Dark Side of Hybrid Vehicles

I missed your 4 point post but recently replied. To be clear, I rather like
the Prius and might consider purchasing one. I like gadgets and that'd be
the reason for the purchase. I'd probably spend much time enhancing
performance (driving style wise) and would probably post some impressive
MPG figures. Nothing much more to say about 5/20 oil. The manufacturers made
the change, told us it was for improved fuel economy which, as you noted, it
doesn't deliver. I just reported the change.

Way too many variables for me to deal with now.

Depends on location. I'm not overly fond of coal fired generation either but
it's got to come from somewhere.

I like choice too. Let's bring the smart42 to the US! Considering the odd
popularity and re-sale value of the Mini-Cooper, I'd think the Smart42 would
make dealerships very wealthy indeed.

 

im not too sure, but its worth a shot. the mini is based on an updated
"retro" design, and backed by BMW. the smart has no history, and im not
sure its even backed by daimler-chrysler in canada. isnt an independant
company importing it?

 

Let me explain it to you this way. They hybrid system allows the
horribly inefficient ICE to run closer to its theoretical efficiency
of 30% instead of its usual 20%. (These numbers come form other
posters in this thread along with explanations of the various ways in
which ICE efficiency is enhanced by the hybrid system.) Lets say that
instead of 20%, ICE efficiency goes to 25%. Now most of that energy
bypasses the hybrid system and goes straight to the wheels - no
conversion inefficiency. And the portion that does get converted
let's say it is the entire 5% gain, is handled more efficiently than
ICE. Let's say it is 50% efficient in total. That would mean that
overall efficiency of the gasoline-only powered vehicle would have
increased form 20 to 22.5%, a 12.5% increase.

Admittedly these numbers are made up but the reality is that the
system does make the vehicle much more efficient. I Googled the Civic
Hybrid (a great test bed since it is available with and without the
hybrid system) and found A Motor Trend one year test:

http://motortrend.com/roadtests/oneyear/112_0404_verdict/index1.html

"We experimented with driving style to determine its impact on fuel
economy. One week, we'd be miserly efficient, carefully monitoring
shift points, accelerating slowly, and keeping speed under 65 mph on
Interstates. The next week, we'd drive it like a teenager in a
vinyl-emblazoned Si, going full throttle at all times. The 1100-mile
experiment using the exact same route showed mild driving returned
48.2 mpg and wild driving netted 46.1 mpg. Needless to say, that was
the end of granny mode." (They actually ended up getting about 41 mpg
over the 23,000 mile test.)

Now, I don't know what kind of milage the regular Civic gets in
typical driving, but I guess it might be 35 mpg on a good day. If so,
the hybrid is 17 - 33% more efficient. How much of that do you think
can be attributed to tires?

List them all you want, but they don't alter the real world reality
that the hybrid system increases efficiency as measured in mpg of
gasoline, the only energy source they use.

You missed the part about the benefit being very small.

To exhaust the battery you would have to have been driving like a
maniac for an extended period of time.

Common sense. If I try to get maximum power out of my engine for more
than a minute at a time, the fuel shuts off because the speed has
reached 130 mph. What percent of the time do you spend driving with
your foot on the floor?

But it is consuming it more efficiently and you will get it back when
the motor assists.

Do you have a better way of measuring the efficiency of a
gasoline-only powered vehicle.

How does political posturing affect fuel efficiency? And what driving
style do I have to adopt to get 46 mpg out of my GS-R?

 

Why is there a need for the Smart when you can get better milage out
of the gasoline-as-the-onlly-energy-source Insight?

 

So let me get this straight. You keep whining that hybrids don't have
any energy source but gasoline, but when someone tells you about a
hybrid which does have a second energy source, you whine about that
too. If they got 5% of their energy from hydrocarbons emitted into
the air by vehicle refueling, would you complain that they were
stealing your gas?

 

I think you'll have them next year.
Smarts are sold and serviced in Mercedes Benz dealerships, at least in
Ottawa. Smart Cars are a wholly owned subsidiary of MB. The first car sold
in 1998.

 

Sweet Jesus,...I want this one!
http://www.motorsm.com/collection/photos/SMART_ROADSTER_SL.jpg

 

I'm all for the Smart being sold in the US. More choices is always
a good thing in my book. But alas, DCX nixed the idea about half a
year back. And it looks like the new CEO is less enamored to the
brand than Shremp, who created it. It's been a big money loser
since its inception. Rumors are that he'll shop the brand.

BTW, the diesel Smart sold in Canada has a 0-100 km/h of 19.8 sec!

 

Yep. And 95 a litre regular gas!
The can't keep them in stock.

 

Definitely cute, but it would be a royal PITA to keep the headlights
clear in heavy snow. Would need some sort of a cover, for sure. But then
not too many folks in snowy climates would go for a convertable, I guess.

 

Oh, here's a good site for gov't real world test results of various
HEV's:

avt.inel.gov/hev.shtml

 

Otoh, there's at least one municipal fleet that's looking
at forcing the issue by purchasing a couple of hundred
of them.

No decision yet...

(keep in mind that 99% or so of city worker driving doesn't
need anything larger than the Schmarrrt Kar).

Oh.. and that lovable curmodgeon from CBS's "Sixty Minutes", Andy Rooney,
test drove around NYC a couple of months ago. I made a QuickTime version
of his clip and posted it at:

http://www.panix.com/~dannyb/video/schmart-car-cdr.mov

Note: it's about 16 megs in size... (which is larger
than the car...)

 

different strokes for different folks. isnt the smart supposed to be
cheaper? then theres people like me who dont have a 2-car garage and
dont drive much. id much rather have a smart and have room left over for
3 more motorcycles or scooters

 

The Smart doesn't consume gasoline and it's very unlikely the Insight gets
73 US MPG irrespective of conditions.

 

Needing to repeatedly point out the obvious isn't whining and charging
batteries via house wiring isn't new.
Sniffing gas fumes would be humorous but you'd need a permanent connection
for figures like you're guessing - about as practical as an extension cord
for your hybrid.

 

The Smart as delivered in the USA will be a gasoline version.
Canadians will get the diesel version.

The EPA rating for the 2005 Insight M/T is 60/66, so 73 is a possiblity
with careful driving.

--Gene

 

Canadians _have_ the diesel version.

 

That belies the "only source of energy" that you repeat frequently. It's
oil, not diesel or gasoline, for the Smart and most other cars.

I picked posted results for each because that would seem to be the folks
from the hyper-miler class, squeezing miles out of their barrel of oil.
I stayed with Canadian posts, so I could keep the Smart in context.

There are hypermilers in the US that report 90MPG with the Insight.

The Smart is estimated at 51/61 USMPG (and 19.8 seconds 0-60).
The Insight is rated at 60/71 USMPG (and 10.6 seconds 0-60).

 

The Dark Side of Diesel:
http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/english/faq/answer.cfm?id=750&score=3228&text=N

 

Hello,
I might have missed it but does anyone know of a website where I can see a
picture of the "Smart" vehicle?

I wanted to comment on those people that mentioned that want to develop a
system where they can easily charge the batteries in their Hybrid vehicle.

Do other people agree or disagree that those people that charge the
batteries that they might end up getting more MPG but their electrical
utility bills will be higher and the utility companies will have to burn
more oil to run their generators. In other words, in the long run--they
might not be saving any money in the long run.

Jason