vehicle is about $600/yr.
Right, I don't drive a lot, and you know, I don't need to. At any rate,
for the $3000 premium for a hybrid, I can drive for 5 yrs..and then it's
trade-in time. So what's the point? And how much does it cost to replace
the batteries? Think life cycle costs and you'll stick with IC engines.

Al

 

[Todd H.]

Not worth the extra cost. My gas cost for my vehicle is about $600/yr.
Right, I don't drive a lot, and you know, I don't need to. At any rate,
for the $3000 premium for a hybrid, I can drive for 5 yrs..and then it's
trade-in time. So what's the point? And how much does it cost to replace
the batteries? Think life cycle costs and you'll stick with IC
engines.

Think clean air for your children and a reduced dependence on dead
dino juice from a terribly unstable region of the planet, and demand
more efficient vehicles.

Hard dollar thinking and gas prices that were (quite artificially)
lower than the cost of a gallon of milk have gotten us to where we are
today....both in terms of gas prices, and continued involvement in
that political nightmare known as the Middle East.

 

[Walt Kienzle]

Think clean air for your children and a reduced dependence on dead
dino juice from a terribly unstable region of the planet, and demand
more efficient vehicles.

Hard dollar thinking and gas prices that were (quite artificially)
lower than the cost of a gallon of milk have gotten us to where we are
today....both in terms of gas prices, and continued involvement in
that political nightmare known as the Middle East.

I disagree with both of your claims and believe that you have fallen into
the trap of the eco-fanatics. 10 years ago, production cars were being
made - and sold - that had emissions that were cleaner that the ambient air
that they took in. With the current emission standards ("current" being
those in place since 1985), a highway full of automobiles is causing less
pollution than a herd of cows. Nobody is protesting this existence of cows
or asking for the development of hybrid cows. Contrary to the cries from Al
Gore, the automobile is not our greatest enemy. Now if we could get the
same reduction in pollution from heavy equipment, you would have something.
But I don't see anybody making, buying, selling or talking about hybrid
Freightliners, Mack trucks or diesel locomotives.

For someone that spends only $600/year on gasoline, and I am in that camp
along with the OP, the few gallons saved by going to a hybrid isn't going to
reduce the rate of dependence on "dead dino juice". We could fuel our cars
with ethanol and get that result without the expense of hybrids. Since you
live in the Chicago area, as I do, you are already using gasoline with 10%
ethanol. Many cars (and trucks) are equipped to run on 85% ethanol. Did
you hear that it was on a promotional sale for $0.85/gal a couple of weeks
ago in Chicagoland? That would have been the thing to buy to reduce
emissions and dependence on oil. Oil goes into more things than
automobiles. It is used to generate electricity, make plastics and
chemicals, and more. Saving a minute amount of oil by switching to a hybrid
vehicle isn't going to make any difference in when we run out.

The problem I have with hybrid vehicles is that they still use gasoline and
they have batteries, which IMHO are not a very efficient method for storing
energy. What about all the pollution generated and/or energy needed to
dispose of or recycle the batteries in that hybrid at the end of their
useful life? I see the true solution to the items you ask us to think about
is by developing vehicles that operate on something other than oil.

Walt Kienzle

 

[Byron]

Now if we could get the same reduction in pollution from heavy equipment,
you would have something. But I don't see anybody making, buying, selling
or talking about hybrid Freightliners, Mack trucks or diesel locomotives.

GM hasn't made hybrid cars or light trucks (yet) because it's focusing
on the big pollution producers.
http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=7193&sid=173&n=156
They delivered a fleet of 235 diesel-electric hybrid buses which will
save Seattle 750,000 gallons of fuel a year.
And the maintenance schedule is less expensive too.

Saving a minute amount of oil by switching to a hybrid
vehicle isn't going to make any difference in when we run out.

Um, changing to hybrid buses saves one city a lot of gallons. (a mere
drop multiplied by many cities)
If in 5-10 years the world auto market switched almost entirely to
hybrid (especially diesel powered ones) powertrains and saved a
conservative 25% in fuel economy, don't you think that will help
conserve the supply for a while?

The problem I have with hybrid vehicles is that they still use gasoline and
they have batteries, which IMHO are not a very efficient method for storing
energy.

Depends what kind of efficiency. Batteries used on modern EVs are quite
efficient storing and giving back electrical power. However they are
very inefficient when compared to liquid fuels with an energy to weight
ratio.

