Hybrid cars

Soaring? I've not seen it above $3/gal. I'd hardlycall that soaring.

 

Look at how many highly promoted hybrids there are, and their real
world (not EPa) economy figures. Then look at small european diesels
and their real world MPg figures. see what the difference is.

 

How so? An automatic uses a viscous coupling, and there is always going to
be slippage. Some slushboxes have lock-up torque converters, which help
mileage in top gear, but the tranny still slips during acceleration.

 

Regarding horsepower, the mathematics follows:

1 horsepower is equivalent to 0.7457 kilojoules per second
gasoline typically delivers 50 kilojoules per gram

Now, if a car is REALLY delivering 300 hp, that would mean without
loss corrections, that you would be burning about 224 kilojoules per
second of fuel, or about 4.5 grams of gasoline every second.

In an hour, you would be burning over 16000 grams of fuel to maintain
that horsepower, or about 35 pounds of fuel. That is approaching 5
gallons per hour. If you are doing 70 mph over that hour, then you cannot
get more than 14 mpg theoretical maximum.

We both know that high advertised horsepower cars might get that good
or even a little better, so what that tells us is that the engine
maintenance
systems, transmission, etc, limits the horsepower during this period. We
are
actually NOT generating 300 hp, at least not all the time.

So the bottom line is that horsepower -actual horsepower - costs.
It is inevitable. To decrease the fuel consumption, actual horsepower
generated
has to be decreased...And that can be done with weight control, rolling
friction
(tires), aerodynamics, tranny and its electronic controls, engine controls,
air condition
usage, electricity usage, etc.

Now, assuming your 100 mpg situation, and again assuming you run 70 mph
over the test period, you could not be allowed to average more that 0.7
gallons
consumption over that hour. That is very roughly 4.9 pounds of fuel, or
2225
grams. This equates to about 40 well managed horsepower...

See the discrepancy?

 

But all engines aren't equally efficient.

 

Maybe you had better take a look at current autos. ALL of them have
lockup converters and 99% have overdrive as well. They are MUCH better
than a stick for mileage now.

 

You might like to look at the EPA test results. Cars with manual
transmissions get something like 1 mpg better mileage than the same car
with an automatic:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/

 

There is a limit to the amount of hydroelectric power available. You
can't dam up every river in the country.

There is great debate about the value of alcohol fuels. Studies by a
professor at Cornell University suggest that it takes more energy to
grow the corn (fertilizer, plowing, harvesting, etc.) and distill the
alcohol than you get out of the alcohol itself. Therefore, you really
don't gain anything that would displace fossil fuels.

And just what to the manufacturers care about the amount of fuel burned.
They don't own Saudi Arabia or Venezuela.

 

They can't make 100 percent into 2 percent by some slight adjustments in
facts. The reality is that alcohol is not much of an answer to the
problem with a shortage of fossil fuels.

 

The lockup torque converter does nothing for mileage except in high gear.
And the vast majority (if not all) manual transmissions have at least one
overdrive gear. I've never, ever heard of a slushbox that got better
mileage than an equivalent manual gearbox.

 

At least 1 mpg. In some vehicles, the real world difference can be over 5
mpg (depending on the driver).

 

The difference is that diesels with conventional power trains still don't do
well in town, most especially for the short trips that most people make. Our
2002 Prius gets real-world mid-40s mpg in town, even with short trips and
cold weather. I am disappointed if it drops below 50 mpg in mild weather -
what diesel compares to that? The extreme Lupo with the tiny engine and the
manual tranny? The Prius is quiet and powerful, a joy to drive in town. Our
7000 foot elevation doesn't slow it down a whit, and it has the exact same
throttle response cold as when warmed up. The "ECVT" (actually a fixed gear
system) is perfectly smooth and has almost nothing to fail.

Turbo diesels are wondrous things on the highway, but until the turbo gets
its mojo working any bicycle can beat them. A turbo diesel providing the
motive power in a hybrid power train would be a huge improvement.

Mike

 

....as long as you purchased the Prius for it's green advantages and
not the mpg you perceive you're saving, I agree. If you purchased the
car to save money on gas, you'll need to own the car for 7 years
before you realize any savings back.

 

We purchased it for both fuel savings and the driving experience; it is the
second most fun car to drive I've ever had (I still miss my Lotus, though).
We traded in my old '84 Nissan 300ZX for it, so we went from 18-20 mpg to
45-50 mpg. That amounts to 1000 gallons of gasoline over the last 50K miles
instead of 2500, so at an average of $2 per gallon we are $3000 US better
off so far, to the tune of $1000 per year at current gas prices. The Nissan
was crumbling at 150K miles, mostly electrical system intermittents, and was
abominable in snow. The Prius has ABS and the hybrid system protects itself
with a wheel slip limiter that behaves like a primitive traction control in
snow - press the accelerator and drive.

No car made ever pays for itself - they all depreciate, use fuel and require
maintenance and repair. What's the payback period for a turbo, or a premium
sound system? How long does it take for a Lexus to pay for itself compared
to a Toyota, or a Toyota compared to a Kia? The Prius just bleeds us less
than most while delivering solid reliability, and since we typically hold on
to cars for 15 years or more (my Volvo is 21 this year) it should be a good
choice.

Mike

 

There are two potential trouble areas that could be problematic down the
road: battery replacement cost (if you have to buy a pack out of
warranty) and the extremely complex electrical system to control all the
components.

I once owned a house with an advanced heat pump that didn't use outside
air for exchange, but rather ground water in a big loop of plastic pipe
buried in the side yard. We did have lower electrical bills, but the
annual repair costs on the heat pump and the big bill for replacing all
the underground pipe when it sprang a leak more than negated our
savings.

 

Inasmuch as the hybrid system is warranted for 100K miles or 8 years (150K
and 10 years in California and a few other states) I am not worried. One of
the techies in the Yahoo Prius Technical forum bought a battery pack from a
wreck for $500 US, barely twice the core value. There is a supply of
batteries from totalled Prius cars and no demand.

If you drive a car newer than 1980, you have a lot of sophisticated and
critical electronics in it, too. ECU, transmission controller, ABS
controller, probably power window and power lock controllers (depending on
make/model/year). Any of those is as vulnerable as the hybrid system
computers in the Prius and many are about as expensive... and are about as
available on the used market and as reliable. Electronics in a car are
nothing to be scared of these days - the moving parts are still the big
problems, and the Prius as fewer of those than probably any conventional car
on the market.

Buying any car is a risk. Head gaskets in some 2.5L DOHC Subaru engines,
throttle position controllers in some years of Volvo (not to mention the
transmissions and evaporators in '93 and '94 Volvo 850s), automatic
transmissions in some years of Honda/Acura V6s - all of these are real and
present frustrations experienced by buyers of conventional cars. The least
of those will set the owner back $1000. Some (like the trannies) are three
times that much and some unlucky owners have to drink from that well several
times.

It is interesting to google 'honda transmission fail' and 'prius battery
fail' - the first produces nearly half a million hits, mainly dealing with
why the transmissions are failing and what to do about them. The second
produces nearly 100K hits, mainly wondering if the battery will fail and
when that would be. Notice one post that claims to document a hybrid battery
failure - if you follow the link http://tinyurl.com/ahc2x it's clear it is
bogus. He claims the battery put out sulfur dioxide, while there is no
sulfur in the NiMH hybrid battery. I suspect the 12 volt lead-acid aux
battery failed instead, unless the post is just a hoax. I canna change the
laws of chemistry.

In the end, we are not born to live in fear. We pay our money and take our
chances. The experiences of people who have a lot more miles (183K miles for
the Yahoo Prius forum owner, last I heard) and a few more years on their
Prius than I have on mine are very encouraging indeed.

Mike

 

Why are you spreading political hog wash about this administration. This
administration has done many things to try to lower are demand for foreign
oil. They offered a 2000 dollar tax credit for people that buy Hybrids cars,
I know because I almost got one and the dealer told this to me many times.
Plus offered ground breaking help from the Government for people to use
Biofuels. I have a friend that collects hamburger grease to burn in his
diesel VW and told me about it plus you may still be able to read about it
at the biofuel sites. This is only the ones I know of first hand and am sure
there's more so don't spread political trash like that. What's this about
being anti-science bent and big oil in there pockets? You sound like another
Michael Moore nut. Get real.

 

Waiving the right to remain silent, "Michael Pardee"

That depends on the car. In 1976 I bought a new Corvette at the LA
dealer auction. Nine years later, I sold it for $800 less than the
purchase price. Had I maintained it better, I would have gotten more
than I paid.

 

The administration has demonstrated that they are anti-science by banning
federally-sanctioned stem-cell research, and by demanding religion being
taught as science (ID). And the Bush family has been a Big Oil family for
decades, look up Arbusto Energy for an example.

 

Don't forget that the big agriculture producers are about as Big Business
as you can get. And they are home-grown. The idea that the Bush
administration
would rather see all that money go into the pockets of foreign oil-producing
governments like Saudi Arabia, instead of into the pockets of the domestic
farmers is preposterous. Saudi Arabia does not make significant political
contributions into US reelection campaign funds compared to the farmers.
Why the hell do you think the government is still propping up the tobacco
farmers with subsidies?

Ted