Slashdot Mirror
Toyota to Move to All Hybrid Vehicles By 2012
ftumph writes "Toyota has announced that
all their vehicles will be gas-electric hybrids by 2012. The plan is to eliminate the current $3,000 per vehicle additional cost for hybrid engines through mass production."
Finally, it is about time that an auto manufacturer step up to the plate. Too bad it is not an american mfg.
Who are you? The new #2 Who is #1? You are #617565. I am not a number, I am a free man! Muhahaha.
I think I'd rather see Hydrogen Fuel cell vehicles than hybrids. From what I've read, the fuel cell vehicles are more efficient not to mention cleaner. But I guess all of these thing take time, no?
Derek Greene
for this to become a reality. That 2012 deadline will likely be pushed back. Until they can get power output up Americans just aren't going to buy these things in droves. Then again, maybe Toyota is just tired of making all that money. >
So now the government will raise the price of electricity too! Feel sorry for California.
Of course this could be done now but the Big Oil people still want to squeeze some more out before they change to electricity.
Maybe the EPA will back off of them if they burn their own oil for electricity and then sell us the electricity so the_cars_run cleaner but the factories are still spewing out the crap.
This SIG pulled due to lack of funding. (This damn war is costing too much!)
What would be really cool would be a hybrid Wankel-electric engine. You'd get the smoothness and high power to weight ratio of the wankel combined with the efficiency of the electric motor. Mazda, any plans for the RX-9? :-)
Stick Men
---- .sig
Link
2012? Isn't that the year the Mayan calendar ends?
Great, any step which takes us further away from an oil economy can only be a good thing for world stability, the environment and the economy.
Coupled with yesterdays news that gas mileage is continuing to drop in 2003 models, this is a great announcement.
As an Insight owner, I try to keep up with this stuff. Turns out Toyota has retracted that promise, saying that there was a "misinterpretation" on the Japanese end.
Can't find the link, but here's the WSJ article re: same:
Toyota Still Plans to Sell 300,000 Hybrid Vehicles a Year By 2005
Friday October 25, 5:19 pm ET
By Norihiko Shirouzu, Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal
DETROIT -- Toyota Motor Corp. reaffirmed it aims to sell a total of 300, 000 super-efficient, electric-gasoline hybrid vehicles a year by 2005.
Toyota's reaffirmation came in response to a news report earlier this week that said the auto maker plans to use hybrid engines in all vehicles by 2012 to increase fuel efficiency and reduce tailpipe emissions. The report also said Toyota won't sell 300,000 hybrids annually until 2007.
Kevin Webber, a Toyota spokesman in Ann Arbor, Mich., said the report was " inaccurate," which he said stemmed from a "misinterpretation" of comments in Japanese made by a Toyota executive.
Mr. Webber said it is "technically infeasible" to use hybrid systems in all vehicles Toyota sells around the world in 10 years. He said Toyota continues to aim to sell 300,000 hybrids a year by about 2005.
Last month, Toyota's president Fujio Cho said the No. 1 Japanese auto maker will expand its lineup of gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles into larger vehicles, such as midsized sport-utility vehicles and minivans, as it tries to sell a total of 300,000 hybrids a year by 2005.
Cho said Toyota "will expand hybrid systems into an array of models, including larger vehicles."
Already, Toyota recently has begun selling in Japan a hybrid minivan called the Estima. In the U.S., Toyota currently sells only one hybrid, the small Prius car, while in Japan its lineup includes the Prius and a Crown luxury car equipped with a so-called "mild" hybrid system, in addition to the Estima.
-Norihiko Shirouzu, The Wall Street Journal
Slashdot search is down, but I managed to find at least a press release for what I'm talking about at GM's website here.
:(
Toyota's plan will add more weight, bulk, and complexity to the car, while simultaneously reducing acceleration, handling, and passenger space. With all the cons above, I don't think many people will consider it a viable alternative to straight combustion engines.
GM's AUTOnomy project not only has the potential for greater acceleration, being a transmissionless electric auto platform, but having motors in each wheel means most vehicles will be able to (literally!) turn on a dime. It's a 100% fuel cell vehicle, and all the workings fit in a 6" high plate at the bottom of the vehicle. It makes the car safer, lighter, easier to handle, and since there is no engine, no battery packs, and basically nothing above ankle-height, passenger safety is vastly improved (no engine to break your legs in a crash) along with comfort.
Which car will Americans choose? Well, I guess it actually all depends on who's marketing their car more agressively.
True science means that when you re-evaluate the evidence, you re-evaluate your faith.
...they don't have any true high-performance cars left. :D
i just can't imagine a supra tt or a mkII mr2 turbo running nearly as fast on a hybrid engine as on a pure gas motor. although a really small, light nimble car like a mkIII mr2 or a miata could probably work well with a hybrid, especially with the smooth throttle control the electric motor. and who knows, i could be wrong and we could have 2.4L 550-hp 38mpg hybrid engines in two years.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
I'd be a little concerned about buying one of these vehicles unless the manufacturer made a real effort to provide education to the masses about how to service them. How expensive is service going to be? Can I grab my buddies, tools and a case of beer and nut it out myself? These things are important.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
I'm telling you, hybrids are great!
When I was looking for a new car, I test drove the Toyota Prius and the Honda Insite. Both cars were awesomely silent when you got up to cruising mode. It was actually kinda eerie!
Anyway, I ended up going with a VW Golf TDi (another high efficiency vehicle).
Long story short, hybrid vehicles are really great and they're a good intermediate step between petroleum based fuels and electric cars.
"It's a tarp!" -- Dyslexic Admiral Ackbar
Toyota's always been a visionary and hit the moving market targets well. Think back to the early-to-mid 80's, and you'll remember that they had great affordable sports cars (Celica, Supra) at exactly the time when sports cars were the rage. During the 90's, they let their sports cars get bloated, because the market was about luxury, and they axed the cars before they became jokes (think Camaro).
