 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Honda Cars / August 2005Dark Side of the Hybrids
The current edition of "Car and Driver" (magazine) has an interesting article about the dark side of the hybrids on page 26. The date on the cover is September 2005. Many of the so called "greenies" have purchased hybrids because they really care about the environment. I learned about something from the article that I had never thought about before. What's going to happen to those millions of batteries in hybrid vehicles after they wear out? They will be placed in landfills. Imagine the harm that those batteries may do to the enviroment after they are laying in a landfill for 50 years. If you own or are planning to buy a hybrid vehicle, I advise you to read the article. Jason  SignatureNEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. >The current edition of "Car and Driver" (magazine) has an interesting >article about the dark side of the hybrids on page 26. The date on the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >will be placed in landfills. Imagine the harm that those batteries may do >to the enviroment after they are laying in a landfill for 50 years. I don't know the specifics but it seems that recycling of such things is quite common these days. > >The current edition of "Car and Driver" (magazine) has an interesting > >article about the dark side of the hybrids on page 26. The date on the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I don't know the specifics but it seems that recycling of such > things is quite common these days. See http://www.batterycouncil.org/news-edf_response.html Which reads, in part: 5. It's hard to argue with a 97.1 percent recycling rate for battery lead, and no other battery chemistry can come near that number. Car batteries are not disposed of. Their materials - mostly lead -- are recycled indefinitely. The battery industry has been continuously recycling and reusing lead from old car batteries for more than 50 years. There is virtually no recycling process for other chemistries, and it's hard to even imagine the cost of developing a recycling process and infrastructure comparable to what we already have with lead-acid batteries. > > >The current edition of "Car and Driver" (magazine) has an interesting > > >article about the dark side of the hybrids on page 26. The date on the [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > of developing a recycling process and infrastructure comparable to what we > already have with lead-acid batteries. Hello, You may be right. I have not done any research on this subject. Brock Yates--the author of the article--stated the following in his article: "[Batteries] are hardly biodegradable items like spoiled vegetables. They are in fact self-contained toxic waste dumps. How and where millions of these poisonous boxes will be deposited ... has yet to be considered, much less resolved." Jason SignatureNEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. >> > >The current edition of "Car and Driver" (magazine) has an >> > >interesting article about the dark side of the hybrids on page 26. [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > considered, much less resolved." > Jason Well,it IS an additional expense that must be factored in.(recycling costs) SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net >>Car batteries are not disposed of. Their materials - mostly lead -- are recycled indefinitely. The battery industry has been continuously recycling and reusing lead from old car batteries for more than 50 years.<< Only problem is: The high-voltage hybrid batteries are not lead-acid, but nickel-metal-hydride (NiMH). >>Brock Yates--the author of the article--stated the following in his article: "[Batteries] are hardly biodegradable items like spoiled vegetables. They are in fact self-contained toxic waste dumps. How and where millions of these poisonous boxes will be deposited ... has yet to be considered, much less resolved."<< For Brock Yates, a reactionary conservative, to even mention recycling is amazing all by itself...but that sounds to me as if he's making an assumption. I'd like to hear what Honda and the other makers of hybrids have to say about it. The Hybrids are not a lead acid type. Over 240(?) small batteries of some sort. SignatureStephen W. Hansen ASE Certified Master Automobile Technician ASE Undercar Specialist > >> >The current edition of "Car and Driver" (magazine) has an interesting [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > of developing a recycling process and infrastructure comparable to what we > already have with lead-acid batteries. >The current edition of "Car and Driver" (magazine) has an interesting >article about the dark side of the hybrids on page 26. The date on the >cover is September 2005. Maybe the author of the article should have done a little actual research. Here is what Toyota has to say about battery replacement and recycling: http://pressroom.toyota.com/photo_library/display_release.html?id=20040623 How long does the Prius battery last and what is the replacement cost? The Prius battery (and the battery-power management system) has been designed to maximize battery life. In part this is done by keeping the battery at an optimum charge level - never fully draining it and never fully recharging it. As a result, the Prius battery leads a pretty easy life. We have lab data showing the equivalent of 180,000 miles with no deterioration and expect it to last the life of the vehicle. We also expect battery technology to continue to improve: the second-generation model battery is 15% smaller, 25% lighter, and has 35% more specific power than the first. This is true of price as well. Between the 2003 and 2004 models, service battery costs came down 36% and we expect them to continue to drop so that by the time replacements may be needed it won't be a much of an issue. Since the car went on sale in 2000, Toyota has not replaced a single battery for wear and tear. Is there a recycling plan in place for nickel-metal hydride batteries? Toyota has a comprehensive battery recycling program in place and has been recycling nickel-metal hydride batteries since the RAV4 Electric Vehicle was introduced in 1998. Every part of the battery, from the precious metals to the plastic, plates, steel case and the wiring, is recycled. To ensure that batteries come back to Toyota, each battery has a phone number on it to call for recycling information and dealers are paid a $200 "bounty" for each battery. Elliot Richmond Freelance Science Writer and Editor > Here is what Toyota has to say about battery replacement > and recycling: Spun like a member of the Clinton family. If you believe Toyota's PR spin 100%, you're in for a big surprise. >> Here is what Toyota has to say about battery replacement >> and recycling: > > Spun like a member of the Clinton family. > > If you believe Toyota's PR spin 100%, you're in for a big surprise. ....and? That's it? Please enlighten us with your wisdom on the subject. > > Spun like a member of the Clinton family. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Please enlighten us with your wisdom on the subject. All I'm saying is, Toyota is spinning their side of the story very hard. Don't accept it at face value. You're a fool if you do. They have an axe to grind, and they'll spin it however they have to in order to make themselves look as good as possible and sell as many cars as possible. In other words, never listen to a car salesman. And that's all that PR piece is. >>All I'm saying is, Toyota is spinning their side of the story very hard...In other words, never listen to a car salesman. And that's all that PR piece is.<< Right. However, according to you we should believe any yahoo who posts under an assumed name in a newsgroup, without any proof whatsoever. Thanks. I needed a good laugh today. > >>All I'm saying is, Toyota is spinning their side of the story very > hard...In other words, never listen to a car salesman. And that's all that [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Thanks. I needed a good laugh today. Hmmmmmm. I'm not saying to believe or disbelieve; I'm simply pointing out that, like any good corporate PR machine, Toyota is spinning their side of the story very hard in order to sell more stuff. By that token, you shouldn't simply believe it wholesale without investigating it more. But because I'm saying that, you decide that Toyota's press release must be 100% correct and truthful? You lead an interesting life. >>I'm simply pointing out that, like any good corporate PR machine, Toyota is spinning their side of the story very hard in order to sell more stuff. By that token, you shouldn't simply believe it wholesale without investigating it more.<< Congratulations. You've just won the grand prize for missing the point. They have data. You don't. You just assume that they're "spinning" because they're a big, bad company with an axe to grind. YOU made the allegation that they're "spinning." Where's your proof? Show us your data to prove their data wrong. We're waiting. >>But because I'm saying that, you decide that Toyota's press release must be 100% correct and truthful?<< Add to the above cited prize another one for putting words in someone's mouth. I decided no such thing. I see, so far, no evidence to contradict the press release, but that doesn't mean the evidence does or does not exist. You, OTOH, just assume it's a lie. Still waiting for that proof. > >>I'm simply pointing out that, like any good corporate PR machine, Toyota > is spinning their side of the story very hard in order to sell more stuff. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Congratulations. You've just won the grand prize for missing the point. > They have data. You don't. They have an agenda--sell more cars. I don't. I simply don't like being spoon-fed by people who have an agenda. If you enjoy being spoon-fed by people who have an agenda--and everything you say points that direction--that's your problem. > You just assume that they're "spinning" because > they're a big, bad company with an axe to grind. Is it, then, your assertion that they are NOT spinning? > YOU made the allegation > that they're "spinning." Where's your proof? Show us your data to prove > their data wrong. We're waiting. Hmmmmmm.....I don't think I ever said that one way or another. I simply said "beware, and investigate it more". You, on the other hand, appear to be saying that there's no need to investigate it more--that everything they say in that PR piece is 100% the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. One wonders why you would say that. > I see, so far, no evidence to contradict > the press release, I see, so far, no evidence to support the press release. Toyota said some things. I say, that's nice--but investigate further. You say, "if they said it, I assume that it's 100% true and you have to prove otherwise." That's your problem. > I simply said "beware, and investigate it more". You, on the other > hand, appear to be saying that there's no need to investigate it > more--that everything they say in that PR piece is 100% the truth, the > whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Well, since Toyota has put their side in black and white, it's up to you to to do the investigating and come up with something concrete. So far the assertion that they are lying through their teeth (as they must if the claim they are recycling the batteries is false) is weaker than the "who shot Kennedy" conspiracy theories. Give us something we can use. Either you can catch them in a huge lie or you are blowing smoke. Mike > > I simply said "beware, and investigate it more". You, on the other > > hand, appear to be saying that there's no need to investigate it [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Well, since Toyota has put their side in black and white, it's up to you to > to do the investigating and come up with something concrete. Is it your position that Toyota's press releases are 100% truthful and without omissions? You miss my whole point. Let me put it this way: when President Bush puts something in black and white like that, do you agree that one should be careful and not necessarily accept what he says at face value? That's all I said. Nothing more. I never said they were wrong; I said they were spinning things, exactly like any politician or corporate flack spins things. Whenever a company puts out a press release, they're spinning things. That's why corporations like that have big PR departments, and that's why they have corporate policies that any contact with the press be done only by or in conjunction with someone from their corporate PR department. All I said was, it looks good--but remember, they have an axe to grind, and they spin things just like any other corporate or political entity. Would it surprise any of us if we found out that they weren't being 100% truthful? Not at all--because it's their job to obfuscate anything that would be detrimental to their sole job of making money for their shareholders. > In article <-KGdnU0oo_hCj3PfRVn-pg@sedona.net>, > Let me put it this way: when President Bush puts something in black and > white like that, do you agree that one should be careful and not > necessarily accept what he says at face value? Back to the issue.... Let me put it this way: all Toyota has to do is enter into a contract with a company to handle the recycling on a per-unit basis and add the cost of that and the $200 deposit to the battery. Then they can make the claim in good conscience. It greatly limits their liabilities and costs them nothing at all. They would be incomprehensibly stupid not to... so what on earth would make you think such a thing? Mike >> In article <-KGdnU0oo_hCj3PfRVn-pg@sedona.net>, >> Let me put it this way: when President Bush puts something in black [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Mike Was the orignal claim about Toyota not recycling their NiMH batteries or the amount of battery life the batteries would have under ordinary service? I thought it was the latter. I do not doubt that Toyota would recycle the batteries. Their claims on life expectancy,I might doubt. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net "" wrote: > > In article <-KGdnU0oo_hCj3PfRVn-pg@sedona.net>, > > Let me put it this way: when President Bush puts something [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Mike The only problem I have with hybrids is that people dump their "old" cars to purchase an environmentally friendlier vehicle.... It is my understanding that the processes involved in manufacturing a new car cause more polution than driving the same car will produce over its entire lifetime. So the greenest car is a used one...no matter the gas mileage. > "" wrote: > > "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > So the greenest car is a used one...no matter the gas mileage. there's a substantial element of truth to that, and you're thinking big picture which is good, but for smaller utilitarian cars at least, there is an overall benefit for the newer more efficient vehicles. whether that continues to be the case is another matter now that we have relatively clean burning fuel injected cars, but compared to carburetion, the overall benefit of modern cars is worth the manufacturing effort. > > "" wrote: > > > "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > carburetion, the overall benefit of modern cars is worth the > manufacturing effort. Hello, I agree with you related to your last point. I am now 54 years old and remember all of the problems I had with cars made in the 1960's, 70's and early 80's. The carburetor and electrical system was the main source of those problems. I have never had any problems with the EFI system or electrical system in both of Honda Accords that I have owned. Jason SignatureNEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. > > I simply said "beware, and investigate it more". You, on the other > > hand, appear to be saying that there's no need to investigate it [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Mike Mike, It's difficult for most of us to conduct that sort of research. Perhaps a disgruntled (sp??) employee might eventually sneak data out of the company and release it to the news media. If that never happens, we will probably never learn the true facts related to this issue. A Federal investigation might also force them to release the true facts. On the other hand, perhaps Toyota is being totally honest related to the data that they release to the news media and post on the internet. Do you really believe that any company is totally honest related to information they release to the news media or post on the internet? I doubt it. There is a conflict of interest involved. Jason SignatureNEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. >> > I simply said "beware, and investigate it more". You, on the other >> > hand, appear to be saying that there's no need to investigate it [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > internet? I doubt it. There is a conflict of interest involved. > Jason There's certainly enough evidence that auto companies have had "hidden warranties" to fix problems they do not want the public to know about. And that they usually fight any effort of the consumer groups on class actions concerning major auto problems.