Hybrid cars

Think how smart the average person is.

Now consider that 50.0% of the population isn't even that smart.

Those are the people who will be running your nuclear reactors.

No, thanks.

 

Around here, in one year (Jan 2004 to Jan 2005) the price more than doubled.
That's soaring.

 

You seem to be confusing "average" with "median."

You also assume that a person with average or median intelligence will be
running nuclear reactors. I am not a nuclear scientist, but my guess is
that that due to job requirements, nuclear reactor operators will have above
average and median intelligence.

 

I believe the Accord Hybrid is one with a smaller effect on fuel
economy by an increase in performance. However - the Accord
Hybrid doesn't qualify for the California HOV lane exception.

There are many ways to make a hybrid powerplant. However - the
main effect on highway efficiency is the use of a tiny engine that's
inherently fuel efficient. If these dinky 1.3-1.5L engines were used
without a supplementary electric motor, they would still get
exceptional highway fuel economy. They would also take nearly
forever to get up to speed, which is where the electric motor
comes in.

The electrical motor simply provides acceptable acceleration. An
ICE is also going to be less efficient and not as powerful at low
revs. At low revs, the electric motor is probably generating more
power than the ICE. Regenerative braking recycles what normally
would be turned into heat back into the battery.

 

But the main reason--pretty much the ONLY reason--is that the automatic
transmission is a fluid drive, with inherent waste in the fluid transfer
mechanism.

Manual transmissions are mechanical drives, without the same wastes.

 

Wrong.

See the 2006 Honda Civic, where the automatic gets BETTER mileage than
the manual trans model.

 

But don't the shift points matter, too?

 

These really aren't rocket science. I am doing my own maintenance, and it is
different from conventional cars but not hard to learn. I bought the Toyota
manuals and a $200 aftermarket scanner to allow me to interface with the
hybrid and battery "ECUs", but I understand the current model uses CAN. If
Toyota's hybrids don't make it farther into the mainstream, if Toyota backs
out of their commitment to convert the bulk of their fleet to their hybrid
system, it may be a problem. Otherwise we will see independents attracted to
the market. The advent of EFI in everyday vehicles in the 80s was a bigger
challenge, as computers (gasp!) appeared in cars. Today's garages cope with
ECUs or fail. tomorrow's will cope with hybrids or fail.

That is the error I hear the most. What makes you think that is the case? It
defies the nature of failure patterns because it supposes there is a timer
that will cause the battery to fail the very year the warranty expires. Will
your car be scrap when the standard warranty expires? Or will your
refrigerator only last one year? The reason those things don't happen is
that manufacturers know better than to push the envelope on warranty
periods; that is the sure way to loss where there should be profit.

You are still thinking of car batteries. Industrial batteries have been
getting 20 year life expectancies for ages:
http://www.batterypowersystems.com/products/absolyteIIP.htm says (in part)
"Absolyte IIP VRLA batteries range from 105 to 4800AH and have a twenty (20)
year life expectancy." Batteries are not all that sensitive to time, but
mostly to operating conditions. Put 5% too much voltage on one of those
puppies and it will last less than a week, as I too well know :-(
Treat it right and it will be at rated capacity when I retire.

Toyota only puts their money where their mouth is for 10 years, but a lot of
cars don't last that long, either. Every car dies of something. My first new
car was a 1970 Mercury Capri that went to salvage at the tender age of 8
years when it needed yet another u-joint... they were integral with the
driveshaft, which was then as expensive as the market value of the car. My
second new car was a 1984 Dodge that made it to 6 years or so before it
needed a timing chain change. Step one: remove engine so the cover could be
removed. More than the car was worth. My last Volvo wasn't worth a new
carburetor at 25 years. Anyway, I have every expectation that most Prius
will end their days with the original battery somewhere around the 15 year
mark, which is what Toyota estimates the battery life is.

I can't understand the fixation on the battery. If Toyota is confident
enough to pick up the bill for the first eight or ten years, what is the
likelihood there will be a drastic change in the curve at 11 or 12 or 13
years? What is the chance this major automaker with a reputation for
reliability has gone nuts and made a car that will bite them hard on
standard warranty on a major item? I think the odds are in my favor. If you
want to hold off, I understand.

Mike

 

Have you had a lot of trouble with your ECU or transmission controller
failing you on the road? The controllers in the Toyota hybrid system are
very much like those devices: crucial, low power and very reliable. You may
be hearing of ECU replacements in the pre-2004 Prius cars; those are
replaced because the software could not be updated otherwise and was too
touchy about the speed with which the combustion engine fired up. As the
engine aged it would sometimes get too slow about firing and would set the
hybrid warning. The present model just takes flash upgrades.

Worry more about power handling devices. There have been a smattering of
inverter failures, which have the same effect as the igniter failing in
Hondas - call a tow truck. It isn't nearly as common as igniter failures,
but will be more expensive when out of warranty... probably $300 or more on
the used market. Let's not get started on main relays!