At the same time, in the early 90s, they were rolling out a big line of SUV's. Today, with SUV's all the rage, Toyota has models for everybody - the RAV4, the 4runner, the big Land Cruiser, the Highlander, you name it - plus all the models they sell under the Lexus brand.
If Toyota says their models will all be green-friendly in 2012, you'd better believe that they're going to be in the right place at the right time again, and green vehicles will be all the rage. Toyota does brilliant product planning.
What's your damage, Heather?
If you're talking about racing performance, then that's something else entirely, and has nothing to do with consumer vehicles.
hmm...ok, i know The Fast and the Furious is one of the worst movies ever made, but that whole streetracing thing isn't a Hollywood fantasy. some people do like to blatantly disregard the "rules" and see how much true performance they can squeeze out of their "consumer vehicles" on public streets. i imagine pure gas cars will still be a hot-ticket item in these crowds, but eventually they'll wear out, and then what?
anyway, high-end sports cars come stock with that much horsepower, why do you ever need a 575-hp ferrari (that gets 9mpg)?
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
I really can't wait to see the the air car come out!
Now that's going to be exciting. I highly recommend reading the site. Also if I read the FAQ correctly it says that the vehicles will cost between $8000 and $10,000.
An interesting fact is that the air that comes out of the Air Car is cleaner that when it entered the car. Not only is it zero pollution, but it cleans the air!
"It's a tarp!" -- Dyslexic Admiral Ackbar
but late. It is interesting that Toyota is going ahead with this first, but with that kind of a ship date, they could be outdone easily.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
It says in the article that the hybrid cars would get 50 miles to the gallon.
We used to own a family sedan (Volkswagen Passat) which got 45 miles to the galon of Diesel fuel. Driven economically, you could get it up to about 70 miles a galon. This was 8 years ago.
And here in Germany VW have had the 3l Lupo, where the 3l standing for 3l/100km consumption, which translates to about 75mpg, out a couple of years also.
So I ask you: Is 50mpg really that good?
I think you are confusing electric with hybrids... Hybrids have batteries that are recharged by the engine and brakes. They do not need to be plugged in. Most of the MPG savings come from having the engine shut off while sitting in traffic, only coming on periodically to recharge the battery. Ars Technica has a really good review of the 2003 honda civic hybrid:c -hybrid/2 003-civic-hy-1.html
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/02q3/civi
I know; I didn't want to get into a lot of detail.
There are actually three possible designs:
* Small engine driving the car with an electric backup/boost. Allows a smaller engine for the same output and not too much redesign of current vehicles.
* Electric drive with the engine used to drive the electric motor and load the batteries, and also used directly to boost accelleration when needed. The advantage is that you can 'coast' periodically (or when in cities) with the engine turned off.
* All electric, with an engine just to charge batteries as well as giving extra power directly to the electric motor when needed. This is the most efficient, as the engine can be designed for a specific RPM - or replaced with a gas turbine.
Depending on the details of the design, you do not need to carry a lot of extra batteries; they are used only as a buffer between the engine and the electric motor. If you want the ability to coast, you need more, of course. But especially with the third type, the weight of batteries are offset by the much smaller engine, smaller tank and the lack of a heavy mechanical drivetrain to the wheels - you can give each wheel a motor.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Operating an electric vehicle may not be as cheap as you may think. Currently, gas taxes go to support maintaining and expanding the roadways. Once enough people jump on the electric bandwagon, I could see the government imposing many of the same kinds of taxes on electricity. And I don't know if you've noticed, but electricity hasn't been getting that much cheaper lately.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I am not sure how many people will be willing to make the switch themselves. I was very much looking forward to buying a Toyota Prius, but I recently found out that the hybrid cars of today require you to change the batteries every 3 yrs and it costs $6000-7000 to replace them and they are not as powerful now. But maybe all this will change by 2012.
Oh ....
.... :)
In other news, duracell and ever ready are seeling profits sky rocket as battery sales go throught the roof
HallmarkOrnaments.Com
no its not about maximum speed.
its about acceleration.
The adrenaline rush as you mash the gas petal as the light turns green, poping the clutch to allow the tires just the right amount of spin. Clutch/Shift the road zooms past as you hit the speed limit in a split second, then down shift and tap the brake as you dive into the tightly wound highway on ramp, then back to the accleration as soon as the apex of the turn is on you.
$sig=$1 if($brain =~
As far as I know, the batteries are still not available as a replacement part and are estimated to cost between 4k-6kusd (www.cartalk.com). Most electric cars need a full battery replacement between 3-6years depending on usage.
On a hybrid the performance and mileage will degrade over the years without this replacement part. This will limit the life of the car and definitely reduce it's value to a second owner.
They are interesting but need to have replaceable batteries. A TDI engine instead of a gasoline engine would also help.
the hybrid cars of today require you to change the batteries every 3 yrs and
it costs $6000-7000 to replace them and they are not as powerful now. But maybe
all this will change by 2012.
Where'd you get that information?? Honda is giving an 8-year 80K mile warranty on its Hybrid batteries. Their claim is replacement at around 10 years, and about $1000 at today's prices ($1K price told to me by a Honda dealer), which will probably come down as the first hybrids need their replacements.
The reason why diesels aren't popular in the US today is the fact that current Diesel #2 fuel is too full of sulphur compounds, which will quickly destroy the fuel delivery and exhaust emission controls found on European diesel-powered automobiles.
Since the EPA will require drastic reductions of such compounds in a few years, by then we could see the PD130 and PD150 engines found on European-market Golfs and Passats show up on the US market. Can you imagine a diesel-electric hybrid powertrain on a VW Golf getting fuel mileage that would make the diesel-powered VW Lupo seem like a fuel-guzzler in comparison? It could happen as early as 2006.
At the filling station, they pump out the broken shells, water and NaOH from your tank, before putting in new water and powerballs. The broken shells are recyclable. The NaOH is reacted with fresh H2 to produce water and NaH.
There needs to be some regulatory rules to make this process as clean as it promises to be. NaOH is nasty stuff, though no more toxic than gasoline. But overall, it's a cool idea.