(like wheels falling off) So,one should blindly trust the auto companies?? SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net >>>I'm simply pointing out that, like any good corporate PR machine, >>>Toyota [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Congratulations. You've just won the grand prize for missing the > point. They have data. You don't. Tobacco companies had data,too,yet still told people smoking was safe. And auto companies often have "hidden" warranties or don't bother telling people about free repairs to correct deficiencies.Toyota is not any "saint".They,like any other product seller,are going to paint their product in the best possible light,and not disclose and downsides. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > >>>I'm simply pointing out that, like any good corporate PR machine, > >>>Toyota [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > "saint".They,like any other product seller,are going to paint their product > in the best possible light,and not disclose and downsides. (just waiting here for Sid to respond. Not holding my breath, but still...) >>Tobacco companies had data,too,yet still told people smoking was safe.<< I deeply appreciate you making my point for me. Just as multiple disinterested parties came up with the data to contradict the tobacco companies (which is what got them to admit that they had the same data), I'm still waiting for Elmo P. Anonymous to come up with the data to contradict Toyota. > >>Tobacco companies had data,too,yet still told people smoking was safe.<< > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > still waiting for Elmo P. Anonymous to come up with the data to contradict > Toyota. Um, I don't believe it's up to me to come up with anything. I simply warned you that Toyota in this case is in the same role as the tobacco companies, and that you'd be best to be wary. What part of that didn't you understand, Sid? >>>Tobacco companies had data,too,yet still told people smoking was >>>safe.<< [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > data), I'm still waiting for Elmo P. Anonymous to come up with the > data to contradict Toyota. I note you edited out the comments about auto companies knowing about product defects in their vehicles(hidden warranties),yet not revealing them so they would not have to correct them at their expense,until enough 'incidents' occur and public indignation forces them to correct them,hoping that the owners would fix them themselves at their own cost.Also,the "lemon" laws that had to be passed to get auto companies to replace vehicles with major recurring defects. Actually,disgruntled tobacco employees revealed that the companies had the data for many years. It's also like the recent cellphone while driving debate;It's common sense that it's a dangerous distraction,and the data has not been collected sufficiently to prove it,but rational people still know that CP use while driving is dangerous. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net >>> Here is what Toyota has to say about battery replacement >>> and recycling: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Please enlighten us with your wisdom on the subject. NiMH and NiCd can only be recharged a number of times before their capacity drops off,and L-A batteries suffer from sulfation,electrolyte loss,and vibration/shock damage(material falls out of the lead grids,shorts the cell). Hot environments like the Southwest and Florida will shorten battery life further. I don't know of any rechargeable battery chemistry that can be recharged 100,000 times. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net >>>> Here is what Toyota has to say about battery replacement >>>> and recycling: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > I don't know of any rechargeable battery chemistry that can be recharged > 100,000 times. Well, a hybrids' certainly wouldn't need to unless it only got 3 miles per charge. >>>>> Here is what Toyota has to say about battery replacement >>>>> and recycling: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Well, a hybrids' certainly wouldn't need to unless it only got 3 miles > per charge. They get charged before they run completely down;partial charges,"topping off".They still are charge cycles. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net >>>>>> Here is what Toyota has to say about battery replacement >>>>>> and recycling: [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > They get charged before they run completely down;partial charges,"topping > off".They still are charge cycles. However, they are not failing. Try googling "prius battery fail" and you will see about 10K hits with a ton of speculation about when the battery will fail and about failures of the 12 volt aux battery (which is as vulnerable as the 12 volt battery in conventional cars)... but good luck finding a report of one that has actually died a natural death. Then google "acura transmission fail" and you will get about 22K hits; why the transmissions are failing, what to do about the transmissions failing. One member of the Yahoo Prius group just had his150K mile service done on his 2001 and has done nothing but scheduled maintenance and tire replacement - no battery failure yet. That figures since Toyota warranties the hybrid system, including battery, for 8 years/100K miles (150K miles in CA). Even the original Prius, sold since 1998 in Japan, has no battery failure issues. There is nothing in chemistry that limits the number of charge cycles for a primary cell. Edison cells, for example, have no natural limitations on charge/discharge cycles and usually last for decades but have poor energy density. We are familiar with lead acid and NiCads which have serious life limitations because of their particular chemistry so we assume all rechargables do. Then we look at the batteries in portable electronics - they are designed to charge as quickly as possible, have the highest possible energy density and be profitable to replace - and we decide no rechargable battery could last longer than a couple years... just as we might watch sprinters and conclude no human can run more than a mile. When it comes down to it, the experiment is on the roads and has been successful for 7 years. At least one Prius has exceeded 200K miles http://www.hybridexperience.ca/Reliability.htm Mike >>>>>>> Here is what Toyota has to say about battery replacement >>>>>>> and recycling: [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] >rechargable battery could last longer than a couple years... just as we >might watch sprinters and conclude no human can run more than a mile. oh dear, the old 'we're all familier with X, which is kinda like Y, and so what we know happens with X, we also assume happens to y - Sorry, thats complete and utter, unadulterated BULLSHIT. Save your pop-psychology for the easily impressed - such as any children under 10 you might have. NIcads and NIMH have lmited charge cycles. Why? conductive crystaline formaton int he cell, producing an effectively 'shorter' cell. can you fix this? yes you can, alsthough its tricky to do, and risky - you zap the cells. >When it comes down to it, the experiment is on the roads and has been >successful for 7 years. At least one Prius has exceeded 200K miles >http://www.hybridexperience.ca/Reliability.htm Whoopdie do. One has managed 200k miles, conrgatulations, pat on the back there. I've a first gen caravan thats managed that too, doesn't make it a particularly good van. Second, you keep making this song and deal about a vehicle that is expensive to make, would have to be run for over 300,000 miles before its actually more efficient in TOTAL than a similarly sized conventional car, and which would probably be more efficient if you just ran it as a straight petrol engine. Want to be fuel efficient, two easy rules 1) be smooth with driving, and make speed ransitions smooth and slowly 2) remove any unneccesarry weight. - less weight = less fuel needed. Take out the weighty electrical system, and you'll probably get around the same mpg. Lets look at it another way, EPA rating for prius 51mpg (very optomistic rating, as with all EPA ratings) I've seen an Audi A8 (thats the big one) with a 4l V8 twin turbo engine (thats a big engine too) return 40mpg. A car designed to be big, heavy, smooth, comfortable - ANYTHING but fuel efficient - can get such figures speaks volumes. i will admit that was highway driving, if you'd rather have a small car, and think about fuel economy from the get-go, VW group also make a lupo - agains non-hybrid - thats RATED at 65mpg. People with hybrids can be described in one word - poser. "Look at me, i'm driving a hybrid, aren't I trendy, trying to show i'm conserned with the enviroment, but cool, and have money to waste" - what a right old load of bollocks it is. >Mike > People with hybrids can be described in one word - poser. "Look at me, > i'm driving a hybrid, aren't I trendy, trying to show i'm conserned > with the enviroment, but cool, and have money to waste" - what a right > old load of bollocks it is. I have a solution for you! Don't worry about what other people drive. >> People with hybrids can be described in one word - poser. "Look at me, >> i'm driving a hybrid, aren't I trendy, trying to show i'm conserned [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >I have a solution for you! >Don't worry about what other people drive. now tell the other 8 billion on the planet. However, you seem to ahve confised what i was saying. I wasn't saying that I particularly cared. its the Prius and similar drivers that care, not about what others drive (although that is used as a introduction to 'well i drive a ...') but about what other people think about the car they drive. Personally, i don't care about what other people think about the car i drive, so i have a ratty civic, a ratty caravan, a ratty volvo 340, and a ratty *looking* MG metroTT. They all have dents, they all have rust. They're all from 87-89, and i really don't care what people think about me as i drive past. This is a concept that is very hard for a hybrid owner to grasp. The wife cares, hence she got a saturn SL1, Meanwhile i'll look at a caterham superlight, or an Atom2 "flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message > However, you seem to ahve confised what i was saying. I wasn't saying > that I particularly cared. its the Prius and similar drivers that > care, not about what others drive (although that is used as a [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > for a hybrid owner to grasp. The wife cares, hence she got a saturn > SL1, Meanwhile i'll look at a caterham superlight, or an Atom2 Hybrid drivers aren't that easy to categorize, either. Drive what you want - when we were looking at replacing the Nissan that kept me busy in the garage, we had two options (I'm the car authority in the family!) We could employ my favored and time proven tactic of buying a reliable model of car with at least 80K miles on it or we could buy a new hybrid. I saw no reason at all to buy a 21st century car with a 20th century power train, and I had looked forward to mass-market hybrids since I was introduced to the concept of hybrids some decades ago. The Civic Hybrid was hardly an improvement over the conventional Civic and was not in stock, but the Prius was just the ticket. Toyota had lept most of the barriers