What I am trying to say is that the reliability and longevity issues are
somewhat different from those in conventional vehicles but are no more
worrisome. The car you are driving today, if it was made since 1996, is
every bit as complex and high tech as hybrids are. As a practical matter,
this Prius has been so far the most reliable car I've had in my 35 years of
driving... by a large margin.

Mike

 

Not according to the measurements; http://tinyurl.com/axydj

The 2005 Corolla has 0.2 inch more headroom, 0.5 inch more rear shoulder
room and 0.9 inch more front hip room.

The 2005 Prius has 0.6 inch more front legroom, 3.2 inches more rear
legroom, 2.2 inches more front shoulder room, and 5.4 inches more rear hip
room. Altogether the Prius has nearly 6 cubic feet more passenger space.

The pre-2004 Prius was nearly identical in measurements to the Corolla.

Mike

 

You may want to READ it. Notice that little item about freedom of
speech? It means I have the RIGHT to say whatever I wish the same as you
do.

Sure you do Move out of the US. The constitution does provide for
spending for the defense of the country and it's interests.

NOPE, nothing about teaching religion is unconstitutional. It states
that Establishment of a state religion is wrong. That means that the
government cannot say "ALL persons in the U.S. MUST be Catholic" Or
"that all persons MUST be Wicca" However there is NOTHING about religion
being taught in shools as being wrong, regardless what the ACLU wants to
believe.

 

Here in Hurricane country,we often pump DOWN lakes and reservoirs to have
capacity for incoming storms.Other areas have water shortages year round.

And there's no way to convert electricity into ethanol.
Maybe hydrogen,but not ethanol or other hydrocarbon fuels.

And for hydrogen conversion,the efficiencies are terrible.

You want reliable electric power,nuclear is the way to go.

 

The 2001-2003 Prius is remarkably nimble and manueverable, the features I
prized in the Lotus and sorely missed in the Nissan 300ZX. Dunno about the
current version. I despise automatic transmissions, so I had reservations
about the "ECVT" of the Toyota Hybrid System. Boy, was I surprised! The
accelerator calls up power with supernatural smoothness and predictability.
I hate the way automatics always seem to be in the wrong gear or downshift
when I didn't want them to - never an issue with the THS. I drove it once
and fell in love.

People are always stereotyping me and ascribing motives according to their
preconceptions when they find I not only own a Prius, I love it. I am not a
liberal, I am a Reagan Republican. I am also a minor motorhead (I have a
brother who is a major motorhead, so I know the difference!) I know what I
like, and this is it. Now when I have to drive a conventional vehicle,
especially one with an automatic tranny, I wonder, "what is all the
'vroom-clunk, vroom-clunk' about?" The irony is that now my wife has it and
I have her Volvo wagon with an automatic... vroom-clunk. :-(

Mike

 

What diesel do you have?

 

Since automobile engines are only about 33% efficient, it would more
likely be burning three times this much.

The vehicle would have to be absolutely huge to be going only 70mph at
300hp. Even a fully loaded semi would probably be doing over 100mph
at that power setting.

The only time an engine generates its maximum power is at wide open
throttle and at the specified rpm.

Assuming that we are moving at a constant speed, the power being
generated would be the same for a given vehicle regardless of what
engine is used (within reason.)

Actually, given the 33% efficiency factor, the engine would only be
delivering about 13 hp. Only a very small car could achieve that. To
give you an idea how small, consider that a go-cart with a 9.5 hp
engine tops out at about 50 mph. With 13 hp it might get up to 65.
Your 100mpg car will have to be to be smaller and/or more aerodynamic
than that.

Theoretically, it doesn't matter how much power the engine can
generate, it only matters how much you use. In reality, there is
added inefficiency running the engine at low power settings and more
powerful engines are likely to burn more fuel at idle when you are
getting 0 mpg. For those reasons, a more powerful engine will consume
more fuel even if it is not driven any faster that the same car with a
less powerful engine. In practice, drivers tend to use the power they
have available, so the difference is even greater.

 

Definitely true. Water storage is a proven and attractive way to use
intermittent generation to provide power on demand, competitive with current
peaking sources. The problem is that the intermittent power producers
haven't seen fit to do that in the US AFAIK.

Mike

 

No, it is more efficient when working harder, at least up to ~70%
power. Unless it is very underpowered or the hill is very steep, it
won't be working that hard.


As I

 

Yes, the car did change - I stand corrected.

 

Yeah, I've watched the Simpsons too. But in the real world, why managers who
are responsible for billions of dollars worth of tightly regulated equipment
would hire stupid people escapes me.

Mike

 

I guess all they need to work on is the styling!
It sure doesn't compare to a Lotus or Z.

(IMO,Prius is dog-ugly)