Hybrid tech, the hype

Hi, I've been reading recently that all the new hybrids are nowhere near as fuel economic as they are said to be. I've been told that this is because they do all the fuel economy testing on dynos and they don't compare to actual road driving. Is this true or just more pro-petro propaganda steve

formatting link

Reply to
steve goodsworth
Loading thread data ...

As one of those hybrid owners, I can attest that I do not get the EPA sticker numbers of 50/60 mpg on a Prius. The norm seems to be more like 44 mpg for most owners.

I get 47 mpg on summer blends of gas (low or no ethanol mix) and it drops to

42 mpg in the winter when they add the ethanol. Course, the mileage dropped on my other vehicles as well and none I've owned ever got those sticker values (I tend to have a lead foot).

A lot depends on the fuel and what they do to it when you start measuring the miles-per-gallon with some high mpg vehicle. I also get different results - often substantially different - between different gas companies as well a octane blends for some reason.

B~

Reply to
B. Peg

Part of the reason for a dyno test is that they can collect CO2 as a gauge of fuel use. This is supposed to be more accurate than any measurement of fuel levels.

formatting link

Not meeting EPA estimated fuel economy isn't exclusive to hybrids.

There are way to many variables in actual driving.

Honestly - hybrid vehicles of today aren't going to save more in fuel than their additional cost (including replacement batteries). However - the technology is immature and improving. The capacity of the batteries are going up as the cost is going down. Certainly a lot of what we see today are early adopters paying a premium for the latest gee-whiz technology. This is the natural evolution of the technology. I would expect that the technology/cost is going to improve to the point where hybrids do end up costing less than ICE-only cars.

Reply to
y_p_w

This is a fallacy in the hybrid argument promoted by whom (GM? Ford?). The battery is warranted for 10 years in California (part of the emissions package), far longer than most, including myself, who will own any car.

I do know our fuel bill has dropped from $180 per month down to $65 for same mileage driven per day. So that works out to $1380 per year. Lower maintenance costs (only oil changes for 100K miles) and less brake pad wear. I won't mention the $3000 tax break either. That amounts to around $12,660 if you add our fuel savings and tax break together and we hold onto it for 7 years. You do the math.

If gas climbs, older ICE powered vehicles resale and depreciation will take a big hit. If it ever comes around to rationing again, you won't be able to give away a ICE vehicle. Don't even try to compare the ICE transmission against the fewer parts of the hybrid's for wear or component replacement.

That is what the taxi cab companies discovered in Canada who saved on an average of $900 per month over conventional ICE powered taxi vehicles.

B~

Reply to
B. Peg

Some people report good mileage with the hybrids. I am told by my son who owns two of them that you have to learn to drive them properly for maximum effect.

The ICE is not dead, but as we are forced to pay ever higher fuel prices, the gas guzzlers can look pretty sick.

Do we need engines rated at 300 bhp? I don't think so, when the chips are down. Do we need heavy road cars? Many like them, but fewer may become able to afford them.

Will we learn to walk again, and perhaps use bikes? This is the most unlikely of all American scenarios.

Reply to
<HLS

I'm still wondering what their warranty terms are. NiMH cells inherently lose capacity with use as does any other rechargeable battery system. Typical AA cells are rated for 500-1000 full discharge/recharge cycles. Life is supposed to be longer if cells are "topped off" quickly.

If they do become increasingly popular (I think they will) the funding for tax credits is likely gone. I think that's a good thing, if the costs improve to the point where there's a greater incentive to buy without them. I still don't trust any maintenance recs that don't include periodic brake fluid flushes.

I think hybrids work really well in stop and go driving situations. Yosemite National Park has added several diesel-hybrid buses to its Yosemite Valley shuttle service. I rode in several last Dec, and they are exceedingly quiet coming right from a stop. The National Park Service seems to be willing to use hybrids, as I saw a Prius in the fleet at Point Reyes National Seashore. Point Reyes also received a Ford Escape Hybrid as a gift from Ford.

I'd like to see a lot more hybrid vehicle offerings. I thought of getting a Civic Hybrid but went with a WRX. I'm hoping that there's a similar car in hybrid form that's competetively priced when I'm ready for a new car.

Reply to
y_p_w

South Park really nailed it.

Reply to
clifto

Yeah those numbers really do add up. Also, replacing the batteries is no different than other routine maintenance done on a car. How many times do you have to change a fuel pump in 5 years? brakes? fuel lines? etc. I figure that regardless of out of pocket expense, there is a greater obligation to ourselves to improve our environment on this planet. Don't get me wrong, I love my muscle cars. But I think that with alternative fuels such as ethanol (better performance anyway) we can have both of best worlds. thats my two cents.

Reply to
customcarhouse

I disagree, and personally do not take "the environment" into account at all when making purchase decisions.

Reply to
Roger Blake

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.