WWJD for a Klondike Bar?
Too bad diesel died so many years ago in the US, but that's also beyond the point.
And 3L is great btw. :)
and wrote about it on his website.
First of all, I've had my Prius for about 8 months now -- and I love it. The car is a technological marvel. Not only does it get amazing mileage, it also puts out less emissions that just about any other car out there. For those not familiar with how a hybrid works, all of the car's energy originates with the car's 11.5 gallon gas tank. There is no plug. I repeat: there is no plug :)
There is however a battery pack under the rear seat of the car and accessible from the trunk. Under the hood there is a conventional 4 cylinder engine as well as a electrical motor/generator. Here's where it gets fun: in order to slow down, the generator spins backwards (!) slowing the car down and generating energy. When the need for strong breaking occurs, or at low speeds, the friction brakes kick in. The system is very refined, with only a small barely noticeable transition between regenerative breaking and friction breaking. The energy generated is then stored in the batteries.
Internal combustion engines are least efficient when they first start up and also produce the most pollutants at start up. The Prius uses its electric battery power to drive the motor forward and get the car moving. This dramatically reduces wear on the engine and lowers emissions and increases mileage. (Note: At speeds under 38 mph, you can run totally on electric power -- or stealth mode -- the car is completely silent! Very cool.) That's a real basic run down. For real engineers & car people -- note the lack of a planetary gear, an ignition system, etc. There's a lot going on in this car!
I alluded to the biggest misconception earlier -- there is no plug. All the energy is generated internally. Some other folks have mentioned fuel cells, I sat in on a briefing a few days ago with some top EPA/DOE folks, and they made it quite clear the technology isn't quite there yet. But the biggest problem is the hydrogen infrastructure that would have to be built. I sensed that they would personally favor government intervention to encourage this, but that would be extremely unlikely under the current administration.
One last comment -- there are two categories of hybrid cars -- full and mild. Both are good, but if Toyota is talking about mild hybrids, this story is a bit more of a yawn. Mild hybrid just means that the engine kicks off when the vehicle is stopped. Basically, the only additional battery needed is to spark the engine back to life. This is a good thing (imagine all those idling engines turned off and not emitting pollutants), but it is hardly a revolutionary step. The technology to do this has existed for years.
But please -- everyone go out and buy a hybrid -- I've driven them all, and they are all amazing. Of course, the Prius is my favorite, but the hybrid civic is nice and so is the Insight. And keep your eyes open for the new hybrid Ford Escape due in late 2003. Encourage all your "I'm an environmentalist but I drive an SUV" friends to put their money where their mouths are!
You found out wrong. The Prius battery is warranteed for 8 years or 100,000 miles. If the warranty covers it for that long, the actual lifetime is likely to be longer than that.
I've had mine for two years of not so gentle driving in the NYC metro area and occational forays into mountainous areas and nasty unmaintained dirt roads with no problems (34,000 miles so far) As for the full/mild, the differences are a bit more involved. There are "series" and "parallel" hybrids - the Prius can act as either and any shade of grey between a strict series and parallel. The Hondas are strictly "parallel" hybrids. From the marketing literature the Escape seems to be a "parallel-series and any shade of grey" version like the Prius - but they are talking about a paltry 40/29mpg :-( (I sort of wish they wish Toyota would just stick a little motor on the rear wheels of the Prius for low speed 4wd)
The "mild" hybrids are those that some monster SUV makers have been taking about which are basically integrated alternator/starters (i.e. very small parallel hybrid) that could in theory help out a little with propulsion if it wern't for the fact that the huge hotel loads of some of the proposed enhancements (i.e. 110v outlets for hair dryers and the like) would consume most of their energy budgets.
BTW, like any other car, driving style affects milage. I average 54mpg, my wife would kill me if I told you she only averages about 49mpg.
FUD!
The Toyota Prius has a 8 year/100,000mile warranty on the hybrid components of the Prius in the US (which include the battery). (A new battery pack currently costs about US$4950, although individual bad cells can be replaced and not just the entire pack... Plus, with higher production, the battery costs will come down. (Toyota has 2 hybrid cars, a minivan, and a bus in Japan at the moment.)) There's a Prius taxi in Vancouver (Canada) that has over 284,000 km. on his Prius (24/7 usage), and hasn't had any battery trouble or had to replace the battery...
Also, Honda has an 8 year/80,000mile warranty on the battery in the US on both the Insight and the Civic Hybrid.
-mrv
I own a 1992 Honda Civic VX. During the summer months I have been getting between 50 to 55 mpg. (Winter it will drop to 45-50 mpg.) My car is 10 years old. It uses gasoline. They can do better than what they are doing today.
In 1992 it had the second best gas mileage rating (52 mpg on the highway) of all the cars. Geo Metro which was a much smaller car had better mpg. The only difference between my Honda Civic VX and the other Honda Civics was the engine. Why is it they are not doing better?
But, I find that most of a car's noise does not come from the engine in the first place. I'm sure a brand new car has all the seals in tack and is sound-tight but how silent will this car be after 50,000 miles? How much wind-noise is there now? How many spot welds will fail and cause the panels to flex in the future?
When I worked in the car industry (1991-2000) I know that car were designed to last 10 years/100,000 miles. Everything from engine wear to paint thickness was taken into account. The law also states that parts must be supplied for 10 years after the final production car leaves the line. Now, rust and mechanical failure normally end a car's life, so how long is the life expectancy on a car like this that has less engine wear?
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
hah, you pussy. i very rarely *brake* for onramps - i just com ein a touch fast, then roll off the throttle and let the compression braking (yet another reason to love stick) shift the weight forward and bite the front wheels into the pavement, diving the car into the corner. Trailing Throttle Understeer - the cause of 90% of spinouts, but a great technique if you can master it [disclaimer: i know that trailing off will cause *oersteer* (dive the car into the turn too much), but my driver's ed teacher, who happened to also be an SCCA instructor, called it TT Understeer...i have no idea why]. having RWD helps, too (95 240SX) - if things really go bad and i start to oversteer (pus the front end), i can abruptly accelerate and break the back tires loose, fishtailing and bringing the car back in the right general direction. then there's the issue of getting control back, but i'd much rather be worrying about that while the car's relatively parallel to the road, not 90 degress to it. oh, and of course there's the cool factor of hanging th back end out around 90 degree corners, spinning the tires wildly in a cloud of smoke. and i wonder why i have to replace them every 10,000 miles :D
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
damn, when did denis leary start posting on /. ? ;)
He didn't say anything about brown leather whale-skin interior or baby seal eyes for hubcaps.
Nope, no sig
A hybrid generates its own electricity. You do not plug it in. Its efficiency comes from the fact that it makes for a more even distribution of the energy produced by burning gasoline.
Why are so many people not getting this point?!?
www.wavefront-av.com
Go over and visit TDIClub.com, we're good people.
The gelling problem is fixed as long as you buy your diesel from decent-volume stations. Winter diesel has anti-gelling additive mixed in before it gets to your car. The VW TDIs don't even have a way to plug the car in; some of the very anal types up in Calgary (or thereabouts) have retrofitted engine-block or coolant heaters because (a) they think it'll prolong the life of the engine and (b) they want to heat the interior faster. Some of the biodiesel devotees are working on fuel-tank heaters (since BD does gel, and anti-gelling additives for BD are virtually unavailable mass-market).
The reason the early '80s US passenger diesel days didn't last is because those GM diesels uniformly SUCKED. The memories of those (my grandparents bought a GM diesel that didn't make it home from the new car dealer), plus FUD from the enviro-wackos who want hydrogen/fuel-cells or nothing, are much of what has hurt US diesel acceptance to this day.
That depends on how you do it. The Prius and Insight use their engines to drive the wheels, and the motors to assist that, but it doesn't have to be done that way.
If you have the engine turn a generator charging batteries, with drive motors for each wheel, you can leave out the clutch, transmission, starter, drivetrain, and differential. The engine can run at a constant speed (and thus be designed to be quiet at that speed), the batteries can be relatively small/lightweight (limited by how often you want to cycle them), and the car will have a decent amount of low-speed torque as well.
Would anyone like to comment on why the Prius and Insight were not designed this way?
I recently bought a slightly used pickup truck. 2000 F-150.
I did a comparison with purchase price, gas prices, mileage, etc. between the F-150, and a new Honda hybrid.
The F-150 @ $12,000 and 20mpg does not start to cost more than the Honda @ $22,000 and 70 mpg until almost 200,000 miles.
And that is not including any maintenance costs. Battery replacement, etc.
Yes, the truck uses more gas. But the price differential is hard to ignore on a personal level.
Read the freaking article with a more critical eye. Geez.
Slashdot: "all their vehicles will be gas-electric hybrids by 2012"
Article: "plans to use gasoline-electric hybrid engines in all vehicles"
It sounds more like they're planning to offer a hybrid version of each model in their line. It doesn't indicate that they'll abandon internal combustion.
Yes, they are an improvement, but they're not the ideal--especially not current designs! A far more intelligent design is to have a completely electric drive while powering the motors with a small IC engine that drives a generator. This small engine can be engineered to run at an optimized constant RPM, making it very efficient. Batteries and a capacitor bank can supplement the gasoline generator and allow regenerative braking. Eventually, once fuel cells or some other energy storage technology have matured, just replace the small IC generator. That's the beauty of this design: the energy source is completely seperate from the drive. Modularity! And you gain all the advantages of a fully electric drive: greater low-end torque, electronic traction control, no transmission or drivetrain, and very hack-friendly! Dang.. if I had the resources, I'd build one myself (:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/Aerosols /
please tell me where you see the greatest levels of pollution over the year?
Are you shocked at the polution coming from India, Russia, and Europe? I'm certainly not. Now - compare it to the USA.
That's right.. its a piss in the ocean in comparison.
What amazes me is that the Russians, who have been whining and crying about Kyoto... good Lord! Look at Russia during the winter months.
The rest of the world is so full of crap when they complain about us.. but then, hard facts and evidence don't really matter to hippies, tree-huggers, or liberals.
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
E85 is much better for the environment.
By 2015 I would hope to see a combination of E85 Fuel and hybrid electric. E85 is a fuel blend of 100% renewable Ethanol and 15% gasoline. I have seen people claim that American car manufacturers are not paying attention to the "green" car. I say that isn't true. The Ford Taurus, in all it's grand ugliness has been a FFV vehicle for years. An FFV vehicle is a fuel flexible vehicle that can run on 100% gasoline, to any mix of ethonol up to 85%. There are currently more FFV vehicles on the market today than Hybrid Electric Vehicles.
Some include:
2.7L Dodge Stratus Sedan
2.7L Chrysler Sebring Sedan and Convertible
3.3L Dodge Cargo Minivan
3.3L Chrysler Voyager minivan
3.3L Dodge Caravan minivan
3.3L Chrysler Town & Country minivan
4.0L Explorer (4-door)
3.0L Taurus sedan and wagon
3.0L Supercab Ranger pickup 2WD
5.3L V-8 engine Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra half-ton pickups 2WD & 4WD
5.3L Vortec-engine Suburban, Tahoe, Yukon and Yukon XLs
3.0L Selected B3000 pickups
4.0L Selected Mountaineers
2.2L Hombre pickup 2WD
2.2L Chevrolet S-10 pickup 2WD
2.2L Sonoma GMC pickup 2WD
E85 vehicles require no plug either. They also require no infrastructure upgrades like other solutions. Ethanol combustion produces friendly CO2 gas that can be used by plants, and water. Ethanol produces 110 octane, thus keeping your engine cleaner. The biggest myth about Ethanol, is that it requires corn to be efficient. Not true again, many industrial byproducts can be used to produce Ethanol. The byproducts of Ethanol production can be used in many other applications.
