Hybrid Cars Don't Live Up to Mileage Claims
Omega1045 writes "Wired News is running a great little article about how hybrid cars (specifically Honda and Toyota models) do not come anywhere close to living up to their fuel efficiency claims. The article highlights that the EPA tests are more to blame than the car manufactures. Consumer reports has shown that the mileage for these cars can be as low as 60% of the claims. The article also links to a blog authored by hybrid enthusiast Pete Blackshaw detailing his failures getting any real answers on why his Honda Civic Hybrid isn't getting better fuel mileage. It looks like these cars are more hype than help in the battle against pollution and foreign fuel reliance."
An interesting alternative fuel is biodiesel:
- We can make it in the US
- Runs in existing diesel engines
- Almost all emissions reduced vs. dinodiesel
(for NOx there are some interesting additives
being produced).
- Much less toxic/dangerous than dinodiesel/gasoline
- Exhaust smells like french fries!
I can speak to the accuracy of hybrid fuel economy numbers, but I did do a bit of research and ended up buying a small gas-only car instead. I found the fuel economy of the hybrids wasn't so much better that it warranted the significant price increase.
I wrote more about the issue on my weblog: Why I didn't buy a hybrid car.
I never got below 50MPG, ever, and that was living in the thin air of Flagstaff, AZ, at over a mile in elevation. I got closer to 60MPG in the lower and warmer Phoenix, AZ.
31.5 isn't better than what one of the guys at work gets in his escort. And if they aren't more efficient then they are wasted.
Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
The Honda Civic Hybrid is an example of a hybrid is set up with the following:
Energy is lost in the conversion from gas to electricity, it's also lost in the storage in the batteries and the usage from the batteries to the wheels. You konw and I know that while normally this would all be lost in the braking, now it is stored and used to assist with acceleration.
The odd part is that while driving where you aren't using the brakes a lot, the transmission, weight improvements and aerodynamics will be the only improvements in your efficiency. The electrical assist means that your engine can be improbably weak, but I don't know if that necessarily translates to a more efficient engine.
Here's something which nicely describes why I'm skeptical about the true performance of hybrids:
1992 Civic line:_ Civic.shtml
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/1992_Honda
2004 Civic line (including hybrids)_ Civic.shtml
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2004_Honda
I'm not sure why, but it looks like my 1992 1.5L Civic Hatchback is(was) more fuel efficient (city and highway) than the modern 2004 Civic Hybrid. I don't think U.S. government numbers are right, but they're close enough to try to make some kind of a point :-)
As an aside, I was looking into the hybrid transmissions and from what I could tell... I was wrong, the Honda Insight was manual-only, but the newer hybrids sometimes sell with the choice of an automatic or continuously variable transmission... oddly, the fancy transmission hurts highway fuel efficiency, but it helps in the city.
Note that comparing an aluminum hybrid to a galvanized steel compact, e.g. the Insight to a "regular" car, would not be an apples-to-apples comparison since if you were to remove all the weight from the electrical system (adding hydraulic brakes) and increase the engine size to match the lost horsepower, the new gas car would be more efficient than other gas cars on the road today, and might even be better on the highway than the hybrid. (Although it really should fail to beat the hybrid in the city)
A 2004 Honda Civic Hybrid to a 2004 Honda Civic would be a more reasonable comparison than my 1992 to a 2004... the 2004's have bigger engines and are less fuel efficient. I'd also expect the 2004 hybrid to have more horsepower than my 1992 car... so I'll admit, it's not a fair comparison...
But there may be less expensive, more fuel efficient non-hybrid vehicles on the market.
(In reality, I get about 37MPG on the highway, ~30 in the city... the car _is_ 13 years old)
What needs to be understood is that hybrid cars offer better gas milage only depending on certain conditions. If you are driving without much acceleration/decceleration, then you basically do not get the advantage of hybrid technology. For city drivers, you get the recharge while braking and it makes for very efficient energy consumption. Just my 3 cents.
From a Truth In Advertising (ha!) standpoint, it certainly stinks.
Yes, it does, but don't make the mistake of blaming the companies or the advertisers for this. Federal regulations prohibit using any number other than the one calculated by the EPA test in advertising a car's mileage. This test was devised almost 20 years ago, and doesn't actually measure fuel consumption. It measures the emissions, and uses that data to calculate efficiency, and thus, mileage. Obviously a hybrid (with very low emissions) is going to skew the test.
Where's my lobbyist? Right here.
One nuance that the Wired article didn't cover is that mileage depends greatly on driving style. If I make short, aggressive hops across town my Prius' mileage drops to the mid 30s in summer or low 30s in winter. If I drive more sedately (at the speed limit, with gentle acceleration instead of punching the throttle at the lights) I get mileage in the mid to high 40s. Not bad for a comfortable four-door family car.
I can drive all day at 80 mph and get 41 MPG. I do it several times a year to visit family and/or just road-trip around the state.
The lesson to take is that good mileage requires both good tech and good habits.
yes it has been adressed, new hybrids have lifetime or 125,000 mile pack warrenties.
Bio is also over 3$ a gallon. Thats over 43$ a tank of gas!
31.5 isn't better than what one of the guys at work gets in his escort.
For what it's worth, I have two Saturn SL cars, and they both average between 42 and 44 miles per gallon. One is a 1997 model, the other 2002. Aside from three or four times when someone else filled up the tank and forgot, I can account for every single gallon of fuel and every mile over the last seven (and two) years. Oh, and I bought both of them brand new from the dealer for $12K and $10K.
These cars are not hot rods, but they have plenty of power to climb hills at 65mph and I am almost always a bit quicker than the other cars.
So using my own experience as a benchmark, I can see that these 50mph+ cars may have a claim for better efficiency, but they are also a lot more expensive than mine.
A dingo ate my sig...
As a happy Honda Insight CVT owner (which is rated at 57MPG highway), the lifetime average on my 2001 model is 56.1 MPG. I bought it used, and the previous owner had averaged 54.1 MPG. My personal average is 62.1 MPG. The manual transmission Insight can do even better.
So while there are some hybrids that fail to live up to the mileage claims, with careful driving your average Honda Insight can beat the EPA estimate by an appreciable margin. But a key is careful driving. If you're a foot-to-the-floor driver, or frequently drive on roads well in excess of the EPA "highway" speed (50-60MPH), your mileage will definitely take a dive.
You're not going to get anywhere near the rated mileage doing 85 on the freeway, or if your commute is all stop-and-go.
Matthew P. Barnson
I learn what I think when I read what I write
I can't speak for the Honda, as I have the Toyota Prius, but I get consistently 48-9 city MPG, (the '02 P is rated at 47 city).
If you don't know how to drive a hybrid, then you will get poor MPG. Period. Here's how to get high MPG in a hybrid:
It is absolutely understandable why people try to drive the way they are taught: smooth acceleration, hit the brakes often, etc., but that is the antithesis of getting good gas mileage in a hybrid.
Finally, the main goal of the hybrid is reduced emissions; increased MPG is a byproduct.
Yeah, right.
The problem with car diesel engines (speaking as a brit who's driven a few) is that yes they have good mpg but they also generally have lousy performance compared to a petrol engine of the same capacity. Also diesel exhuast despite filters and catalyst its still pretty noxious and even new diesel cars can be seen disappearing off in a cloud of black smoke if revved hard. Plus they sound awful on idle. Obviously these points don't bother many people in europe since diesel cars are big here but they're not the perfect transport solution.
I bought a used 2000 Insight (5 spd) and I've had it for about 7 months now.
In my experience, I've consistently gotten around 60 miles to the gallon . In the winter it dropped to ~59 (Missouri weather), but on my current tank of gas I have gotten 64.8 MPG over the last 240+ miles. I drive about 5 miles to work one way in city roads, with an max speed of around 40 mph and several stop lights. On weekends I drive it on the highways and my mpg figure usually rises even on a 5-10 mile trip on the highway, which I figure means that I've gotten significantly better mileage. My worst mileage was when i drove to Indiana last thanksgiving and I did 80 mph most of the way. I got 55 MPG then.
In my opinion, the hybrids need to be driven a certain way. You can't really drive them the way you drive a regular car (accelerate too fast / brake fast). Dont get me wrong, I still accelerate normally, but being able to anticipate stops better and using the regenerative braking and getting the engine into auto-stop faster when the batteries are charged works like a charm for me. Insight Central has some driving tips that helped me a lot.
I'd chalk this guys problems up to him not adjusting his driving style to fit the car. Thats my 2cents.
While your post IS funny, it's also, uh, wrong.
Hybrids have cleaner emissions compared to standard vechicles, regardless of mileage.
This is how they qualify as a LEV and SULEV (low-emission vehicle/super-low-emission-vehicle).
So, when compared to the more "average" pollutant level of the Escort's emissions (I don't believe there are any LEV or SULEV escorts available, correct me if I'm wrong), 31 hybrid's MPG in a hybrid can be considered "way better for the environment" than the Escort's 31 MPG.
Low sulfur diesel fuel will be required in the year 2006 in the US, so the mandate has already occurred. There is a lot of debate about whether older diesel-fuel cars will work well with the newer fuel, though.
Never look down your nose at others. Someday, someone is bound to see your boogers.
Batteries are also the single most agressively recycled automobile part, with deposits charged and refunded like they are on pop bottles in some states.
www.wavefront-av.com
Stop spreading FUD.
We're not using lead batteries, damnit! It's 120 1.2 v NiMH batteries. The battery pack weighs 63 pounds, not 200 as you assert, and the entire Honda Civic Hybrid manual car weighs only 129 pounds more than a comparable Honda Civic EX manual model.
There's no lead, no mercury, no cadmium in these batteries, and they're recyclable. Just like all the other NiMH batteries.
--You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
The Toyota Prius uses an ICE system. It involves two electric motors, can operate "silently" (purely off the electric motor) at low speed, and can only be used in conjunction with an automatic transmission.
The Honda hybrids use a system called "IMA", that functions more like an electric turbocharger. If a Honda hybrid is moving, the gasoline engine is running. Well, OK, there is an exception to this if you're coasting to a stop at speeds below about 10 MPH (3 MPH in the CVT), with the brake pedal depressed, the engine goes into "auto idle stop" mode. The Honda design can be used with a manual transmission (leading to the extraordinary mileage of certain models) and is less complicated than the Toyota system, but otherwise seems to be a wash as far as advantages when comparing the two.
I have to admit some bias here: I think the Honda Insight is in a class by itself. It was a brand-new model introduced in Japan in 1999, engineered from the ground up to be the MPG king of the mass-produced world. It sacrifices a lot to be that: no rear seat, "unusual" design (my brother-in-law says "ugly", but I think it gives the car "character"), all-aluminum construction (painful, painful body repair bills), high insurance costs (on par with high-end rear-wheel-drive sports cars), a fairly stiff econo-box-like ride due to really hard little wheels, a crappy stereo (until 2004, when they put a much nicer model in), and hardly any selection of "options": if you have an Insight of a particular year, other than air conditioning and transmission type, your choices are extremely limited.
But I still love the car :) Now, back to responding to your post!
The engineer that talked about the Prius "running off batteries and not using gas" must have been off his rocker, if what you describe is correct. The energy has to come from somewhere, and in the case of these hybrids, that's from the gas tank. The gasoline motor must run to recharge those battery cells. And the chemical energy (gas tank) to kinetic energy (motor) to chemical energy (battery) transition wastes a good deal of that energy. Add to that kinetic energy to potential energy losses due to regenerative braking, actual brake pads being used in hard stops, and it's a recipe for poor efficiency.
The numbers back this up: in city driving, a hybrid frequently turns in extremely disappointing MPG numbers due to these inefficiencies. The Prius takes a hit in its highway MPG numbers, because it has to leech power off the gas engine to recharge the battery it depleted in city driving. The Honda cars take the hit from the gas motor occasionally idling (rather than going into auto-idle-stop), and acceleration from a stop draining nearly as much gas as a "normal" car.
That said, a hybrid will beat the pants off any similarly-driven traditional gasoline-powered vehicle for efficiency in those conditions. But when the EPA rates city mileage higher than highway mileage, it's not taking into account losses in the battery pack: the car ends the test with a battery pack lower than it started.
Sadly, you can't beat the laws of thermodynamics:
- You can't create or destroy energy
- You can't hope to ever do better than break even
- You can only break even at absolute zero
Sounds like my life sometimes...Matthew P. Barnson
I learn what I think when I read what I write
come on now, didn't you do any research into todays hybrid vehicles?
1) They use NiMH batteries and not lead-acid. If NiMH electrolytes are getting smeared all over the passengers, they probably didn't survive the crash anyways.
2) Again, NiMH and not lead acid or NiCAD so there isn't that massive environmental impact of the previous battery technologies. But I do agree we still need mandated recycling of some of these materials so they don't end up in lakes/etc.
3) The Toyota battery does not have to be completely replaced if a battery cell fails. Just the bad cell so there should be no large expense to replace the whole battery. Except maybe in a collision and again, that's going to likely be a total anyways....
4) our Dodge Dart is not getting very environmentally efficient milage( ie green house gases/etc ). There's more to good MPG with hybrid systems.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
A better hybrid could be produced that utilizes an electric motor for the propulsion, and a fixed rpm diesel to produce electricity, regeneration from coasting and braking, and an additional sterling engine to capture heat from the coolant and the exhaust manifold.
The easiest way to gain fuel economy, however, is to drive a car that weighs 1500 lbs instead of 3000 lbs.
"Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
--Tom Schulman
Naturally, the technology, not the drivers, that is responsible for the poor fuel economy.
Nonsense. When I drive my 2003 Honda Civic Hybrid (yes, I actually own one, potentially unlike many other people posting here) on the highway, I am careful on the gas (I take a speed hit going up hills, I utilize descents, et cetera). On the Pittsburgh, PA - Washington, DC drive, I consistently average 51 MPG for the length of I76, I70, and I270. On the George Washington Memorial Highway along the Potomac, I can keep it above 53 going in and out of the city. For local traffic, I accelerate slowly and brake slowly (when possible) and that helps keep it above 48 MPG.
On the otherhand, when I feel like having some fun, the gas miliage can drop down into the low 40s (42-46 MPG). For my Civic, that is terrible, but still better than 90% of the cars on the road. I consistently score 575+ miles out of my 12.7 gallon tank.
A terrible driver could take an NSX and lose every race. An excellent driver can take a Kia and kick some serious ass. