 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Trucks / April 2006Hybrids..
--Went and had a look at the GMC "hybrid" 1500 the other day, thinking it would be nice to slip into something with decent fuel economy and better mileage than the Ranger. Well, dream on gang: it was a POS. The corporate philosophy (they had a little flyer describing their rationale) was to use the truck with the biggest engine, to *keep* that engine and to add NiMH batteries. They claimed an increase in gas mileage of a piddling 10%. The thing they were touting as the advantage of their hybrid was the dual 110-v outlets in the box, so the owner could plug in portable power tools. Not my idea of hybrid technology at its best, not by a long shot. IMO GMC just doesn't 'get it'. I'm wondering if we'll be luckier in a few years with a Ford hybrid truck or will they also take this "low road" approach. Anyone got an insider's view to let us know what's in the works?  Signature"Steamboat Ed" Haas : Concave, convex, con Hacking the Trailing Edge! : carne: all is Zen.. www.nmpproducts.com ---Decks a-wash in a sea of words--- > --Went and had a look at the GMC "hybrid" 1500 the other day, >thinking it would be nice to slip into something with decent fuel economy [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >few years with a Ford hybrid truck or will they also take this "low road" >approach. Anyone got an insider's view to let us know what's in the works? The model you mention certainly isn't for the general consumer's benefit. It might be great for contractors though that are always having to haul around a generator. Or maybe not even for that. This model will go the way of the four wheel steer GMs... (Although at least the four wheel steer made some sense!) Supposedly GM does have another system on the way that they claim offers up a 25% increase in mileage and combines batteries with their displacement on demand technologies. Personally, I'd like to see more diesel engine options..... but without the crazy price increases that the Big 3 tack on their diesel trucks currently. It wouldn't take much to get me into a 30+ mpg diesel Ranger truck, if I could buy it for a fair price. Until then, I'll keep feeding my V-10 and drive with a light foot. It does hurt to watch the price on the gas pump, but the truck is paid for! Matt 99 V-10 Super Duty, Super Cab 4x4 > The model you mention certainly isn't for the general consumer's > benefit. It might be great for contractors though that are always > having to haul around a generator. Or maybe not even for that. This > model will go the way of the four wheel steer GMs... (Although at > least the four wheel steer made some sense!) There hasnt been a successful quad steer vehicle yet. They are disconcerting to drive, and some what fear-ful, the idea of it glitching into "crimp" instead of "crab" steer while doing a lane change at 70 mph.... Worked on pettibone 6000lb rough terrian forklifts while in the service, we were for ever having problems with the four wheel steer systems. When they worked they were great. Army finally scrapped them and went International Harvisters with an articulating style, like buckect loaders. I read somewhere before the last hurricane season hit florida, that the 1500 hybrid with the 5.3 will power a 5000 btu ac unit and an average sized fridge for 38 hours on a tank of gas. One storm we were with out power for 6 days, fist time with out power more than 2 days in 20 years living down here.. > Supposedly GM does have another system on the way that they claim > offers up a 25% increase in mileage and combines batteries with their > displacement on demand technologies. I hope they do the displacement on demand better than they did the Caddy 4-6-8 > Personally, I'd like to see more diesel engine options..... but > without the crazy price increases that the Big 3 tack on their diesel > trucks currently. It wouldn't take much to get me into a 30+ mpg > diesel Ranger truck, if I could buy it for a fair price. I havent figured out why the 4 cyl turbo diesel in the tiltmaster and Izusu isnt in the truck yet. and the 2.0 litre Isuzu engine used in the S-10, Chevette, I-mark, Pup truck etc, was not a bad engine, as long as you never bounced a drive wheel off the ground under acceleration, or broke a timing belt. And what about the V-6 diesel GM used in the "A" body? The only real pain there was changing a water pump. Whitelightning >> --Went and had a look at the GMC "hybrid" 1500 the other day, >>thinking it would be nice to slip into something with decent fuel economy [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > Matt > 99 V-10 Super Duty, Super Cab 4x4 I've gotten 31.5 m/g on the hiway in my 04 ranger 4 banger 5 speed. Of course, the 4 banger ain't for towing. John >I've gotten 31.5 m/g on the hiway in my 04 ranger 4 banger 5 speed. Of >course, the 4 banger ain't for towing. That certainly ain't bad. I should have detailed the truck in my mind which is an extended cab 4x4 Ranger. Sadly, the last one I had with the small V-6 and a 5 spd could only pull down about 22 mpg under perfect conditions. Matt 99 V-10 Super Duty, Super Cab 4x4 Matt - you have the same year and make truck I do - what kind of mileage do you get? My mileage has been as low as 5MPG !! but the truck has a heavy dump bed on it. It runs well otherwise. John >>I've gotten 31.5 m/g on the hiway in my 04 ranger 4 banger 5 speed. Of >>course, the 4 banger ain't for towing. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Matt > 99 V-10 Super Duty, Super Cab 4x4 I've got a 5 spd manual, 4.3 gears and 285 series tires and in light stop & go/country road driving I've been rock steady at 11 to 12 mpg for the past year or so. On a freeway trip last weekend running 75 mph for 2/3rds of the trip and 65 for the other 1/3rd, I was sitting right at 13 mpg. I've never gotten mileage worse than the low 9s, but I don't tow anything heavier than a pop-up or small 2-place enclosed snowmobile trailer. (These numbers take into account the tire size increase over stock [265s].) Matt 99 V-10 Super Duty, Super Cab 4x4 >Matt - you have the same year and make truck I do - what kind of mileage do >you get? My mileage has been as low as 5MPG !! but the truck has a heavy [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >> Matt >> 99 V-10 Super Duty, Super Cab 4x4 I read somewhere that GM has the most fuel efficient engines in the world. Better than the Koreans, Europeans and Japanese. I don't know how this was arrived at but I rented a DTS Cadillac and averaged almost 30mpg on the hiway at around 80 mph. I also know a Corvette gets very good mileage. You would think that GM would continue development with their "displacement on Demand" or go with a new fuel instead of the Hybrid which is just a stop gap at best. (if its even that) Rob > --Went and had a look at the GMC "hybrid" 1500 the other day, > thinking it would be nice to slip into something with decent fuel economy [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > few years with a Ford hybrid truck or will they also take this "low road" > approach. Anyone got an insider's view to let us know what's in the works? >I read somewhere that GM has the most fuel efficient engines in the world. >Better than the Koreans, Europeans and Japanese. I don't know how this was [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Demand" or go with a new fuel instead of the Hybrid which is just a stop >gap at best. (if its even that) My 1995 Lincoln Town Car with the 4.6 V8 got 30 on the hiway...and when I needed it to get out of the way, it went like a raped ape. I'd assume the Crown Vics will still do the same. > --Went and had a look at the GMC "hybrid" 1500 the other day, > thinking it would be nice to slip into something with decent fuel economy [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > few years with a Ford hybrid truck or will they also take this "low road" > approach. Anyone got an insider's view to let us know what's in the works? I don't really see the point of it either. If you're interested in saving money or gas, you wouldn't be driving a GMC to begin with, but if you absolutely have to have a big truck to do your job, then you wouldn't pay a big up-front cost that doesn't pay out. So it doesn't seem to useful. This month's road & track has a comparison of 3 common (I guess) hybrids to their non-hybrid versions - The ford Escape, Camry, and Honda Civic. It's really interesting. The Ford and Toyota pay back the up-front cost in about 100,000 miles, but that's ignoring the cost of capital. They'd really never pay out. The civic was not worth having, because regular civics don't use much gas to begin with. The tax benefits are probably the best thing about them, economically. The Ford and Toyota are full hybrids that really do a pretty good job by the numbers, even if they're not economical. The Ford Escape, for instance, increased its fuel mileage 50% - from 20 to 30 mpg. Or, put another way, it cut consumption by a third. Not too shabby. That's not epa, just the conditions of the test by the magazine folks. >> --Went and had a look at the GMC "hybrid" 1500 the other day, >> thinking it would be nice to slip into something with decent fuel economy [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > to their non-hybrid versions - The ford Escape, Camry, and Honda Civic. > It's really interesting. A little extra info - the Camrys were 2007 prototypes. > > > This month's road & track has a comparison of 3 common (I guess) hybrids > > to their non-hybrid versions - The ford Escape, Camry, and Honda Civic. > > It's really interesting. > > A little extra info - the Camrys were 2007 prototypes. I haven't opened an R&T cover in eons. Never seen it ever do anything but rave about imports, but then its a french owned rag. Whitelightning |
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.