Now image all this:
US production of Ethanol - 85%
US production of Oil - takes care of 5% of the Gasoline requirement
10 % of Gasoline is still from foreign sources
Combined with Hybrid Electric technology we can create a vehicle that gets 50+ MPG, reduces pollutants by probably 90%, and changes NONE of our infrastructure requirements!
Why hasn't this technology come to the forefront... because for some reason, no one wants to see Ethanol succeed. The oil companies shot down Ethanol in the 80's and Archer Daniels Midland worked out a deal with the oil companies to save itself from bankruptcy due to bad management.
Visit e85fuel.com and see the truth.
I could see it was a "different" car - looked kinda like an Echo from the rear, but still better looking. When I saw it was a Prius, I was surprised. It actually didn't look that bad. Then the light turned green, and its acceleration was actually pretty good. I have seen regular automobiles move slower off the start. Of course, none of this is scientific or anything - just my observation. Still, if Toyota is going to all hybrids in the future, I might just know what truck to buy to replace my Ranger in the future.
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
The difference is that the Hybrid Civic doesn't drive like crap (like your old civic)
Funny, 10 years a when I got the car it, I was impressed at how much more power it had than my old 1985 Ford Escort. I don't think performance was/is that bad. My wife drives a 2000 Toyota Echo and it does have more power than my Civic VX, but I don't think the difference is all that noticable. (Thanks for the info on the Hybrid Civic engine.)
The battery packs were about $1800 when these cars came out, they're priced at $1000 now, and they'll get much cheaper than that. One of the big advantages of the current hybrid designs is that they use common, commodity battery tachnology, unlike all-electric cars like the EV-1. How's this for commodity -- the Prius and Insight actually use regular, NiMH "D" flashlight cells. I'm not kidding. So not only will there be aftermarket suppliers, replacement packs may even be within reach of the home DIY'er.
The other day my mom mentioned to me that my cousin had bought a Honda Civic Hybrid for his new car, and I didn't think too much about it until I got stuck behind one on an on-ramp yesterday, and following today's Slashdot article (full of wrong information in both the article and comments) about Toyota's hybrid plans, I started hunting through Honda's site and Edmunds and came up with the following between the Civic Hybrid and the economically-minded HX (the HX is nicer than the DX and LX models, gets better mileage than the others, but has 10 less horsepower than the top of the line EX):
- The Hybrid costs $6000 more on average than the HX (getting the CVT transmission increases the cost on both by $1K).
- The Hybrid gets 85 HP, versus 117 on the HX (have fun turning off the A/C when going up a hill [/sarcasm]).
- Any engine-related parts on the Hybrid are a lot less popular and are going to cost a lot more in the case of repairs (Honda will give you 8 years/ 80,000 miles warranty on the battery pack, but after 3 years/ 36,000 you're paying for everything else yourself).
- The Hybrid gets 48/47 MPG, versus 36/44 in the HX.
Sure, you can get some money back from federal and state on the purchase, but it will be less than 1/3 of the inital cost difference, and you probably won't make back your money over the course of the life of the car on gas, and they haven't been around long enough to prove themselves on maintenance. Some of those issues will probably go away as they become more heavily produced, but I really don't see any advantage in the near future other than a warm fuzzy feeling that you're helping the environment, and I do see a lot of drawbacks. Did I miss anything big?
Is your browser retarded?
The real problem is that cars being sold in the US today are too big and heavy. Part of this is safety requirements, but it's also because carmakers keep moving their cars "upmarket." A Honda Civic of today is a much bigger, heavier car than an Accord was back in the 80s.
There were many cars 15-20 years ago that got great gas mileage, better than most cars today. And this is with engines that were much cruder. The main reason is weight. A late 70s Volkswagen Scirocco got around 40 MPG on the highway, yet still had decent performance. This is because it was small, aerodynamic, and weighed only 1950 LB. My '79 Rabbit Diesel weighed about the same, and got 50 MPG all around, with occasional spurts over 70 MPG under the right conditions. So it doesn't surprise me at all that the Insight gets 70 MPG. It's probably the lightest and aerodynamically sleekest car being sold in the US today, in addition to having a very efficient drivetrain. The thing is, all cars would get surpisingly goo mileage if they weren't so damned big and heavy. And unfortunately, the trend continues. The new Saturn ION weighs 400 LB more than the SL it replaces.
Fast forward many years: Stirling cycle engines are much more efficient (actually, Stirling cycle engines have always been very efficient - some say they have the best efficiency - but they typically had a low hp/big size ratio), smaller - overall just better. There is also a growing awareness of them - look around on the internet and you will find a bunch of sites detailing construction of simple Stirling cycle engines. There is also a company that creates Stirling cycle generators that run on propane.
Basically, what a Stirling cycle engine needs is a "hot" and and "cold" side - it works off of the temperature differential. Most of the test vehicles used a propane burner or something similar to raise the hot plate above ambient temperature. This worked, but was slow to start (because the burner had to fire up and bring the hot plate up to temperature before the engine could turn over). I wonder if maybe there is a different way....
What I am going to describe is something maybe those of you out there with mechanical experience and "gumption" can use to jump start a new project - a "free idea" invention, if you will. If you actually get this thing to work, post it on /. or somewhere, and give me some credit - that's all I ask. Or, perhaps this has already been tried - in that case, don't. I hope at least one person tries, though:
Basically, make your hot plate be a solar collection panel, heating up brine or oil or something, and the cold plate be a "multi-finned" panel on the bottom of the vehicle (think of it as a large heat sink). Put the Stirling engine between them, and use the power of the Sun! The engine could be directly connected to the back wheels, through a transmission, or you could have it drive a generator to run electric motors (with associated regen braking, etc via a capacitor/battery bank). At night, allow it to plug into the wall (or gas line), which drives a heater to keep the engine spinning at low-RPM, thus eliminating the "cold start" startup time.
