 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Maintenance and Repair / January 2007Hybrid cars a safe buy?
Honestly though - the EPA mileage estimates of all cars tend to be higher what most people experience in the real world. It's unfair to single out hybrids for unrealistic published fuel economy. JS> The scale of error is very different. We are talking about erring on the high side 15 to 20 mpg for the hybrids. For gasoline/diesel cars the variance might be +- 3 or 4 mpg. At least in California, a hybrid's battery pack is considered part of the emissions system. In California, all emissions parts are required to be warranted for 10-years or 150,000 miles. The cost of rechargeable batteries are going down, and I'd expect that the price of replacement battery packs will be extremely reasonable if they need to be replaced after the warranty period. Honda has an 8-year factory warranty on their hybrid batteries, which may be higher in some states. JS> Having an extended emissions warranty would be some help. The high initial price really isn't offset by the net cost savings though. <http://automobiles.honda.com/models/model_overview.asp?ModelName=Civi...> Really though - NiMH batteries can last an extremely long time provided they're not deeply discharged. I kind of worry about people who insist on needing a "battery only" mode. I know the typical NiMH AAs I use in my camera have a rated life of about 700-1000 recharge cycles before the capacity is reduced to less than 80% of original capacity. I've read information that they can literally last many (dozens to hundreds) times this if exposed to only shallow discharge periods - like being topped off by the generator or regenerative braking. JS> I've read that 100,000 miles is about the level at which problems could begin to show up with the batteries and charging system. But the real question is whether the consumer ends up saving money by buying one. With their real world mpg down in the 40's I don't think there is much invcentive. If they were able to return average mpg's in the high 60's as originally advertised then a better case could be made. <http://autoelectronics.com/mag/nimh_batteries_charge> "Cobasys' NiMH batteries are capable of supplying powers of 200 W/kg to greater than 1000 W/kg to a load. They have demonstrated cycle life of greater than 1000 80% depth of discharge (DOD) charge discharge cycles. And in HEV applications, with shallow charge-discharge cycles, they have achieved 200,000 to 300,000 cycles." Reply » Rate this post: Text for clearing space > JS> The scale of error is very different. We are talking about erring > on the high side 15 to 20 mpg for the hybrids. For gasoline/diesel > cars the variance might be +- 3 or 4 mpg. I've heard some are averaging 50+ while others aren't. This may be a case where YMMV, literally. > JS> Having an extended emissions warranty would be some help. The > high initial price really isn't offset by the net cost savings though. I really doubt anyone is under the impression that they've buying a current hybrid because the net fuel savings will offset the increased cost. Right now, people are early adopters, much like I was when I bought my first DVD players in 1997 for $1100 and $600. > JS> I've read that 100,000 miles is about the level at which problems > could begin to show up with the batteries and charging system. However - it has been shown that bad cells can be replaced individually. If they do fail, I don't think it's all at once. I'd think in the future there might be more advanced monitoring systems and that failing cells could be detected early and replaced as preventative maintenance. As it is now, one failing doesn't seem to mean that the next one is bound to go bad in a month. There are real world cases where people have gotten more mileage out of hybrids (on the original battery) that most get out of standard cars. There are plenty of hybrids that have gone beyond 100K miles, and there hasn't been a documented case where there's been catostrophic failure of multiple cells. > But the real question is whether the consumer ends up saving money by > buying one. With their real world mpg down in the 40's I don't think > there is much invcentive. If they were able to return average mpg's in > the high 60's as originally advertised then a better case could be > made. Again - nobody is buying current hybrid cars simply because they think they'll save money overall. I don't think the original poster is asking that question. The real question is whether or not it's going to be possible to service these cars in the future, and whether shops will be able to service them. I take my car to Art's Automotive (Berkeley, California), which is a Japanese car specialist. They will service all Toyota and Honda hybrids. They were considering servicing Ford and other hybrids, but probably can't justify the cost of subscriptions for all the info services for just one model. <http://www.artsautomotive.com/Hybrid.htm> > > JS> The scale of error is very different. We are talking about erring > > on the high side 15 to 20 mpg for the hybrids. For gasoline/diesel [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > adopters, much like I was when I bought my first DVD players > in 1997 for $1100 and $600. That is the story I hear. But if cost savings is not the reason then why would anyone pay more money for a car that would only deliver the performance of a lesser priced one. > > JS> I've read that 100,000 miles is about the level at which problems > > could begin to show up with the batteries and charging system. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > cars in the future, and whether shops will be able to > service them. Again, then why would anyone buy one if there is no cost savings and likely an increased cost in operation.. > I take my car to Art's Automotive (Berkeley, California), > which is a Japanese car specialist. They will service all [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > <http://www.artsautomotive.com/Hybrid.htm> > Again, then why would anyone buy one if there is no cost savings and > likely an increased cost in operation.. One would buy one in order to do one's part to protect the environment. I really suspect that "John S." is a sockpuppet for someone who posts drivel all over Usenet. Joe > > Again, then why would anyone buy one if there is no cost savings and > > likely an increased cost in operation.. > > One would buy one in order to do one's part to protect the environment. How would one protect the environment by purchasing a hybrid car that converts energy from one form to another by burning fossil fuel. They use fuel at real world rates (not EPA ratings) not unlike that of high mpg standard cars. And they use a large number of storage batteries made of noxious materials that will have to be disposed of at some point. Where's the net improvement to the environment. >>>Again, then why would anyone buy one if there is no cost savings and >>>likely an increased cost in operation.. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > How would one protect the environment by purchasing a hybrid car that > converts energy from one form to another by burning fossil fuel. Over the life of the vehicle, I believe there will be fewer noxious tailpipe emissions from a hybrid than a similarly sized ICE-only car. I think the hybrid strategy is creative. Use an efficient engine that would otherwise be gutless without the aid of an electric motor. Operate the engine at times where it's most efficient (in terms of fuel use and emissions output). > They use fuel at real world rates (not EPA ratings) not unlike that of > high mpg standard cars. And they use a large number of storage > batteries made of noxious materials that will have to be disposed of at > some point. Where's the net improvement to the environment. The problem with real high MPG ICE cars is that they are almost universally gutless and tiny. Maybe diesels are OK, but diesel has higher energy content (meaning higher CO2 output per unit of fuel), limited availability, and low temperature problems. NiMH batteries aren't super toxic like lead-acid types. Most auto companies making hybrids have already started up recycling infrastructure. If a battery is at end of life, I'm pretty sure dealer service departments will take them. <http://www.toyota.co.jp/en/environment/recycle/battery/index.html> > >>>Again, then why would anyone buy one if there is no cost savings and > >>>likely an increased cost in operation.. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > where it's most efficient (in terms of fuel use and emissions > output). The small engined toyota/honda/nissan cars get milage that is not all that much lower than the real world milage of an electro/hydrocarbon powered hybrid. From what i've read there is no cost justification for buying such a car, especially when replacement of the batteries is factored in. > > They use fuel at real world rates (not EPA ratings) not unlike that of > > high mpg standard cars. And they use a large number of storage [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > NiMH batteries aren't super toxic like lead-acid types. They aren't ??? Wow that's a unique description.... > Most > auto companies making hybrids have already started up recycling > infrastructure. If a battery is at end of life, I'm pretty sure > dealer service departments will take them. > > <http://www.toyota.co.jp/en/environment/recycle/battery/index.html> > The small engined toyota/honda/nissan cars get milage that is not all > that much lower than the real world milage of an electro/hydrocarbon > powered hybrid. From what i've read there is no cost justification for > buying such a car, especially when replacement of the batteries is > factored in. Like I said - gutless. I really don't get it when it comes to the batteries. There is evidence that the large majority of the cells in a battery stack should last the life of the car. I doubt there's going to be any mass failure of the cells. It should be more like light bulbs. There might be a few early failures here and there that would fall under warranty repair. Even after that, I don't get the scare tactic that all batteries are doomed for failure in rapid succession. I could see a cottage industry of businesses that buy out old batteries and test/recondition them. I can buy systems for consumer electronics batteries that do a similar function. At that point, I think most people will be looking to squeeze just a few more years out of the old heap rather than look for it to last another 150,000 miles. I think another thing that might be noted is that the majority of the current hybrid buyers like new cars and probably will be moving on to the latest technology in ten years. Some people get attached to their cars and put more money into their repair than it's worth. That's the nature of most older vehicles that aren't collector's items. > > NiMH batteries aren't super toxic like lead-acid types. > > They aren't ??? Wow that's a unique description.... Some people have stated that NiMH cells are legal to dispose of in landfills. I think that's possible in some jurisdictions, but I wouldn't advise it. There is some mild toxicity with NiMH batteries, but a lead-acid battery is WAY more toxic. More tailpipe emissions over the life of a car are also way more toxic. In any case, the means to recycle NiMH batteries is fairly common even today. > > The small engined toyota/honda/nissan cars get milage that is not all > > that much lower than the real world milage of an electro/hydrocarbon [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > evidence that the large majority of the cells in a battery stack > should last the life of the car. Exactly. What you don't seem to get is the fact that the life of the battery pack *IS* the life of the car. If the pack lasts 10 years that is the life of the car. Once the pack fails the whole car has little more than scrap value. With the conventional economy car you simply don't have this catastrophic end of life scenario. The conventional economy car gets just about the same mileage, costs less and has a longer viable life span - win, win, win. You comment of "gutless" is also not really true as anyone who has driven one of the old Subaru Justy 3 cylinder conventional economy cars with the ECVT transmission can attest. Those little 50 some odd HP glorified golf carts would go like a bat out of hell thanks to the ECVT matching the little engines power output to the drive train needs and their extremely low weight. Add in the recently refined variable displacement technology for conventional engines and you can get the 200 HP kick when you mash the gas with little MPG penalty when all you need is 20 HP to cruise the highway. > > > The small engined toyota/honda/nissan cars get milage that is not all > > > that much lower than the real world milage of an electro/hydrocarbon [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > the car. Once the pack fails the whole car has little more than scrap > value. Like I said - the individual cells can be replaced. The individual cells won't die off all at once. 250,000 miles and 15 years shouldn't be out of the question for the large majority of the packs in a stack. I would imagine that there will be some mechanics that might specialize in overhauling hybrid batteries. NiMH technology has been around for a while. Equipment to analyze and recondition batteries should be available, as exists now for consumer electronics cells. I see the sale of reconditioned battery packs like we find rebuilt engines or starters. Of aftermarket drop-in modules. The battery pack isn't a single module. It's not as simple as the entire pack being scrapped just because one or two fail. The hybrid systems seems to do a fairly simple thing that maximizes the life of the battery stack. Just keep it from being completely drained, but keep it from being completely full where it might be overcharged. With that type of use, 15-20 years doesn't seem to be out of the question. > With the conventional economy car you simply don't have this > catastrophic end of life scenario. The conventional economy car gets > just about the same mileage, costs less and has a longer viable life > span - win, win, win. Who cares. This is just an option, and not everyone will try to get 250,000 miles out of a car. If someone is really intent on getting 250,000 miles out of a hybrid, I think it can be done for less than the price of a complete battery stack. > Add in the recently refined variable displacement technology for > conventional engines and you can get the 200 HP kick when you mash the > gas with little MPG penalty when all you need is 20 HP to cruise the > highway. And you're still hauling around that weight and heating up a full-sized engine block. > > > > The small engined toyota/honda/nissan cars get milage that is not all > > > > that much lower than the real world milage of an electro/hydrocarbon [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Like I said - the individual cells can be replaced. True. > The individual > cells won't die off all at once. True, however the individual cells are all the same age and have seen the same usage so they will all die within the span of about one year. > 250,000 miles and 15 years shouldn't > be out of the question for the large majority of the packs in a stack. In commercial taxi service perhaps. Not for the typical consumer. > I would imagine that there will be some mechanics that might > specialize in overhauling hybrid batteries. Pretty unlikely given the state of mechanics today. The bulk are nothing more that parts changer with little understanding of how things actually work and minimal troubleshooting ability beyond what the decision tree in the manual tells them to try. The few good mechanics that actually understand a vehicle are mostly employed by racing teams. > NiMH technology has > been around for a while. Equipment to analyze and recondition > batteries should be available, as exists now for consumer electronics > cells. It exists, but it isn't cost effective in most cases. Spending $100 on a charger / conditioner that will get you an extra six months of life from a $10 battery just doesn't make economic sense. Applied to hybrid battery packs it still doesn't make much sense due to the minimal life extension it might provide. > I see the sale of reconditioned battery packs like we find > rebuilt engines or starters. Of aftermarket drop-in modules. Take a look at the most comparable battery market, one that has been around many years - electric forklift batteries. They don't generally get reconditioned, they get recycled since the effort of reconditioning them does not provide enough extra life to be worthwhile and the unpredictability of that extra life and the inconvenience and down time it causes costs more money than the potential savings. > The battery pack isn't a single module. It's not as simple as the > entire pack being scrapped just because one or two fail. Not relevant. The battery in my forklift is composed of 12 individual cells in a big steel case (whole thing weighs 1,571#). You simply don't replace an individual cell, when one fails the others aren't far behind. > The hybrid > systems seems to do a fairly simple thing that maximizes the life of > the battery stack. Just keep it from being completely drained, but > keep it from being completely full where it might be overcharged. > With that type of use, 15-20 years doesn't seem to be out of the > question. It might not seem out of the question, but it vastly exceeds the service life of pretty much any Ni-MH pack in use today in other applications. I know I have quality Ni-MH packs on tools that are approaching 10 years old and they are showing signs of impending failure such as reduced capacity. > > With the conventional economy car you simply don't have this > > catastrophic end of life scenario. The conventional economy car gets [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > getting 250,000 miles out of a hybrid, I think it can be done > for less than the price of a complete battery stack. Correct, it can be accomplished by driving at least 25,000 miles a year so you reach that mileage mark before the battery pack fails since it's service life relates more to age than use. That way your service costs will be tires, brakes, wheel bearings and oil changes, all far less expensive than a battery pack. No comment on the Subaru Justy? It was a 3 cylinder 50 some odd HP conventional IC economy car that had plenty of pep, proving your gutless claim false. > > Add in the recently refined variable displacement technology for > > conventional engines and you can get the 200 HP kick when you mash the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > And you're still hauling around that weight and heating up a > full-sized engine block. The heating part is utterly irrelevant since unless you do all your driving in the arctic the radiator is busily dissipating heat constantly after the first few minutes of operation. Having more thermal mass to heat does nothing more than add one or two minutes to the warm-up. As to weight, that is minimal for a car engine and is less weight than the battery pack the hybrid hauls around. > > The individual > > cells won't die off all at once. > > True, however the individual cells are all the same age and have seen > the same usage so they will all die within the span of about one year. I really don't see that happening. I would expect that a few might fail here and there; more like a increasing distribution rather than a cliff. Possibly one might go next month or three years down the line. It's not like a bad apple where the one failing one alerts all the others that they need to execute some massive die-off. I think of it more like an older house that's been well taken care of. I live in a 50+ year old house with some of the original wiring. Some hardware has worn down with age and needs to be replaced, but the house as a whole hasn't fallen apart. When older components fail, they can be repaired as needed. We don't walk into the house expecting that all the original doors are going to start failing in short order if just one needs to be repaired or replaced. > > 250,000 miles and 15 years shouldn't > > be out of the question for the large majority of the packs in a stack. > > In commercial taxi service perhaps. Not for the typical consumer. The biggest enemy of NiMH battery life are excessive heat, overcharging, and deep-discharge cycles. The latter two are handled by the system design. The stacks are fan cooled. Most of the tools I've worked with use simple dumb chargers, and I'd expect that the batteries would show the signs of overcharging and or deep discharge use after 10 years. > > I would imagine that there will be some mechanics that might > > specialize in overhauling hybrid batteries. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > in the manual tells them to try. The few good mechanics that actually > understand a vehicle are mostly employed by racing teams. I'd expect to see semi-automated equipment. Break down the old battery and insert several cells into the analyzer. Analyzer gives a report and the cells are marked and/or graded. It might not even be all that different than the equipment that the manufacturer uses to test new batteries. > > NiMH technology has > > been around for a while. Equipment to analyze and recondition [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > battery packs it still doesn't make much sense due to the minimal life > extension it might provide. I only bring a "conditioner" as an example of the technology out there. What I had in mind was an analyzer to detect which cells are likely to have a long, useful life and to discard (i.e. recycle) the cells that might fail. > > I see the sale of reconditioned battery packs like we find > > rebuilt engines or starters. Of aftermarket drop-in modules. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > cells in a big steel case (whole thing weighs 1,571#). You simply don't > replace an individual cell, when one fails the others aren't far behind. Typically lead-acid batteries that aren't fan-cooled during the charge and discharge cycles, right? I expect the failure characteristics of a fan cooled NiMH battery (that's kept well between fully charged and fully depleted) to very different. > > The hybrid > > systems seems to do a fairly simple thing that maximizes the life of [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > old and they are showing signs of impending failure such as reduced > capacity. Again - how many applications are designed to keep a NiMH battery from being deep-discharged AND fully-charged? While being fan cooled. That environment is far more conducive to longer life than a tool battery pack. Now I don't expect that every last battery pack in every car is going to be perfectly reliable over the course of 15 years and 250,000 miles. That's unrealistic for any car part. I do believe that these hybrid systems are set up to maximize rechargeable battery life better than almost any other use to date. I wouldn't expect that amount of monitoring/cooling would be worth it for typical consumer electronics where I could get another set for less than $10. > > > With the conventional economy car you simply don't have this > > > catastrophic end of life scenario. The conventional economy car gets [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > will be tires, brakes, wheel bearings and oil changes, all far less > expensive than a battery pack. No room for other parts failures? I had a coolant hose go at 110K miles. The radiator tank cracked at 130K miles. There were also other little things that probably needed servicing. It was stolen, recovered, and declared a total loss. I got a great settlement that was more than I could have sold it for. > No comment on the Subaru Justy? It was a 3 cylinder 50 some odd HP > conventional IC economy car that had plenty of pep, proving your gutless > claim false. I remember the Justy. That sucker was tiny. > > And you're still hauling around that weight and heating up a > > full-sized engine block. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > weight, that is minimal for a car engine and is less weight than the > battery pack the hybrid hauls around. I thought the typical weight difference between a V8 and an I4 is about 200-250 lbs. A battery pack is about 100-120 lbs. The battery can be placed anywhere you can find it, while a V8 would require more volume under the hood. > > > The individual > > > cells won't die off all at once. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > that all the original doors are going to start failing in short order > if just one needs to be repaired or replaced. It's a predictable electro-chemical thing, no analogy whatsoever to home electrical. > > > 250,000 miles and 15 years shouldn't > > > be out of the question for the large majority of the packs in a stack. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > the batteries would show the signs of overcharging and or deep > discharge use after 10 years. If they have dumb chargers you're using cheap tools. The quality tools have smart microprocessor controlled fast chargers and the battery packs have built in temperature sensors. Some battery packs have built in intelligence as well with flash memory to track the packs history. > > > I would imagine that there will be some mechanics that might > > > specialize in overhauling hybrid batteries. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > all that different than the equipment that the manufacturer uses to > test new batteries. You can analyze and grade all you want, but you're still going to have a 90%+ reject rate because all the cells will be about equally worn out in almost every case. > > > NiMH technology has > > > been around for a while. Equipment to analyze and recondition [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > to have a long, useful life and to discard (i.e. recycle) the cells > that might fail. Look at some of the battery management chips from Microchip and Dallas Semi. The intelligence is intended to be built right into the pack. Helps maximize the life expectancy of a pack, but either way, all the cells will be near death at about the same time. > > > I see the sale of reconditioned battery packs like we find > > > rebuilt engines or starters. Of aftermarket drop-in modules. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > a fan cooled NiMH battery (that's kept well between fully charged and > fully depleted) to very different. Yes, big honkin' lead-acid, but not relevant to the point about not replacing individual cells in the pack. > > > The hybrid > > > systems seems to do a fairly simple thing that maximizes the life of [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > cooled. That environment is far more conducive to longer life than > a tool battery pack. Quality tools have smart chargers and the battery packs have internal temperature sensors. Indeed my packs and chargers are all indoors in a relatively controlled environment, not bouncing around in a car in the Texas heat. > Now I don't expect that every last battery pack in every car is going > to be perfectly reliable over the course of 15 years and 250,000 miles. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > monitoring/cooling would be worth it for typical consumer electronics > where I could get another set for less than $10. The Ni-MH packs for quality tools are typically around $70. > > > > With the conventional economy car you simply don't have this > > > > catastrophic end of life scenario. The conventional economy car gets [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > miles. The radiator tank cracked at 130K miles. There were also > other little things that probably needed servicing. Those are simple, inexpensive failures and the hybrid is equally subject to them (a pure EV wouldn't be). > It was stolen, > recovered, and declared a total loss. I got a great settlement that > was more than I could have sold it for. I don't think a stolen vehicle has much relevance to this discussion. > > No comment on the Subaru Justy? It was a 3 cylinder 50 some odd HP > > conventional IC economy car that had plenty of pep, proving your gutless > > claim false. > > I remember the Justy. That sucker was tiny. Tiny yes, but inexpensive, peppy (chirp tires at will) and pretty reliable. Rather comparable to the mini cooper, but without the hype or price tag. > > > And you're still hauling around that weight and heating up a > > > full-sized engine block. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I thought the typical weight difference between a V8 and an I4 is about > 200-250 lbs. Perhaps comparing an aluminum I4 to a cast iron big block V8. There is a great variety of V8 engines out there covering a huge weight range and huge displacement range. There are also very nice aluminum V6s that are more appropriate in a car. An aluminum V6 with variable displacement is probably not more than 50# heavier than the engine and electric motor in a hybrid. > A battery pack is about 100-120 lbs. The battery can be > placed anywhere you can find it, while a V8 would require more volume > under the hood. The battery pack may be 120#, but the framework required to hold it and give it some protection in an accident adds a lot more weight. Again, an aluminum V6 is more applicable to a car than a cast iron V8 which belongs in a truck. > > The biggest enemy of NiMH battery life are excessive heat, > > overcharging, and deep-discharge cycles. The latter two are handled [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > have built in temperature sensors. Some battery packs have built in > intelligence as well with flash memory to track the packs history. Still - typically no fan cooling which is rare in most applications. Most people have different expectations for rechargeable batteries. Charge the battery to full capacity and try to get as much use out of a single charge is the most typical pattern. > > I'd expect to see semi-automated equipment. Break down the old > > battery and insert several cells into the analyzer. Analyzer gives a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > 90%+ reject rate because all the cells will be about equally worn out in > almost every case. Depends on the expectation. Much like there are reconditioned batteries for low/medium-duty forklifts, I'd expect that there might be different grades of used batteries for people looking to get the last 3-5 years out of a hybrid car. The usage pattern is also way different with only a shallow discharge. I would retire a set of camera batteries if they were down to maybe 50% of original capacity. For a hybrid car battery that stays between a small window of charge/ discharge, that might still be acceptable. The meaning of "failure" is considerably different. The way the batteries are used leads me to believe that the large majority should be adequate for the intended duty after 15 years and 250K miles. Those that aren't can be replaced with known good cells matching the condition of the original ones. > > > > NiMH technology has > > > > been around for a while. Equipment to analyze and recondition [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Helps maximize the life expectancy of a pack, but either way, all the > cells will be near death at about the same time. Again - a much different usage than the fully charged then discharged pattern that's typical with most consumer/industrial electronics cells. > > Again - how many applications are designed to keep a NiMH battery > > from being deep-discharged AND fully-charged? While being fan [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > relatively controlled environment, not bouncing around in a car in the > Texas heat. You forgot the part about the battery cooling fan. > > Now I don't expect that every last battery pack in every car is going > > to be perfectly reliable over the course of 15 years and 250,000 miles. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > The Ni-MH packs for quality tools are typically around $70. Just an example. The 7.2V NiMH battery pack for a Canon 1D-MkII is about $150. However - I think most people can understand what I was getting at. The expense of replacing a single battery pack for a camera is considerably less than an entire stack for a hybrid car. I still contend that the average owner isn't going to need that full replacement down the line. Those who do will likely have options other than a complete, brand-new stack that will get it in working condition for several years. The Honda Insight battery is rather interesting. I know the car is rather small, but still an interesting battery design. Essentially 120 D-cells selected specifically because it was a standard size with the likelihood of multiple sources down the line. > Perhaps comparing an aluminum I4 to a cast iron big block V8. There is a > great variety of V8 engines out there covering a huge weight range and > huge displacement range. There are also very nice aluminum V6s that are > more appropriate in a car. I was comparing an aluminum block I4 (typically around 200 lbs) to an aluminum block V8 (400-450 lbs). > An aluminum V6 with variable displacement is probably not more than 50# > heavier than the engine and electric motor in a hybrid. So far I haven't heard of any. I thought it was mostly used in the large V8s in GM SUVs. I thought that Cadillac's early attempts were massively unreliable. > What you don't seem to get is the fact that the life of the battery pack > *IS* the life of the car. If the pack lasts 10 years that is the life of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > With the conventional economy car you simply don't have this > catastrophic end of life scenario. Well, you actually DO. Most economy cars are pretty much Bic razors with wheels. Reliable as hell for the first 100k miles, then not worth fixing when the typical Asian car "massive organ failure" starts happening somewhere in the mid-100k miles range. Sure, there are isolated cases of Civics and Tercels going 200k or more, but the vast majority get turned to beer cans long before then. Not true of larger/higher end cars. Seriously, when was the last time YOU saw a Civic (or similar car) more than 5 years old on the road? I see a 10-year-old Neon in the office parking lot every day, but man does it ever stick out, because that's the only time I ever see a tiny car that old! If someone would ever bother to produce an economy car with the ruggedness and longevity of a high-end car, there probably would be a market for it. But right now, "economy car" is so closely correlated with "minimal intial purchase price" that they simply aren't built to last. > > What you don't seem to get is the fact that the life of the battery pack > > *IS* the life of the car. If the pack lasts 10 years that is the life of [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > market for it. But right now, "economy car" is so closely correlated > with "minimal intial purchase price" that they simply aren't built to last. If you rely on a dealer for service and install new parts, sure the uneconomical point could be in the 100k mile range. If you have a decent independent mechanic or do the work yourself, and use salvage parts from the junk yard / recycler that uneconomical to maintain point will be a lot further out. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.