What about all the pollution generated and/or energy needed to dispose
of or recycle the batteries in that hybrid at the end of their useful life?

Might be equivalent to reducing the number of tankers (sea and land)
needed to carry all that gasoline weight around the world.

I see the true solution to the items you ask us to think about
is by developing vehicles that operate on something other than oil.

I agree on that point, but fuel cell cars are probably decades away from
being produced economically. They exist now, but check out the
development costs. And don't forget to factor in the cost of replacing
or augmenting most every gas station in the world with a
hydrogen/whatever station. Hybrids will help bridge the gap. Plus,
what if the hydrogen needed to power fuel cells is most economically
derived from oil?

- Byron

 

[Todd H.]

I disagree with both of your claims and believe that you have fallen into
the trap of the eco-fanatics. 10 years ago, production cars were being
made - and sold - that had emissions that were cleaner that the ambient air
that they took in. With the current emission standards ("current" being
those in place since 1985), a highway full of automobiles is causing less
pollution than a herd of cows. Nobody is protesting this existence of cows
or asking for the development of hybrid cows.

Rightly so cus cows aren't manufactured goods.

Contrary to the cries from Al Gore, the automobile is not our
greatest enemy.

It's certainly the most numerous.

Now if we could get the same reduction in pollution from heavy
equipment, you would have something.

How many front end loaders or locomotives do you see on our morning
commute?

For someone that spends only $600/year on gasoline, and I am in that camp
along with the OP, the few gallons saved by going to a hybrid isn't going to
reduce the rate of dependence on "dead dino juice". We could fuel our cars
with ethanol and get that result without the expense of hybrids. Since you
live in the Chicago area, as I do, you are already using gasoline with 10%
ethanol. Many cars (and trucks) are equipped to run on 85% ethanol. Did
you hear that it was on a promotional sale for $0.85/gal a couple of weeks
ago in Chicagoland? That would have been the thing to buy to reduce
emissions and dependence on oil. Oil goes into more things than
automobiles. It is used to generate electricity, make plastics and
chemicals, and more. Saving a minute amount of oil by switching to a hybrid
vehicle isn't going to make any difference in when we run out.

That's where your math is troublesome. If you can double the mileage
of all production automobiles, you multiply that by how many millions
of vehicles there are... and you sure as hell make a huge difference.

It's progress that tailpipe emissions on a given automobile are
cleaner than they once were. It's embarassing from an engineering
perspective that average mileage is little changed over the past 15
years. With the SUV boom, average mileage I believe has in fact gone
down.

The problem I have with hybrid vehicles is that they still use gasoline and
they have batteries, which IMHO are not a very efficient method for storing
energy. What about all the pollution generated and/or energy needed to
dispose of or recycle the batteries in that hybrid at the end of their
useful life? I see the true solution to the items you ask us to think about
is by developing vehicles that operate on something other than oil.

If Subaru made a natural gas fired outback, I'd buy one. Nothing out
the tailipe but water vapor.

If one isn't part of the solution on this issue, they're part of the
problem.

Consumers only looking at the bottom line of today's fuel cost are
hampering the adoption of LEV's and alternative fuel vehicles, and the
future doesn't look too rosey

 

[oothlagre]

The conflict in the Middle East is only a portion of gas prices. Both China
and the US have increased consumption and with the trend of bigger, heavier
and less-efficient vehicles continuing, well, it comes down to supply and
demand. Greater demand means greater price.

It's been over 100 years for the life of the IC engine. It's time for a new
alternative that does not fund terrorist organizations.

Henry

 

[Dan Duncan]

Rightly so cus cows aren't manufactured goods.

They aren't?

When did herefords thunder across the Serengeti?

It's embarassing from an engineering perspective that average mileage
is little changed over the past 15 years. With the SUV boom, average
mileage I believe has in fact gone down.

Ford gets a lower average MPG now than they did in their
Model T days. That's downright disgusting. (I'm not
knocking the Model T, but you'd think a century of refinement
could improve the efficiency.)

If Subaru made a natural gas fired outback, I'd buy one. Nothing out
the tailipe but water vapor.

And CO2.

If you want water vapor as your only byproduct, you have to
burn pure hydrogen.

Any CxHy (hydrocarbon) fuel is going to produce both CO2 and H2O,
unless you fail to burn the carbon at all.

-DanD