Hybrids, not as great as we thought

Hi everyone,
I was reading recently that Hybrids were not as fuel economic as
stated. It had something to do with the way they tested fuel economy
and how it was nowhere near similar to what actually goes on while
driving. Do you think maybe they are slanting things just a little or
is this more pro-petroleum propaganda?
steve
[url]www.mydreamwheels.com[/url]

In article <1144036253.818120.209780@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"steve goodsworth" <stevegoodsworth@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Hi everyone,
> I was reading recently that Hybrids were not as fuel economic as
> stated. It had something to do with the way they tested fuel economy
> and how it was nowhere near similar to what actually goes on while
> driving. Do you think maybe they are slanting things just a little or
> is this more pro-petroleum propaganda?
> steve
> [url]www.mydreamwheels.com[/url][/color]

You may be thinking a recent Consumer Reports article that seemed to show
that the extra cost of a hybrid is not recovered in fuel cost savings.

With respect to the Toyota Prius, Consumer Reports just issued a
retraction saying that they erred in their calculations and that, indeed,
over a number of years, a Prius does save more in fuel costs than the
extra cost of the initial purchase (taking into account tax incentives,
etc.).

Other than that, the fuel economy figures (hybrid or standard) determined
by US DOT testing have long been known to not reflect the true world. In
fact, DOT is changing the test to better reflect the average person's use
of the car.

Also, it is important to keep in mind that cars like the Prius are
designed to provide fuel savings when driven in city traffic, NOT on
highway driving. So if you use a Prius mainly in the city, you will
probably be impressed with the fuel efficiency, but if your driving is
mostly on the highway, you will be less impressed.

Merritt

steve goodsworth wrote:[color=blue]
> Hi everyone,
> I was reading recently that Hybrids were not as fuel economic as
> stated. It had something to do with the way they tested fuel economy
> and how it was nowhere near similar to what actually goes on while
> driving. Do you think maybe they are slanting things just a little or
> is this more pro-petroleum propaganda?
> steve
> [url]www.mydreamwheels.com[/url][/color]

What 'we' is that? Toyota thinks they're great because Toyota sells cars and
they're a hot, profitable item. It's that easy.

"Merritt Mullen" <mmullen8014@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:mmullen8014-738A11.21212502042006@netnews.asp.att.net...[color=blue]
> In article <1144036253.818120.209780@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "steve goodsworth" <stevegoodsworth@hotmail.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Hi everyone,
>> I was reading recently that Hybrids were not as fuel economic as
>> stated. It had something to do with the way they tested fuel economy
>> and how it was nowhere near similar to what actually goes on while
>> driving. Do you think maybe they are slanting things just a little or
>> is this more pro-petroleum propaganda?
>> steve
>> [url]www.mydreamwheels.com[/url][/color]
>
> You may be thinking a recent Consumer Reports article that seemed to show
> that the extra cost of a hybrid is not recovered in fuel cost savings.
>
> With respect to the Toyota Prius, Consumer Reports just issued a
> retraction saying that they erred in their calculations and that, indeed,
> over a number of years, a Prius does save more in fuel costs than the
> extra cost of the initial purchase (taking into account tax incentives,
> etc.).
>
> Other than that, the fuel economy figures (hybrid or standard) determined
> by US DOT testing have long been known to not reflect the true world. In
> fact, DOT is changing the test to better reflect the average person's use
> of the car.
>
> Also, it is important to keep in mind that cars like the Prius are
> designed to provide fuel savings when driven in city traffic, NOT on
> highway driving. So if you use a Prius mainly in the city, you will
> probably be impressed with the fuel efficiency, but if your driving is
> mostly on the highway, you will be less impressed.
>
> Merritt[/color]

The U.S. DOT does not test vehicle fuel economy - the EPA does.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

"steve goodsworth" <stevegoodsworth@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144036253.818120.209780@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...[color=blue]
> Hi everyone,
> I was reading recently that Hybrids were not as fuel economic as
> stated. It had something to do with the way they tested fuel economy
> and how it was nowhere near similar to what actually goes on while
> driving. Do you think maybe they are slanting things just a little or
> is this more pro-petroleum propaganda?
> steve[/color]

The marketeers that are pushing hybrids gloss over the fact that
they only get better mpg with a lot of stop and go traffic, in city
driving. Indeed, the Priuses electric motor shuts off over 50Mph
I believe it is. If your commuting is mostly highway miles at
constant speed, their mileage is no better than a comparable
conventional engine. But if your a soccer mom doing a lot of
city driving then indeed the fuel economy of a hybrid is much better.

