Re: Hybrid cars

wrote:


Maybe I'm a cynic, but IMO the current government is pushing hybrids, hydrogen, ethanol, etc. to distract the public and shut down discussion of measures which might actually reduce fuel consumption. The subsidy for hybrids is a tiny fraction of the subsidy for real estate agents to buy Hummers. Throwing a little money at fuel cell research is much cheaper and much more over-the-horizon than improving mass transit. Any measures which might decrease fuel consumption by monster SUVs are strictly off the table.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Message from Gordon McGrew written on 2/4/2006 11:57 AM:

Doesn't GM have a hybrid Silverado truck now? And doesn't both Ford and Toyota have hybrid versions of some of their SUV's. I would think that would make them more fuel efficient (if one can afford to buy them!)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Go to the Chevy web site and see how much information you can find on this "hybrid." Then see how much information is available on the "THUNDERING 345-HP VORTEC MAX 6000 V8"
http://www.chevrolet.com/silverado /

The Ford and Toyota might theoretically save some fuel if they replace a vehicle of equivalent size, but I don't wee many out there compared to the number of Avalanches and Tahoes driving around. In any event, my criticism isn't of hybrids, it's of the government policies that throw a few crumbs at a huge problem while refusing to take the most simple steps toward reforming defective regulations. For example, what is the EPA fuel economy of a Hummer H2? Give up? It's a trick question. It doesn't have one because it is not a light truck. It doesn't count against the GM CAFE.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Message from Gordon McGrew written on 2/4/2006 6:39 PM:

If the government got back into this they would just mess it up worse than it already is at best and create even worse "unintended consequences". CAFE is a big contributor to what pushed people to buy these monstrosities. And all because a family sedan or wagon that could tow 5000 pounds and haul 7 people around couldn't be built any longer and still meet CAFE. The American family still had the requirement for vehicles with those capabilities. Enter the scene first was the minivan (as a people mover, not so much a tow vehicle), followed by the SUV that covers both requirements
Before you say anything, I drive a mid-sized sedan and never owned an SUV. But when the kids were still around, we simply didn't all fit in a "sedan" and needed at least a minivan. So that is what we had.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gordon McGrew wrote:

numbers are important.
A properly designed hybrid sizes the IC engine to equal the AVERAGE power requirement, the electric motor to fit the difference between desired PEAK and the AVERAGE.
Many of these so-called hybrids have very large IC engines with a small electric motor to provide a slight performance boost. Yeah, they are technically hybrids, but not worth much. A 300 hp IC engine and a 25 horse electric is not going to save you much gas.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gordon McGrew wrote:

I agree. The amount of increased spending the administration is talking about is minimal, and it is going to be directed in some wrong ways. We don't NEED fuel cells to run our cars on hydrogen. The gasoline or diesel engine can be easily adapted to run on hydrogen. We need the research on how to economically OBTAIN hydrogen.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.