Another idea, not using Stirling cycle engines, but that same energy differential (hot/cold plates with tubing circulating between) is to use some kind of phase change gas, at pressure - which could drive the engine, plus a compressor. The hot plate would heat the liquid, turn it into gas, which would drive the engine, circulate it through the cold plate, then through a compressor to turn it back into a liquid. I am thinking ammonia, freon, or propane as the working gas, though there may be other safer gasses out there which could be used. The key is the phase change (think of it like a refrigerator running backwards). The engine could then drive the wheels or a generator/motor set like above.
I hope this gets people's brains spinning - such vehicles would be nearly polution free, and would have few moving parts. I would also bet that a prototype could be built using off-the-shelf components, or junk.
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
80 mph is overkill? Where do you live, the east coast? Out here in AZ, 80 mph is the average speed on freeways in the city. Outside the cities, the speed limit is 75 mph, so most people drive 85+. 100mph isn't uncommon on some long downhill stretches.
Any posters from NV, UT, etc. care to add their experiences?
I hear people say this all the time, and I think it's a pile of crap. I do all the maintenance and service work on my Integra and have never needed a diagnostic tool for anything.
I like that your car has that ASST/CHRG indicator on your dashboard.
I expect we could save the equivalent of all the oil in the ANWR if all cars had instantaneous MPG indicators on the dashboard. I know for one I would be modifying how I drive to run that number UP, and I don't think I am alone.
If that saved just 1% the 20 MILLION barrels of oil per day (per here) that the U.S. burns...
Why has this not been done? Would it cost an extra $50 per car? I think that the gasoline savings would more than pay for that over the life of the vehicle.
I own a Prius. It's an excellent car. There is a price premium on the car, but if they can minimize this, they'll definitely have a winner. My engine on this 4-cyl compact is a paltry 1.5 L engine, but oomph is way better than most low-cost 2.0 compacts I've come across. Mind you, if you spend similar cash to get a Jetta, you'll get more oomph. But like I said, they just need to get rid of some of the price premium. Also, the Prius isn't as loud many cars in this range. Furthermore, at low speeds when the gas engine shuts off, it's whisper quiet. It's so quiet that I have to extra careful sometimes at intersections - people can't hear a car coming and they just walk in front of the car. Morons - didn't their moms teach them to look before they cross? By the way, continuous variable transmission rules (if you like automatics). The acceleration is soooooo smoooooth.
The batteries on a Hybrid should last longer; they aren't deep-cycled as much as an EV. They "should" last 8 years, but they might not be too reliable after 5.
Kick the habit! No more Saudi Arabian oil!
If half the cars in the U.S. were hybrids, the U.S. would probably be a net oil exporter.
it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
People really need to get past that penis car joke BS. It's just too obvious to even approach being witty, and it never was all that funny. I don't know anyone that seems like they had to buy a big car to make up for some lack of genital size, or insecurity in genital size. Funny thing is that, the guy I know with the nicest car has a hugest schlong too. And before someone comes ou with some kind of "oh so you've been checking schlong size?" He's "the friend with big schlong." Like you have the smart friend, the asshole friend, the in jail friend, the drinks 3 cases riend, and so on.
This is my sig. The post is over.
As to overcompensating for something, if you're trying to imply that the only use for a sports car or a pickup truck is as a penis extension, then you've had some kind of sick self esteem issues pounded into your head at some point.
:p Yeah, you're cool Mr. speedy. You just nearly killed someone.
I can't say what it is like where you live, but around here I frequently see other guys in trucks and sports cars peel out past old women as fast as they possibly can, blaring their engine like hell. If that's not trying to make up for a small penis, I don't know what is. At least, that's what my girlfriend frequently states.
FWIW, I've *never* seen a woman try to frighten others on the road as they pass. They don't seem to need nearly as much attention on the road.
Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
Now if only I could reduce *my* tailpipe emissions. Maybe I should stop going to taco bell.
If you're committed to buying a brand new car, sure. Foolish, IME. Let someone else eat the initial depreciation. Buy a gently used, 1-2 year old. I got a truck, still under warranty, for basically 1/2 price.
Want that new car smell? They sell that in a can.
There is no joy like that of losing losing your handle on that "controlled" fishtail and careening into three lanes of highway traffic. Nothing at all like the smell of burning gasoline as it crisps the skin off 70% of some stranger's body.
You may feel that you know what you're doing, but so has every idiot that killed innocent people with no input on his decision to take a risk for the sake of fun.
All kings is mostly rapscallions. -Mark Twain, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
Further, we have some real world data about the durability of a Prius battery. The Prius egroup carried an article about Yellow Cab in Vancouver BC, which has a Prius in taxi service. 200,000 km, many charge-discharge cycles, and all the power train components including the battery are still factory original.
Toyota claims to have bench tested the Prius battery pack to a simulated 150,000 miles.
That 3-year number sounds like it comes from the experience of pure electric vehicles. Batteries won't last long in those because deep discharge cycles gradually damage batteries. The Prius uses the gas engine as an onboard generator and can keep the discharge cycles much shallower, allowing the battery to last longer.
Oh, a minor correction to the sibling article: D cells are only the the Japanese model of the Prius. For the US model they were replaced by thinner prismatic cells.
Ethanol production from crops is also currently subsidized by the federal government. Hopefully, if they decide to incorporate ethanol into the nation fuel stocks as a replacement additive, there will be efficiences in volume, but you can bet that the farming states will hang on to subsidies for as long as they possibly can.
Of the 6 gas stations in my area, none of them sell diesel.
As mentioned in previous posts, US diesel fuel is pretty dirty stuff - you need only need to take a look at metropolitian buses to see that.
For the US, perhaps not Europe, hybrids are the best solution to an emissions, not an efficiency problem. Sure, we'd love to increase fuel economy here in the states, but given that gas is $1.59 in most places, we're not hurting if our cars don't break 50mpg either. Where we do have serious problems is in the sheer number of cars in traffic - if we can kill emissions while people are doing the hour-long stop'n'go to and from work, that's a lot of fuel that stays in the car, rather than getting thrown into the local airstream.
So it is not the peak power that's limiting the use of hybrid cars.
Exactly. And my point was there are some situations where you need to sustain close to peak power for long periods of time.
If we want the cars climbing steep and long roads into the mountains, we need either larger gas engines or larger batteries.
In this particular case, those would have to be some pretty large batteries, or a big enough engine that I might as well just keep what I've got.
One place I like to go has a 30-mile section that is steep enough that I can only do 30 mph even with the accelerator floored. That part of the road basically requires 100% of my 380 HP gas engine (283KW) for 1 hour straight. To do that entirely on 144V batteries would require almost 2000 amp-hours -- that's 328 times the battery capacity of the Civic Hybrid. Even assuming much better battery technology than the basic lead-acid battery, I wouldn't think you could reasonably stuff more than about 80 KWh (500 kg of batteries at an energy density of 160Wh/kg, which is about four times that of lead-acid batteries -- no idea if that's achievable) into the vehicle, which would mean I would still need almost 275 horses to make that climb. Probably more given the added weight of the batteries.
And the above calculations assume that I start the climb with batteries full which, on that particular trip, I can assure you I would not.
I'm not claiming that hybrids won't work for nearly all applications, but there are _some_ for which they aren't appropriate.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Ethanol combustion produces friendly CO2 gas
I guess California doesn't see C02 as being very friendly.
On July 22, California gov. Gray Davis signed a bill limiting C02 output of motor vehicles. And the federal government even claims C02 is killing the trees.
Oh well, back to the drawing board.
Right, but your original post implied (unintentionally, I assume) that the current crop of hybrids weren't more economical than regular cars.
They are. It's just that they aren't more economical than a used car. Your premise is correct, though: An thrifty consumer would be out of his/her mind to buy a new car, conventional, hybrid, whatever.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
If you're an environmentalist, you aren't buying a new car anyway. You're buying a high MPG used car. Donate the money you save to a cause.
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
Of course, I'm the opposite of you, the lower that number is, most likely the more I'm enjoying my driving.
:)
I saw it hit 4mpg coming into the back straight at New Hampshire International Speedway last year. That works out to less than three minutes a gallon, on average!
I noticed you replied about a million times to your own posts and people at 0 or -1.
Let's though not ignore the fact, like you want to, that you bought a fucking used vehicle.
You are comparing the two almost as if you saved money... but it's only because it's used. Shit, I could say that I'm saving more because I don't actually have a car in my name so there!
But really kid, your Ford will cost more in maintenance! Do a google search, you will find that even though you have a warranty they won't cover anything. You will also find that like other Fords you may just have that nice engine of yours suddenly catch fire by itself.... Winstar?
Really... the F-150 costs more new than $22,000 so stop back-peddling and admit that you'll pay more for gas than a new (bybrid) car.
Get your Unix fortune now!
The reason for the hybrid system on locomotives is to eliminate gearing, because a multi-gear transmission that could handle those massive loads would be incredibly heavy and failure-prone. Not to mention the fact that it would probably require another large diesel engine just to provide the power required to operate the gearshift.
The hybrid system doesn't provide the locomotive with any efficiencies, since it still has to have diesels big enough to accelerate the whole mass.
Hybrid car engines, on the other hand, use a gas engine that is too small to provide adequate acceleration plus a battery backup to provide needed bursts of speed. By using a much smaller engine, they get higher efficiency.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Also, they aren't more economical overall than a similar sized NEW car. What other compact costs $20k+?
There are other considerations (emissions, tax break, financing, etc) But make sure you realize where those $$ savings are coming from.
With the Insight, you're paying upfront (purchase price) and getting a smaller bill at the gas pump.
i never ever push the car that hard onto the freeway - if i'm going to spin, and i do sometimes, actually, it's onto the smooth grass runout - i've come close to the guardrail several times, but i'm always back well down into the realm of control by the time i'm coming off into traffic. if i'm going to spin into oncoming traffic, odds are i'm going to be the one getting by far the worst injuries - not that i don't worry about killing somebody else, but if i'm going to be the most likely to die one, i'm definitely going not going to take stupid risks. same goes for driving down tree-lined roads, or roads with heavy pedestrian traffic. risk does have an input in my decisions - i'm not stupid. i'm confident in my driving skills, and my experiences bear me me out.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
I like the roominess of SUVs. Right now I drive a compact car. In the future I'd like an SUV purely from a stand point of
- elevated seating
- roomier
- I can leave my bike at the back without folding down the rear seats.
But I have been holding on to it, b/c most of the SUVs are gas guzzlers. If there is a Hybrid SUV with enough horse power and affordable price tag I'd buy it.
Excellent points all around. Welcome to my friends list. :)
fuel cells ... "and they made it quite clear the technology isn't quite there yet."
But in the article, Toyota expects to be mass-producing fuel cells by 2010. Maybe they mean initially as a replacement of the battery in a hybrid.
I do drive an SUV, am not an environmentalist but still would buy a hybrid if it has V6-level torque and is not much more expensive (comes with a good stereo, sunroof, etcetera etcetera). Especially if the hybrid engine is more reliable and longer lasting due to the more even load on the block.
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
"but they are talking about a paltry 40/29mpg"
But I head it has the acceleration of the V6, which gets about 19/23 mpg in the non-hybrid escape/tribute (=same car)...
I do call a 50-75 percent improvement a lot!
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
oops.
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
Every nation in the world claims to be a net exporter of food, so appearently they won't mind too much if less US food went into that big storage dumpster in the ocean we must all have...
Seriously, Every country claims it grows plenty of food. I have no idea which do.
Where do you live? I have NEVER seen a gas station without diesel without compition within a mile that does. (I saw an exception, but that station went out of buisness before I saw it, so I can't count it) I live in Minnesota where cold winters make diesels more troublesome.
Sure I'll agree that not every station has diesel, but to say that not every area does? I find that hard to belive. Diesel fuel is everywhere.
You're not always driving on that 30-mile section, so a 380HP engine with a hybrid that runs in hybrid mode everywhere else would still give you a car with a better gas mileage, just not on that one slope.
At 30mph, your engine RPM probably is much too low for the engine to reach its peak power and torque, so you probably are not even close to using 380HP during that climb. With a hybrid, you could have your engine revving at peak power, where the efficiency is much higher, to generate electricity for the electric motors, which could very well result in a a lower gasoline usage even on that slope, going that speed with the same load.
And, starting 2010 there will probably be a fuell cell instead of the battery and that may just be able to store enough power for that 30 mile climb.
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
(Good post).
So all that is needed for that climb is a four cylinder generating 150hp revving at 6kprm, generating electricity for an electric motor capable of putting that power on four wheels (assuming some loss).
Plus when this guy is going back down on the other side of the mountain, he basically gets part of his spent gasoline back by the recharging during braking.
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
Wind energy. Woosh.
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
I'm surprised that no one has pointed out yet the reason for why they're declaring this. No, its not because Toyota a tree-hugger company that wants to do good for the world, and they sure don't think that Americans really do want nothing but hybrids either.
The reality is that its all politics. Government organizations like the California Air Resources Board have been for a long time on their high horses handing down mandates to the manufacturers about what they have to produce.
The latest kick is Zero Emission Vehicles, vehicles that don't produce ANY emissions, including CO2. That means they can't burn anything, but have to run on electricity (nevermind the fact that said electricity may come from coal plants). Why CARB has a problem with CO2 is beyond me, other than the possibility that our cars' production of it might cause global warming, but that's another story.
But fully electric cars aren't practical. They haven't been and they don't appear as though they will be in the near future. This is why the manufacturers have been doing everything they can to convince CARB and the like that they'll take any mandate as long as ZEV's aren't part of it. They can (and already do) make vehicles that have almost no other emissions (NO2 CO etc.), and they can make cars that are increasingly fuel efficient, such as hybrids. But electrics just aren't realistic.
So the manufacturers are doing what they can to sway everyone. Make the public think that hybrids are cool, they're the wave of the future, they're the way to go. Get public opinion and maybe even governmental opinion heading down the path they want, and hey, even make themselves look good in the process.
That being said, I'm not saying Toyota has some evil hidden agenda. They're just trying to fight the BS really. I just don't seem them going to full hybrids. Then again, a hybrid can be a loose term. As long as its got some semblance of electric propulsion, its a hybrid, right?
--
"Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos." - Homer Simpson [1F10]
Unfortunately, there isn't enough arable farmland to grow enough crops to make the levels of biodiesel that the US really needs.
:-)
Here in California, the sulfur content standard is no more than 80 parts per million; the entire USA will switch to this standard in a few years. Once that happens, you'll see really clean-burning diesel engines show up on the US market--and a diesel-electric hybrid getting around 90 miles per US gallon fuel efficiency is within technological reach.
2ms,
I think you're forgetting a big problem with #2 Diesel fuel sold in the USA: a large amount of sulfur compounds in the fuel.
With sulfur compound levels as high as 2,000 parts per million, these compounds will act akin to sulfuric acid (anyone who's taken high school chemistry knows how nasty sulfuric acid can be) and quickly destroy the modern fuel delivery systems and exhaust emission controls found on European market diesel cars, where in Europe sulfur compound levels max out around 450-500 parts million.
In a few years the EPA will mandate that sulfur compounds be no more than 80 parts per million; once that happens we'll see a deluge of truly modern diesel-powered cars arrive in the US market. The Volkswagen PD130 and PD150 engines are very powerful, yet offer very high fuel efficiency; with the new cleaner diesel fuel and proper exhaust emission controls we could see a diesel car get 50+ mpg yet have excellent acceleration and even meet at minimum the ULEV emissions standard (equivalent to Euro 2004 standard).
Now imagine matching a modern diesel engine into a diesel-electric hybrid drivetrain; a Toyota Prius with a small turbodiesel engine instead of a gasoline engine could be capable of nearly 75 miles per US gallon fuel efficiency! With a 11.9 gallon gas tank a one way trip from Portland, OR to Sacramento, CA might be within reach.
99% of the time i'm only pushing my car to mabne 60% of its limits. i've taken it out in parking lots in dry, wet, freezing, and pretty much any other weather conditions specifically to learn when it's going to break, and how it behaves around those points. i may drive *fast*, but i don't drive *recklessly*. actually, in traffic, i'm one of the better drivers on long island - i signal, don't tailgate, don't cut off, and chack my blind spots allt he time. i'm not taking unneccesary risks - both the car and the driver are very much within their capabilities. except at 4:30 in sunday mornings on red creek road...mmm...toasty tires. anyway. all i can say is fast does not neccessarily = dangerous, only if you've got some 16-year old kid behind the wheel who *thinks* he knows how to drive.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
i do take my car out on the track, about 4-6 times a year. problem with that is a. it's only 4-6 times a year, b. it's rather expensive (track days at LRP run ~$100), and c. tracks *eat* tires (they're made of a significantly rougher pavement than roads). as well, i've only got a student SCCA license, and i need about $3000 more training to get my "real" one with unlimited track days, full race priveleges, etc.
yes, i do base my assumptions about my driving on absence of proof [that i'm a bad driver], and i know that's totally absurd reasoning, but every time i'm coming up the onramp to sunrise highway, i think very carefully to myself exactly when i need to be back down to a totally reasonable speed in case a tire blows, or there's oil/ice on the road and i completely lose control. i'm firmly convinced that if i do kill an innocent pedestrian, they're going to be someplace they shouldn't be - like on the side of a freeway median, or in the middle of an empty parking lot.
anyway, i never claimed to be a "safe" driver - just that i don't uneccessarily endanger other people. yes, there is a possiblity i'm going to screw up and kill somebody, but if somebody does die on the island, the odds that it's going to be me screwing up and killing them are so vanishingly small as to be virtually impossible. actually, LI is the only place i've ever driven like this, and i think it's for that very reason. i respect your opinions and concerns, but if you really have such a burning concern with making the roads safer (that's not supposed to be nearly as snide as it sounded), why not start by trying to educate the soccer moms and teenagers that are a much bigger threat, then move on to people like me?
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley