Hybrids and Normal Usage

I'd like to get a hybrid, probably a Prius, but I don't really drive all
that much. My 1991 Honda Accord only had about 80,000 miles on it, and I
drove it less the last couple of years than ever. So, my question: Does
infrequent driving tend to degrade the life of the hybrid battery?

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 03:38:26 GMT, Ralph Alvy <ralvy@warpmail.net>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>I'd like to get a hybrid, probably a Prius, but I don't really drive all
>that much. My 1991 Honda Accord only had about 80,000 miles on it, and I
>drove it less the last couple of years than ever. So, my question: Does
>infrequent driving tend to degrade the life of the hybrid battery?[/color]
Shouldn't. But what would be the point if you don't drive much, get a
Matrix and save the money, unless you like the cool display on the
Prius, of course. We have a Prius, but it'll probably get somewhere
between 12-15k a year on it.

In article <f7thl1lvha2g0phjkrnhr8glbgoqgo09hl@4ax.com>, Chris Hill
<hillco@earthlink.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 03:38:26 GMT, Ralph Alvy <ralvy@warpmail.net>
> wrote:
>[color=green]
> >I'd like to get a hybrid, probably a Prius, but I don't really drive all
> >that much. My 1991 Honda Accord only had about 80,000 miles on it, and I
> >drove it less the last couple of years than ever. So, my question: Does
> >infrequent driving tend to degrade the life of the hybrid battery?[/color]
> Shouldn't. But what would be the point if you don't drive much, get a
> Matrix and save the money, unless you like the cool display on the
> Prius, of course. We have a Prius, but it'll probably get somewhere
> between 12-15k a year on it.
>[/color]
On the basis of the cost of the car and the cost of fuel, I agree.

Thing is, the Prius has merit beyond it thriftiness. That's primarily
why my wife and I bought one. The fuel efficiency is a wonderful plus.

Brent

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:56:01 -0400, Brent Secombe wrote:
[color=blue]
> In article <f7thl1lvha2g0phjkrnhr8glbgoqgo09hl@4ax.com>, Chris Hill
> <hillco@earthlink.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 03:38:26 GMT, Ralph Alvy <ralvy@warpmail.net>
>> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>> >I'd like to get a hybrid, probably a Prius, but I don't really drive all
>> >that much. My 1991 Honda Accord only had about 80,000 miles on it, and I
>> >drove it less the last couple of years than ever. So, my question: Does
>> >infrequent driving tend to degrade the life of the hybrid battery?[/color]
>> Shouldn't. But what would be the point if you don't drive much, get a
>> Matrix and save the money, unless you like the cool display on the
>> Prius, of course. We have a Prius, but it'll probably get somewhere
>> between 12-15k a year on it.
>>[/color]
> On the basis of the cost of the car and the cost of fuel, I agree.
>
> Thing is, the Prius has merit beyond it thriftiness. That's primarily
> why my wife and I bought one. The fuel efficiency is a wonderful plus.
>
> Brent[/color]


Well, it's a good car, it's a neat design, but please don't lull yourself
into thinking you're 'saving the planet'. You really aren't.

The infrastructure for dealing with the batteries still isn't really in
place yet. They'll just sit and rot in a warehouse somewhere until there
is a good disposal method.

If you drive in the summer with the AC, or the winter with the heat, the
engine is going to run just as much as it would if the car DIDN'T have the
batteries, and burn almost as much gas and spew just as much exhaust as it
would if the electric motor weren't there.

In other parts of the world, the system is set to run off the electric
motor more than the gas motor. In the NA market, they turned the gas motor
on more often, in order to give us the performance they think we want.

There are ways to hack the system and set it to the mode used in the rest
of the world, but you'll obviously void the warranty. You really won't
harm the car; it was actually designed to operate in the other mode
primarily.

The Honda Insight was built to run off the gas engine primarliy, using the
electric motor for a performance boost when needed, esp down low since an
electric motor produces all it's torque right from the start. The Prius
was designed to do just the opposite; use the electric motor as the
primary motive source with the gas as a baackup and to charge the
batteries when required, but as I mentioned earlier, they reversed this
for the US market to make it more like the Honda.

Not as reported in the Tribune Newspapers that did a road test of the Hybrid
Highlander. The actual fuel mileage is far below what Toyota reports for
that vehicle as is the case with their other hybrids. When used as the
average driver uses that type of vehicle, the actual fuel mileage they
reported was only marginally higher than the conventionally powered V6
Highlnader. Basically they said if your goal is to save money of fuel,
forget it. Since the majority of owners only keep their vehicles for about
four years, the $7,500 premium that it costs to buy the hybrid over the
standard V6 Highlander will buy ALL of the fuel for the V6 for FIVE years.
;)

mike hunt


"Brent Secombe" <bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:211020051056011298%bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk...[color=blue]
> In article <f7thl1lvha2g0phjkrnhr8glbgoqgo09hl@4ax.com>, Chris Hill
> <hillco@earthlink.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 03:38:26 GMT, Ralph Alvy <ralvy@warpmail.net>
>> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>> >I'd like to get a hybrid, probably a Prius, but I don't really drive all
>> >that much. My 1991 Honda Accord only had about 80,000 miles on it, and I
>> >drove it less the last couple of years than ever. So, my question: Does
>> >infrequent driving tend to degrade the life of the hybrid battery?[/color]
>> Shouldn't. But what would be the point if you don't drive much, get a
>> Matrix and save the money, unless you like the cool display on the
>> Prius, of course. We have a Prius, but it'll probably get somewhere
>> between 12-15k a year on it.
>>[/color]
> On the basis of the cost of the car and the cost of fuel, I agree.
>
> Thing is, the Prius has merit beyond it thriftiness. That's primarily
> why my wife and I bought one. The fuel efficiency is a wonderful plus.
>
> Brent[/color]

Right, Mike

The Highlander doesn't use the Atkinson cycle engine, so its conversion of
gasoline to useful work is no better than a non-hybrid. Also, since it's a
vehicle for the "SUV Crowd" who like a lot of weight and speed and might
even drag race now and then, the likelihood of improved gas mileage pretty
well has to fall on the recovery of braking energy alone. Big deal.

Chuck

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:r2Gdncx9GbR3ssTeUSdV9g@ptd.net...[color=blue]
> Not as reported in the Tribune Newspapers that did a road test of the[/color]
Hybrid[color=blue]
> Highlander. The actual fuel mileage is far below what Toyota reports for
> that vehicle as is the case with their other hybrids. When used as the
> average driver uses that type of vehicle, the actual fuel mileage they
> reported was only marginally higher than the conventionally powered V6
> Highlnader. Basically they said if your goal is to save money of fuel,
> forget it. Since the majority of owners only keep their vehicles for[/color]
about[color=blue]
> four years, the $7,500 premium that it costs to buy the hybrid over the
> standard V6 Highlander will buy ALL of the fuel for the V6 for FIVE years.
> ;)
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Brent Secombe" <bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:211020051056011298%bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk...[color=green]
> > In article <f7thl1lvha2g0phjkrnhr8glbgoqgo09hl@4ax.com>, Chris Hill
> > <hillco@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> >> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 03:38:26 GMT, Ralph Alvy <ralvy@warpmail.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I'd like to get a hybrid, probably a Prius, but I don't really drive[/color][/color][/color]
all[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> >that much. My 1991 Honda Accord only had about 80,000 miles on it, and[/color][/color][/color]
I[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> >drove it less the last couple of years than ever. So, my question:[/color][/color][/color]
Does[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> >infrequent driving tend to degrade the life of the hybrid battery?
> >> Shouldn't. But what would be the point if you don't drive much, get a
> >> Matrix and save the money, unless you like the cool display on the
> >> Prius, of course. We have a Prius, but it'll probably get somewhere
> >> between 12-15k a year on it.
> >>[/color]
> > On the basis of the cost of the car and the cost of fuel, I agree.
> >
> > Thing is, the Prius has merit beyond it thriftiness. That's primarily
> > why my wife and I bought one. The fuel efficiency is a wonderful plus.
> >
> > Brent[/color]
>
>[/color]

You forgot to say "In my interpritation"

Slim

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:13:59 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
<mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Not as reported in the Tribune Newspapers that did a road test of the Hybrid
>Highlander. The actual fuel mileage is far below what Toyota reports for
>that vehicle as is the case with their other hybrids. When used as the
>average driver uses that type of vehicle, the actual fuel mileage they
>reported was only marginally higher than the conventionally powered V6
>Highlnader. Basically they said if your goal is to save money of fuel,
>forget it. Since the majority of owners only keep their vehicles for about
>four years, the $7,500 premium that it costs to buy the hybrid over the
>standard V6 Highlander will buy ALL of the fuel for the V6 for FIVE years.
>;)
>
>mike hunt
>
>
>"Brent Secombe" <bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:211020051056011298%bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk...[color=green]
>> In article <f7thl1lvha2g0phjkrnhr8glbgoqgo09hl@4ax.com>, Chris Hill
>> <hillco@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 03:38:26 GMT, Ralph Alvy <ralvy@warpmail.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I'd like to get a hybrid, probably a Prius, but I don't really drive all
>>> >that much. My 1991 Honda Accord only had about 80,000 miles on it, and I
>>> >drove it less the last couple of years than ever. So, my question: Does
>>> >infrequent driving tend to degrade the life of the hybrid battery?
>>> Shouldn't. But what would be the point if you don't drive much, get a
>>> Matrix and save the money, unless you like the cool display on the
>>> Prius, of course. We have a Prius, but it'll probably get somewhere
>>> between 12-15k a year on it.
>>>[/color]
>> On the basis of the cost of the car and the cost of fuel, I agree.
>>
>> Thing is, the Prius has merit beyond it thriftiness. That's primarily
>> why my wife and I bought one. The fuel efficiency is a wonderful plus.
>>
>> Brent[/color]
>[/color]

That's a good one - SUV owners bought them cuz they like speed and a drag
race now and then! Isn't that what Mustangs and, got me as to why, Neons
and Civics are for. I'd have to pull off the trailer hitch and third row
seat in my SUV (and throw out the soccer team) to do any drag racing.

"Chuck Olson" <chuckolson01@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote in message
news:5p-dnRGdRLP1r8TeRVn-gg@comcast.com...[color=blue]
> Right, Mike
>
> The Highlander doesn't use the Atkinson cycle engine, so its conversion of
> gasoline to useful work is no better than a non-hybrid. Also, since it's a
> vehicle for the "SUV Crowd" who like a lot of weight and speed and might
> even drag race now and then, the likelihood of improved gas mileage pretty
> well has to fall on the recovery of braking energy alone. Big deal.
>
> Chuck
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:r2Gdncx9GbR3ssTeUSdV9g@ptd.net...[color=green]
>> Not as reported in the Tribune Newspapers that did a road test of the[/color]
> Hybrid[color=green]
>> Highlander. The actual fuel mileage is far below what Toyota reports for
>> that vehicle as is the case with their other hybrids. When used as the
>> average driver uses that type of vehicle, the actual fuel mileage they
>> reported was only marginally higher than the conventionally powered V6
>> Highlnader. Basically they said if your goal is to save money of fuel,
>> forget it. Since the majority of owners only keep their vehicles for[/color]
> about[color=green]
>> four years, the $7,500 premium that it costs to buy the hybrid over the
>> standard V6 Highlander will buy ALL of the fuel for the V6 for FIVE
>> years.
>> ;)
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> "Brent Secombe" <bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:211020051056011298%bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk...[color=darkred]
>> > In article <f7thl1lvha2g0phjkrnhr8glbgoqgo09hl@4ax.com>, Chris Hill
>> > <hillco@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 03:38:26 GMT, Ralph Alvy <ralvy@warpmail.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >I'd like to get a hybrid, probably a Prius, but I don't really drive[/color][/color]
> all[color=green][color=darkred]
>> >> >that much. My 1991 Honda Accord only had about 80,000 miles on it,
>> >> >and[/color][/color]
> I[color=green][color=darkred]
>> >> >drove it less the last couple of years than ever. So, my question:[/color][/color]
> Does[color=green][color=darkred]
>> >> >infrequent driving tend to degrade the life of the hybrid battery?
>> >> Shouldn't. But what would be the point if you don't drive much, get a
>> >> Matrix and save the money, unless you like the cool display on the
>> >> Prius, of course. We have a Prius, but it'll probably get somewhere
>> >> between 12-15k a year on it.
>> >>
>> > On the basis of the cost of the car and the cost of fuel, I agree.
>> >
>> > Thing is, the Prius has merit beyond it thriftiness. That's primarily
>> > why my wife and I bought one. The fuel efficiency is a wonderful plus.
>> >
>> > Brent[/color]
>>
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]

I don't know much about hybrid batteries, but I'd like to steal -- I mean
buy -- that Honda ...




"Ralph Alvy" <ralvy@warpmail.net> wrote in message
news:SoZ5f.11580$W32.936@trnddc06...[color=blue]
> I'd like to get a hybrid, probably a Prius, but I don't really drive all
> that much. My 1991 Honda Accord only had about 80,000 miles on it, and I
> drove it less the last couple of years than ever. So, my question: Does
> infrequent driving tend to degrade the life of the hybrid battery?[/color]

Wolfgang wrote:
[color=blue]
> That's a good one - SUV owners bought them cuz they like speed and a drag
> race now and then! Isn't that what Mustangs and, got me as to why, Neons
> and Civics are for. I'd have to pull off the trailer hitch and third row
> seat in my SUV (and throw out the soccer team) to do any drag racing.[/color]


You would have to throw out the soccer team before you pulled out the
third row seat :-) You could leave the trailer hitch on, just unhitch
the trailer. I agree, there are times when you need the seating capacity
and off-road capability. We were at a Scout camporee and parking area
(mud field) had to be covered in hay before anyone, except those with
real off-road capable SUVs could get out.

[color=blue]
>
> "Chuck Olson" <chuckolson01@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote in message
> news:5p-dnRGdRLP1r8TeRVn-gg@comcast.com...
>[color=green]
>>Right, Mike
>>
>>The Highlander doesn't use the Atkinson cycle engine, so its conversion of
>>gasoline to useful work is no better than a non-hybrid. Also, since it's a
>>vehicle for the "SUV Crowd" who like a lot of weight and speed and might
>>even drag race now and then, the likelihood of improved gas mileage pretty
>>well has to fall on the recovery of braking energy alone. Big deal.
>>
>>Chuck
>>
>>"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>news:r2Gdncx9GbR3ssTeUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>[color=darkred]
>>>Not as reported in the Tribune Newspapers that did a road test of the
>>>[/color]
>>Hybrid
>>[color=darkred]
>>>Highlander. The actual fuel mileage is far below what Toyota reports for
>>>that vehicle as is the case with their other hybrids. When used as the
>>>average driver uses that type of vehicle, the actual fuel mileage they
>>>reported was only marginally higher than the conventionally powered V6
>>>Highlnader. Basically they said if your goal is to save money of fuel,
>>>forget it. Since the majority of owners only keep their vehicles for
>>>[/color]
>>about
>>[color=darkred]
>>>four years, the $7,500 premium that it costs to buy the hybrid over the
>>>standard V6 Highlander will buy ALL of the fuel for the V6 for FIVE
>>>years.
>>>;)
>>>
>>>mike hunt
>>>
>>>
>>>"Brent Secombe" <bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>news:211020051056011298%bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk...
>>>
>>>>In article <f7thl1lvha2g0phjkrnhr8glbgoqgo09hl@4ax.com>, Chris Hill
>>>><hillco@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 03:38:26 GMT, Ralph Alvy <ralvy@warpmail.net>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I'd like to get a hybrid, probably a Prius, but I don't really drive
>>>>>>[/color]
>>all
>>[color=darkred]
>>>>>>that much. My 1991 Honda Accord only had about 80,000 miles on it,
>>>>>>and
>>>>>>[/color]
>>I
>>[color=darkred]
>>>>>>drove it less the last couple of years than ever. So, my question:
>>>>>>[/color]
>>Does
>>[color=darkred]
>>>>>>infrequent driving tend to degrade the life of the hybrid battery?
>>>>>>
>>>>>Shouldn't. But what would be the point if you don't drive much, get a
>>>>>Matrix and save the money, unless you like the cool display on the
>>>>>Prius, of course. We have a Prius, but it'll probably get somewhere
>>>>>between 12-15k a year on it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>On the basis of the cost of the car and the cost of fuel, I agree.
>>>>
>>>>Thing is, the Prius has merit beyond it thriftiness. That's primarily
>>>>why my wife and I bought one. The fuel efficiency is a wonderful plus.
>>>>
>>>>Brent
>>>>
>>>[/color]
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 09:52:59 -0400, "Wolfgang"
<NOwolfgangdieterSPAM@cox.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
> I'd have to pull off the trailer hitch and third row
>seat in my SUV (and throw out the soccer team) to do any drag racing.[/color]