The other problem is that the other manufacturers that are introducing
hybrids are basically putting larger, more gas hog engines in them,
and using the hybrid technology purely to meet CAFE requirements,
as a result you get more horsepower for the weight of vehicle, but
no net fuel savings.

Ted

"Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote in message
news:newscache$k8w4xi$eh8$1@news.ipinc.net...[color=blue]
> The marketeers that are pushing hybrids gloss over the fact that
> they only get better mpg with a lot of stop and go traffic, in city
> driving. Indeed, the Priuses electric motor shuts off over 50Mph
> I believe it is.[/color]

You guys are Spinning out of control. Fact is both power systems work in
tandem all the way to top end, which in my case is 101 mph.
mark_

> The marketeers that are pushing hybrids gloss over the fact that[color=blue]
> they only get better mpg with a lot of stop and go traffic, in city
> driving. Indeed, the Priuses electric motor shuts off over 50Mph
> I believe it is. If your commuting is mostly highway miles at
> constant speed, their mileage is no better than a comparable
> conventional engine. But if your a soccer mom doing a lot of
> city driving then indeed the fuel economy of a hybrid is much better.[/color]

To a point this is true. However, I found if you spank the car up to
passing at 94 mph the thing gets there and right now. Reminds me of those
electric slot cars that fly once the trigger is pulled. The electric motor
does kick in and you can fell the G's. Passing is far quicker than the old
Saturn. Highway high-speed mileage has been approximately 39 mpg for me
(excess of 85 mph on I-5) -- far better than the old dinosaur we had. Our
fuel card bill has gone from over $180 per month down to about $65 or so.
[color=blue]
> The other problem is that the other manufacturers that are introducing
> hybrids are basically putting larger, more gas hog engines in them,
> and using the hybrid technology purely to meet CAFE requirements,
> as a result you get more horsepower for the weight of vehicle, but
> no net fuel savings.[/color]

Check out the Toyota Volta:
[url]http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/future/volta.html[/url]

Volta's claim is 0 to 60 in 4 seconds with a 31 mpg mileage claim, compare
that to any other performance ICE sports car (excluding the price tag
though!). One electric motor for each wheel along with a V-6. Pretty
impressive performance and mileage. Basically, a slot car for humans.

B~

In article <voCdnQZi0ME8c63ZRVn-jA@comcast.com>
[email]xxx976@comcast.com[/email] "mark_digital" writes:
[color=blue]
> "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote in message
> news:newscache$k8w4xi$eh8$1@news.ipinc.net...
>[color=green]
> > The marketeers that are pushing hybrids gloss over the fact that
> > they only get better mpg with a lot of stop and go traffic, in city
> > driving. Indeed, the Priuses electric motor shuts off over 50Mph
> > I believe it is.[/color]
>
> You guys are Spinning out of control. Fact is both power
> systems work in tandem all the way to top end, which in my case
> is 101 mph.[/color]

Agreed. A modern hybrid is a complex beast, with business going
on inside it that most people never dream of. For example, the
big savings are not due to the electric motor or the regenerative
system, though they play their part. The Miller Cycle engine is
more efficient than the common Otto Cycle unit, so running on it
alone is your best way to save and the onboard control system is
well aware of that. The electric subsystem is there to augment
the petrol engine when required, such as at speeds lower than the
petrol engine could handle, or at odd moments at higher speeds.

(This is covered by past posts; try Googling for "+prius +miller"
in this NG.)

The dashboard mimic diagram is educational. The electric motor
and generator are constantly switching on and off in a frenzy of
activity, even at high speeds. Meanwhile you just drive along.
--
Andrew Stephenson

In article <1144077546snz@deltrak.demon.co.uk>,
[email]ames@deltrak.demon.co.uk[/email] (Andrew Stephenson) wrote:
[color=blue]
> The dashboard mimic diagram is educational.[/color]

It's nothing but eye candy designed to sell to people who want to focus
on the technology of the car rather than just driving the damn thing.

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-3E1B21.12081903042006@nntp3.usenetserver.com...[color=blue]
> In article <1144077546snz@deltrak.demon.co.uk>,
> [email]ames@deltrak.demon.co.uk[/email] (Andrew Stephenson) wrote:
>[color=green]
>> The dashboard mimic diagram is educational.[/color]
>
> It's nothing but eye candy designed to sell to people who want to focus
> on the technology of the car rather than just driving the damn thing.
>[/color]

What you say Elmo could be true. I know if you are behind a Prius and your
eyesight is good you can invade the privacy of the Prius and see clearly not
only the top dashboard odometer but the graphic chart below and tell how
well the car is doing.
mark_

No, it gets better gas mileage too, especially around town.

It may not make economic sense (yet) but it's probably pretty close.

If you drive 20,000 miles at 45mpg instead of 25, that's a savings of
350 gallons or almost $1,000 per year. It's about 5-10K more expensive
depending on which car you're comparing it to (Camry or Corolla...it's
prob. more comparable to a Camry).

And no, the battery doesn't cost 8K and need replacing every 100K.

"st-bum" <kennykabuki@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1144090221.356160.271880@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...[color=blue]
> No, it gets better gas mileage too, especially around town.
>
> It may not make economic sense (yet) but it's probably pretty close.
>
> If you drive 20,000 miles at 45mpg instead of 25, that's a savings of
> 350 gallons or almost $1,000 per year. It's about 5-10K more expensive
> depending on which car you're comparing it to (Camry or Corolla...it's
> prob. more comparable to a Camry).
>
> And no, the battery doesn't cost 8K and need replacing every 100K.
>[/color]

OK that's one way to look at it. Another way is to look at the cost for
filling up the Camry (800 gallons X $3 a gallon = $2400 a year) and the
Prius (444 gallons X $3 a gallon = $1333). You see, once you sign for the
car the extra money is forgotten. But with the other car you're reminded
every time you fill up.
Actually, when I get in a Camry or Corolla I hit my head unless I bend my
neck down real close to my chest. Not good. And the engine's after all these
years still have that damn tap tap sound that drove me nuts when I was a
teenager. No thanks.

"steve goodsworth" <stevegoodsworth@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1144036253.818120.209780@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...[color=blue]
> Hi everyone,
> I was reading recently that Hybrids were not as fuel economic as
> stated. It had something to do with the way they tested fuel economy
> and how it was nowhere near similar to what actually goes on while
> driving. Do you think maybe they are slanting things just a little or
> is this more pro-petroleum propaganda?
> steve
> [url]www.mydreamwheels.com[/url]
>[/color]

Aside from the fuel savings that hybrids offer for city drivers, another
benefit is that because they use "regenerative" braking, the brakes on
hybrids wear less vs. conventional cars. So hybrid owners will spend less
money on brake repairs and replacements. A while back, I analyzed my records
for a Camry I've owned for a long time, and found that I'd spent more on
brakes than any other type of car maintenance - more than shock
replacements, timing belt changes, etc. I suspect my experience is typical,
too.

I posted a question about brakes on hybrids back in December, and here's
what one fellow noted:

"As an interesting side note, the dealer I work for has ONE recorded case of
replacing brake pads on a Prius. I've seen some with well over 100k miles
and over 50% of the pad lining remaining."

"st-bum" <kennykabuki@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1144090221.356160.271880@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...[color=blue]
> No, it gets better gas mileage too, especially around town.
>
> It may not make economic sense (yet) but it's probably pretty close.
>
> If you drive 20,000 miles at 45mpg instead of 25, that's a savings of
> 350 gallons or almost $1,000 per year. It's about 5-10K more expensive
> depending on which car you're comparing it to (Camry or Corolla...it's
> prob. more comparable to a Camry).
>
> And no, the battery doesn't cost 8K and need replacing every 100K.
>[/color]

Battery life for most batteries, barring abuse, is age-dependent.

Ted

"B. Peg" <bent_peg@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:OC8Yf.677166$qk4.640006@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...[color=blue][color=green]
> > The marketeers that are pushing hybrids gloss over the fact that
> > they only get better mpg with a lot of stop and go traffic, in city
> > driving. Indeed, the Priuses electric motor shuts off over 50Mph
> > I believe it is. If your commuting is mostly highway miles at
> > constant speed, their mileage is no better than a comparable
> > conventional engine. But if your a soccer mom doing a lot of
> > city driving then indeed the fuel economy of a hybrid is much better.[/color]
>
> To a point this is true. However, I found if you spank the car up to
> passing at 94 mph the thing gets there and right now. Reminds me of those
> electric slot cars that fly once the trigger is pulled. The electric[/color]
motor[color=blue]
> does kick in and you can fell the G's.[/color]

But, where does the electric motor get the energy from? The battery,
and where does the battery get it from?

If the gas engine and electric motor are constantly alternating as
to which one is powering the car, like another poster claimed, then
that would be horriby inefficient at highway speeds where you NEVER
BRAKE. The reason is that you would have the gas burned in the
engine being converted to mechanical energy, then to electrical
energy, then to chemical energy, then back to electrical energy,
then back to mechanical energy. All those conversions waste power
since you lose energy every time energy is converted.

Your spanking the car, in order to have any net gain from the
system, would have to use energy gained from regenerative
braking that happened earlier. Once you spank the car enough times, unless
you slamming on the brakes every time you finsh spanking it (a pretty unsafe
method of driving on any highway in my opinion) you would use
up the reserve energy in the battery that had been gained by prior
braking, and then your getting all energy from burning gasoline,
regardless of whether some of the energy detours through the
battery and motor-generator.
[color=blue]
> Passing is far quicker than the old
> Saturn.[/color]

Who really gives a rip about that and how is it germane to a
discussion of fuel mileage?
[color=blue]
> Highway high-speed mileage has been approximately 39 mpg for me
> (excess of 85 mph on I-5) -- far better than the old dinosaur we had. Our
> fuel card bill has gone from over $180 per month down to about $65 or so.
>[/color]

I don't doubt that, but your comparing apples to oranges here. For starters
you have a new engine compared to an engine with a few miles on it, you
also have weight differences, and the engines are constructed internally
differently.

To really make a comparison what needs to happen is someone needs to
take a Prius, drive a couple months with it in city, and a couple months in
it with highway, and record both mileages, then disable the traction
battery,
and repeat the driving pattern. That would really tell everyone exactly how
much MPG is gained by the hybrid system, instead of these rediculous
comparisons to other cars that people seem to make.

I could run comparisons of mileage of a Moped with a SUV in city
driving and claim, based on the results, that the Moped engine is
obviously superior. Everyone would laugh at that. But nobody seems
to think it just as rediculous when people compare Priuses to Corollas
and such, yet this is exactly what is happening.

As the question, why didn't Toyota come out with 2 models of Priuses,
with exactly the same engine except for one difference - one model
was a hybrid, the other just the gasoline engine only. I'll tell you, it
is because it would make it rediculously easy for the general public
to make a true apples to apples comparison and what would be
discovered is that hybrid technology is overblown, and is really of only
use for city driving where there's a lot of braking. That would have taken
the wind out of the Toyota hybrid sales effort which is why they didn't do
it. So now we are stuck with a lot of people hand-waving about
superior engine technology and alternating engine/motor complexity
and ignoring some simple logic because it's not convenient.
[color=blue][color=green]
> > The other problem is that the other manufacturers that are introducing
> > hybrids are basically putting larger, more gas hog engines in them,
> > and using the hybrid technology purely to meet CAFE requirements,
> > as a result you get more horsepower for the weight of vehicle, but
> > no net fuel savings.[/color]
>
> Check out the Toyota Volta:
> [url]http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/future/volta.html[/url]
>
> Volta's claim is 0 to 60 in 4 seconds with a 31 mpg mileage claim, compare
> that to any other performance ICE sports car (excluding the price tag
> though!). One electric motor for each wheel along with a V-6. Pretty
> impressive performance and mileage. Basically, a slot car for humans.
>[/color]

I would be a lot more impressed if Toyota actually came out with
a vehicle that had the electric motor for each wheel and NO V-anything,
and an electric cord to plug it into the garage outlet to charge overnight.
What we need is to get off the gasoline-as-motor-vehicle-fuel kick entirely,
not to just make the vehicle more fuel efficient.

You can argue all you want about vehicle efficiency but I could build
a stationary electric generator that ran on gasoline which had an
efficiency rating that would kick the shit out of the best efficiency
rating of any vehicle gasoline engine Toyota could produce.

Ted