to electrifying the accessories (power steering and brakes were electric even then, and the A/C is electric in the current model.) The 8 year / 100K mile warranty on the hybrid system, combined with a *lot* of research, pretty much had me sold. I wasn't prepared for the driving experience, though. The 2002 model is a great chassis for city dwellers, with remarkable manueverability. The off-the-line acceleration is impressive, even here at 7000 ft where our turbo Volvo makes me wish we could do the Fred Flintstone thing until the turbo finally gets its mojo working. The power train is easily the smoothest available anywhere - since there is no transmission there are no shifts at all. We are approaching 50K miles and have done nothing but routine maintenance, replace the tires and replace a windshield that fell victim to the Arizona road rocks. We have taken several long trips in it and after three years we still love it. I do know what you mean about the political bent of many Prius owners, though. As a Reaganite I do not see eye-to-eye with many of the other owners, whom Click and Clack characterized as "granola eating" and "tree hugging." Oddly, I've learned I am one of four former or current Lotus owners active in the Yahoo Prius group - and none of us hug trees. I miss my Europa, but the Prius is almost as much fun to drive in its own way... and *way* more reliable! Mike > People with hybrids can be described in one word - poser. "Look at me, > i'm driving a hybrid, aren't I trendy, trying to show i'm conserned > with the enviroment, but cool, and have money to waste" They don't call it the Toyota "Pious" for nothing. > Lets look at it another way, EPA rating for prius 51mpg (very > optomistic rating, as with all EPA ratings) I've seen an Audi A8 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > have a small car, and think about fuel economy from the get-go, VW > group also make a lupo - agains non-hybrid - thats RATED at 65mpg. OMG - I wasn't familiar with the Lupo, so I did a little research. See http://www.usatoday.com/money/consumer/autos/mareview/mauto497.htm for the USA Today report on an early test version. The truth is ugly indeed! Non-existent acceleration, maddening transmission behavior, rock-bottom comfort, and so much more. Talk about doing tricks to get fuel economy - this benighted little gremlin tries them all. No A/C of course, no P/S available, and a $3000 premium for the privilege of being abused by your car. This is the basis of the TD version the economy claims stem from. http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/car-reviews/car-and-driving/volkswagen-lupo-1.4-e-10031 51.html is more kind to the production "E" version of the car, but notes much lower economy - 54 mpg on the highway and 30(!) mpg in town. Our Prius gets real-world upper 40s in town, even with hills and stop and go traffic and frequent waits for trains. Mike >> Lets look at it another way, EPA rating for prius 51mpg (very >> optomistic rating, as with all EPA ratings) I've seen an Audi A8 [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >P/S available, and a $3000 premium for the privilege of being abused by your >car. This is the basis of the TD version the economy claims stem from. this wiould be the 'lupo 3l' - and the link i gave a few days ago in the thread about the canadian test, right? Few things to remember. No PS - normal, its so small you don't need it. Don't need it in my 88 civic either. AC is not standard in european cars, its a hgih-equipment spec standard, or otherwise option. Most of europe you don't need it. the engine stop+start is something common to a fair few of the 'high effiiciency cars' The Rock bottom comfort - well thats an american reviewing a european only claim. Used to luxury boats, that get terribale millage, and well hes not in one, plus it was a pre-producton model. By contrst, the BBC's top reviewer (and one of the most influential reviewers in europe) tested the F150 recently. Thats the best selling vehicle in the US, and he tested a production model (the lightning in fact) and he said pretty much the same thing about the comforts, and the production quality. He liked the engine, but then, since he was about to take delivery of the new FordGT (which has the same engine0 i'm not surprised there. In short, i feel the usatoday reviewer was predjudiced by his american car standards, same as europeans are predjudiced against american vehicles (such as their amazement when they drove the caddie CTS, branding it 'the first american car to be able to handle a corner', so which I say "its about time" >http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/car-reviews/car-and-driving/volkswagen-lupo-1.4-e-10031 51.html >is more kind to the production "E" version of the car, but notes much lower >economy - 54 mpg on the highway and 30(!) mpg in town. Our Prius gets >real-world upper 40s in town, even with hills and stop and go traffic and >frequent waits for trains. Its a petrol engine, what doyou expect. the 1.7tdi is more efficient. though, 'return a combined fuel consumption figure of over 64mpg, although acceleration is rather limp" which is http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/car-reviews/car-and-driving/volkswagen-lupo-2002288.html on the combined lupo test. >Mike > Its a petrol engine, what doyou expect. the 1.7tdi is more efficient. > though, 'return a combined fuel consumption figure of over 64mpg, > although acceleration is rather limp" which is > http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/car-reviews/car-and-driving/volkswagen-lupo-2002288.html > on the combined lupo test. But the point stands - these are dinky cars (as the above link points out, the rear seat is really only practical for children) with small engines to increase fuel economy - the same things that have been used for economy for half a century or more. Remember the Nash Metropolitan or the early VWs? You can have economy or you can have performance, but not both, by selecting the version... as the article makes very clear. That is where hybrids shine, with economy in the same league as the economical Lupos and spaciousness and performance in a completely different league. Our 2002 is smaller, lighter, less powerful, lower performance and 15% *less* economical than the current generation Prius (which started in 2004) but still seats five adults adequately (better than my daughter's '93 Accord) and gets fuel economy in town between 45 and 50 mpg - real world, many short trips, with A/C on. According to the article, the 1.0L entry-level model offers that sort of economy but takes more than 18 seconds to reach 60 mph - half again as long as our first-generation Prius and almost twice as long as the current generation. The Prius is the Model T of hybrids. Popular, well designed, but only a shadow of the cars to come. Hybridization is the answer to many engineering dilemmas posed by the requirements of passenger cars. At last we can have spacious, responsive and economical cars - something VW's tricks still can't bring together, as the article makes plain. Mike jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in news:jason-3007051017330001@pm4-broad- 55.snlo.dialup.fix.net: > The current edition of "Car and Driver" (magazine) has an interesting > article about the dark side of the hybrids on page 26. The date on the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Jason Lead-acid and other types of batteries (NiCd and NiMH,Li-ion)are already recycled,why should hybrid auto batteries escape that? IMO,there would be valuable materials that could be recovered,in the amounts that will be discarded. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in news:jason-3007051017330001@pm4-broad- > 55.snlo.dialup.fix.net: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Lead-acid and other types of batteries (NiCd and NiMH,Li-ion)are already > recycled,why should hybrid auto batteries escape that? Apparently, not. http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/WPIE/Batteries/ ... After February 8, 2006, all batteries in California must be recycled, or taken to a household hazardous waste disposal facility, a universal waste handler (e.g., storage facility or broker), or an authorized recycling facility. ... It looks like that's partly due to federal regs, but I'm too lazy to look. > IMO,there would be valuable materials that could be recovered,in the > amounts that will be discarded. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > at > kua.net >> jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in >> news:jason-3007051017330001@pm4-broad- 55.snlo.dialup.fix.net: [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >> at >> kua.net Sure,there are many people who just toss their batteries in the trash,just because they are unaware of alternatives,or just take the easiest route. But Radio Shack and other stores that sell batteries accept them for recycling.And most auto stores require a "core" fee that is refunded when you return the old LA battery,and they send them off for recycling. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net There is a new thing called "recycling" > The current edition of "Car and Driver" (magazine) has an interesting > article about the dark side of the hybrids on page 26. The date on the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Jason >The current edition of "Car and Driver" (magazine) has an interesting >article about the dark side of the hybrids on page 26. The date on the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Jason Pfft, missing the point. The point is that they're ONLY getting 40-45mpg. Many non-hybrids on sale in the EU will easily beat that. For isntance, n the UK, a VW lupo returned to one of the most outspoken motoring journalists int he world, an AVERAGE of 65mpg Hybrids are a Pr stunt only. > Pfft, missing the point. The point is that they're ONLY getting > 40-45mpg. Many non-hybrids on sale in the EU will easily beat that. > For isntance, n the UK, a VW lupo returned to one of the most > outspoken motoring journalists int he world, an AVERAGE of 65mpg > Hybrids are a Pr stunt only. Fuel economy is only a side effect of hybridization. The major reason for the change is to correct the fundamental engineering debacle of using a 260 hp engine to move a personal vehicle through city traffic or along a freeway while we could have *better* performance and economy from a 100 hp engine running when needed and electric power to do the rest. In effect, hybridization separates engine power from acceleration performance. Honda has a good example in their 2001 concept car, the Dualnote ( http://world.honda.com/Tokyo2001/auto/DUALNOTE/index.html ). 4 passengers, 400 combined hp, with off-the-line acceleration comparable to a 600 hp car (according to Honda engineers interviewed in a Popular Mechanics article a couple years ago), and fuel economy estimated around 40 mpg. Kinda like a Super Lupo ;-) Admittedly, hybrids are in their infancy now (but as an owner I can tell you the Prius is a really nice infant!) As an engineer I believe it is safe to say hybrids will be the rule rather than the exception for passenger cars (but not trucks) within 20 years for very sound design reasons. You may believe what you wish. Mike >> Pfft, missing the point. The point is that they're ONLY getting >> 40-45mpg. Many non-hybrids on sale in the EU will easily beat that. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > for the change is to correct the fundamental engineering debacle of > using a 260 hp engine Any ICO will not always be making it's full rated power,usually far less. >to move a personal vehicle through city traffic > or along a freeway while we could have *better* performance and [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Mike SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > > Pfft, missing the point. The point is that they're ONLY getting > > 40-45mpg. Many non-hybrids on sale in the EU will easily beat that. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Mike Mike, You are probably right. I know that you will be right once the price of hybrid vehicles comes down to the point where almost anyone can easily afford to buy them. The Honda Accord Hybrid is so expensive that Honda is having a difficult time selling very many of them. If the Accord Hybrid was priced the same as the 6 cyld. Accord, they would sell lots more of them. Jason SignatureNEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. > You are probably right. I know that you will be right once the price of > hybrid vehicles comes down to the point where almost anyone can easily [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > them. > Jason Base EX-V6 Accord $33,600 CDN Base Hybrid Accord $36,900 CDN Source http://honda.ca/Honda/default.htm?L=E What prices are *you* referring too, "Jason"? > > You are probably right. I know that you will be right once the price of > > hybrid vehicles comes down to the point where almost anyone can easily [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > What prices are *you* referring too, "Jason"? Steve, The above two prices that you mentioned. If the Hybrid Accord and EX-V6 Accord were both priced at $33,600--Honda would sell lots more of them. I rarely ever see any Hybrid Accords on any of the parking lots of the local grocery stores and Walmart stores. I see lots of the V6 (non Hybrid) in those same parking lots. I realize that this won't happen in the next 5 years since it costs Honda much more to make a Hybrid Accord than a regular Accord. Jason SignatureNEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. >>You are probably right. I know that you will be right once the price of >>hybrid vehicles comes down to the point where almost anyone can easily [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > What prices are *you* referring too, "Jason"? As I was pricing a EX-V6 and a hybrid in the San Francisco area in Jan/Feb 2005 I found I could get the EX-V6 Navi (with leather) for $26K but the hybrid was about $32K. As I calculated it: for the price difference and MPG difference one would need to drive the car for 500K miles to break even. I would love to have a hybrid but that $6K put the hybrid out of the competition. > Mike, > You are probably right. I know that you will be right once the price of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > them. > Jason Honda has taken a strange road with the Accord Hybrid and the Acura MDX hybrid. Rather than using the technology to make a high fuel economy vehicle they are using it to make a higher performance, expensive vehicle. Mostly they are selling these vehicles to the feel-good, feel-proud buyer. A good manual transmission diesel-powered drivetrain would be a much more efficient use of resources both at the manufacturing stage and in use. John >> Mike, >> You are probably right. I know that you will be right once the price of [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >much more efficient use of resources both at the manufacturing stage and >in use. Problem is, you can't get a decent, efficient, and above all else MODERN diesel engine in the Us - i believe its because the fuel that is sold here, doesn't work well with the new engine designs that have come up in the last 20-odd years, and the new fuels don't work well with the engines that have been sold in the US in those intervening 20 years. >John > Problem is, you can't get a decent, efficient, and above all else > MODERN diesel engine in the Us - i believe its because the fuel that > is sold here, doesn't work well with the new engine designs that have > come up in the last 20-odd years, and the new fuels don't work well > with the engines that have been sold in the US in those intervening 20 > years. VW is the only one selling good moderate priced diesel powered cars in the US right now. This is mostly a problem of politics and not of engineering or economics. John >> Mike, >> You are probably right. I know that you will be right once the price of [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > John Sadly, you are right. The success of the Prius has been driven mainly by fuel economy, but the luster of hybrids has led a lot of manufacturers to jump on the bandwagon and call some pretty embarrassing things "hybrids." GM is easily the worst, trying to pass off idle-stop technology as hybridization. Proposed and existing legislation favoring (but not usually defining) hybrids makes the problem worse. Until controller and battery technology can bring us practical serial hybrids (essentially electric cars with on-board chargers) we will have to wade through the fluff. Mike The sky is falling! The sky is falling! The sky is falling! > The current edition of "Car and Driver" (magazine) has an interesting > article about the dark side of the hybrids on page 26. The date on the [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. > We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. -- Tp, -------- __o ----- -\<. -------- __o --- ( )/ ( ) ---- -\<. -------------------- ( )/ ( ) ----------------------------------------- No Lawsuit Ever Fixed A Moron... |
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
|
©2009 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.