As someone who's kicked a riced-out Civic's ass in a stoplight drag,
while pulling a trailer load of plywood with a 4.0 Jeep Wrangler, I
say leave the seats in for effect. <G>

What rice pilot didn't know was that Jeeps are geared so low, they're
pretty much flat out at about 65, but can kill anything 0-30. He
should have chosen a longer block! My Tacoma can continue the
discussion for much longer distances.

4WD dosen't exactly hurt during a street drag launch, either... While
rice rocket spins his front tires, you're accelerating.

You should have seen the look on his girlfriend's face!

On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:37:04 GMT, Bonehenge
<Keep_it_in_the_newsgroup_please@aol.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>4WD dosen't exactly hurt during a street drag launch, either... While
>rice rocket spins his front tires, you're accelerating.[/color]

Well, you said a mouthful, there. FWD sucks, for performance.

Ralph Alvy wrote:
[color=blue]
>I'd like to get a hybrid, probably a Prius, but I don't
>really drive all that much. My 1991 Honda Accord only
>had about 80,000 miles on it, and I drove it less the
>last couple of years than ever. So, my question: Does
>infrequent driving tend to degrade the life of the hybrid
>battery?[/color]

Lead-acid batteries hold up best when they remain fully charged, but
nickel-based batteries, like those used in hybrid cars, seem to
tolerate the discharged state well, and most nickel cells are shipped
in the discharged state.

I have a Prius and like it a lot, but there's no way I can economically
justify it unless I start driving at least 30,000-40,000 miles a year.
If you're looking for a 4-door hatchback, the best one available now
may be the Mazda 3. I like the Toyota Matrix as well, but its gas
consumption in the city is roughly 20% higher (real life, not EPA)
compared to the Mazda's and even the sedan Corolla's, although that
shouldn't matter if you don't drive much.

On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 11:40:21 -0700, rantonrave wrote:
[color=blue]
>
> Ralph Alvy wrote:
>[color=green]
>>I'd like to get a hybrid, probably a Prius, but I don't
>>really drive all that much. My 1991 Honda Accord only
>>had about 80,000 miles on it, and I drove it less the
>>last couple of years than ever. So, my question: Does
>>infrequent driving tend to degrade the life of the hybrid
>>battery?[/color]
>
> Lead-acid batteries hold up best when they remain fully charged, but
> nickel-based batteries, like those used in hybrid cars, seem to
> tolerate the discharged state well, and most nickel cells are shipped
> in the discharged state.
>
> I have a Prius and like it a lot, but there's no way I can economically
> justify it unless I start driving at least 30,000-40,000 miles a year.
> If you're looking for a 4-door hatchback, the best one available now
> may be the Mazda 3. I like the Toyota Matrix as well, but its gas
> consumption in the city is roughly 20% higher (real life, not EPA)
> compared to the Mazda's and even the sedan Corolla's, although that
> shouldn't matter if you don't drive much.[/color]

And the Mazda with the 2.3 and a 5 speed (or the optional 'tip-tronic' or
whatever they call it) tranny is a LOT more fun!

Unless, of course, your score an XRs...