The statement does not make sense. How can a car that costs less than many Chevys be branded "for rich people"? There was a time in my life when buying a used car with less than 75,000 miles was a luxury, so I supose viewpoints will vary.
I can't find the smiley. I know it's in here somewhere! Yes, we use cude as feedstock for plastics and many other things, but the gasoline distilling process breaks down molecules that would otherwise be available for these other products.
Suzuki 1000 CC. I've owned many, many bikes; 2 stroke, 4 stroke, 1,
2 3 and 4 cylinders. Some were air cooled and some were water cooled. I owned just about every strange bike that was available through 1990. Never bought a Wankel or Harley.
Fuel economy and longevity are negatively impacted when you extract
100HP from a small engine. That's not a problem for sport bikes ridden a hundred miles a month on the weekends. Long distance commuters and tourers generally go with bigger engines that are more mildly tuned.
The "city mileage" portion of the EPA test is a period of stop and go driving. Though I don't have the details, I know that it's long enough for a normal engine to warm up.
The 1997 - 2003 Prius has emissions reduction as it's main focus with fuel economy as a pleasant byproduct. To this end, the assumption was made that each trip will last long enough that the engine must run. The Prius runs the engine until the engine and catalytic both warm up to operating temperature. Then it turns it off if it's not needed.
So you see, for a 3 minute trip, the engine is running even when it's not needed (down-slopes, stop signs, when braking, etc) and therefor wasting a small amount of fuel. On a ten minute drive this waste is compensated by the time you coast or drive on battery alone.
Starting with a hot engine, it's easy to exceed 60 MPG driving in the city.
The 2004 manages to boost mileage and power while reducing emissions at the same time. I understand that it does so in part by not starting the engine until it's really needed.
A 1000cc four cylinder that got only 20 mpg? There IS more to that story!! Burned valves, dragging brakes, wide open throttle with a choked air filter, or some other extra ordinary circumstance.
I recall those Suzuki Wankels ... rotten fuel mileage but smooth.
Disagree. Running at sustained maximum horsepower (full throttle) output does shorten the life of the engine. Perhaps you meant something different. I've had my share of bikes too since I started riding back in the early '70's.
I think you're confusing a 600cc engine rated at 100 hp but run mostly at very light throttle openings vs. the same engine run at full throttle. The latter is not going to last as long. Perhaps you can clarify. I have to chuckle at your "100 miles a month" estimation. Here in southern California, a one year old sport bike (with the exception of Ducatis and Aprilias) usually have about 7k to10k miles on them. The state of tune has a lot less to do with engine life than typical operating RPM. I own an example of each. The CB1 howls along at 7,800 rpm / 70 mph while the ST1100 purrs along at 3,500 / 70 mph. There's no doubt which will last longer.
You can get similar mileage with similar performance as long as you avoid extremes of speed, load or terrain. The hybrid design allows a smaller engine to handle the extremes more like a large engine without incurring the pollution of a larger engine.
How did that Tercel do when climbing hills, like going to Lake Tahoe? Was it able to maintain 65 mph the whole way? Was it able to regain speed lost when blocked by slower traffic?
Did you still get 40 MPG when in stop and go commute traffic for an hour like we have in the SF bay area? Did the mileage drop when you got to the 10 MPH crawl going through LA?
Did it carry 4 adults comfortably?
I maintain that 0-60 is not the best measure of performance UNLESS you live somewhere that calls for merging onto a freeway near a blind curve or extrordinarly heavy traffic. If there's an on ramp, your 20 to 65 time is more important. If there are metering lights on your onramp, your
0-30 time will be more applicable due to the 30MPH "rush hour" traffic.
So it's claimed. But my understanding is the original Prius couldn't handle extremes all that well either. As for load -- the Insight is notorious for its 300lb load limit.
No problem (though I didn't go to Tahoe). Remember it had a 100hp engine.
Sure. Manual transmission.
Certainly; it got decent mileage highway but it dropped in stop-and-go. Hybrids are the other way around.
Not a chance (two comfortably and two rather less comfortably). Neither does the Prius, though.
Or taking a left turn across and into heavy traffic, which is common.
The main advantage of the Honda technique is simplicity. It can be applied to fairly stock cars.
The main advantage of the Prius is that it can charge the battery while climbing hills. The Civic tested by Popular Mechanics ran down the battery when going up long inclines. This limited its passing ability and its top speed. The Prius, on the other hand, has been driven to Pike's Peak without depleting the traction battery.
Early Prius models used a different algorythems and hardware, so they occasionally depleted the battery under certain conditions.
Another seldom mentioned hybrid advantage is the way it never stumbles in the morning when cold. No cold transmission slip or stumbling from the rich mixture. I love that CVT!
The Ford web site has some neat archives that include their turbine car. They quoted the huge muffler as one reason that it didn't go anywhere.
By the time that you get up to 30 minutes of battery cpacity, you'd be just as well off charging it from the grid every day and only firing up the turbine when going on long trips.
Approximately 9/4/03 12:43, Philip® uttered for posterity:
Sheesh yourself butthead. It means I really don't get all lathered up about a bit of my tax dollars helping subsidize those folks brave enough to actually buy this new technology and help work the bugs out of it. And that is a *lot* cheaper than me being forced to also buy one.
My 1969 Dodge doesn't have "cold transmission slip" nor does it stumble when cold. If a car has those problems, something is broken. And that goes for old carbureted vehicles as well as new fuel-injected ones.
I own two of the three. Phillip has test driven a Prius. Not sure what phillip is trying to say.... I'm not going to even TRY to google Phillip's posts as I'd end up spending all day reading his posts. He truely posts more than I do!!!!
You guys are joking, right? A tax deduction to encourage american taxpayers to buy an environmentally favorable car does NOT put a cent of YOUR money in a foreign pocket.
Don't bother making up new definitions: Websters says: sub.si.dy a grant by a government to a private person or company to assist an enterprise deemed advantageous to the public
You don't get a grant to go buy a hybrid. You are allowed to deduct $2000 (if you don't hit alternate minimum tax limits) from your gross income. That's whopping 600 dollars if you paid more than $30,000 in taxes last year. The difference is a subsidy can exceed your tax payments. A deduction will not.
The child care checks mailed out this year are a subsidy. You get one even if you paid no taxes.
Wait a second. If I'm paying $50,000 a year in taxes and you aren't then I'm subsidising YOUR federal benefits. That's just wrong :-)
Philip didn't read carefully; No big deal. I recall the mileage as being around 28 in my daily commute along I680. A lot of very slow driving. That was years ago. It didn't help that I liked jetting from light to light. That was part of the fun.
As for miles per month.... The figures I recall from the Motorcycle Safety Institute claimed that many bike crashes happen because people drove them infrequently and did not keep their skills honed. The average rider (not those of us who rode 7 days a week all year round) put less than
100 miles per month after the newness wore off.
Milage for bikes is just not great. Looking at
formatting link
I see low figures like28 MPG for a Harley, 34 for a 600 CC Kawasaki. A 400cc CB1 that getsas little as 50MPG is reported at
formatting link
NOTHIN NEW BELOW HERE FOLKS> JUST MOVE ALONG NOW> NOTHIN TO SEE>
In alt.autos.toyota Matthew Russotto wrote: [ contrasting an older tercel with newer hybrids ]
I have a whole family that have ridden in the back of the Prius and found it very comfortable. That includes 75 year old mother in law, a tall 27 year old son and a youthful brother in law in his fifties.
Yuck. You've got me there. I don't __like__ doing that in anything less than a quick motorcycle.
I've had no problems turning right onto a road with heavy (and fast) traffic but haven't had to turn left onto a road where the limit was above 50 without the benefit of a merge lane. Most left turns onto high speed roads are being changed around this section of California. High speed roads are getting center dividers so turning left onto a 65 MPH road is blocked. Left turns across a 65 MPH road are still allowed in some places.
The Pirus is not cost competitive. Even at the relatively high list price, it is my understanding Toyota is actually losing money on every Pirus they sell. Without the tax incentive Toyota might have to lose even more money on each Pirus. By giving gullible American buyers a subsidy to buy a Pirus, our Government is subsidizing Toyota. The only difference between this tax rebate and a rebate from Toyota as far as the buyer is concerned is that he has to wait a few months. If there was any true environmental advantage to hybrids, I could understand the idea of trying to influence the public to buy them. However, hybrids are a scam. Compared to cars of equivalent performance and specifications, they save very little energy and will eventually do more damage to the environment. The whole concept is a triumph of marketing over reality.
If you really care about the environment and want to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, lobby your politicians to gradually raise taxes on oil until the cost of a barrel of oil used for fuel is at least $40. Work with your local officials to provide decent mass transit. Discourage urban sprawl. And quit hoping that some miracle idea will allow you continue to ride around in your personal car wherever you want whenever you want and not feel guilty. Hybrids are not the answer, they are at best a feel good Band-Aid. I guess hybrids allow some people to be proud of having a slow expensive small vehicle.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.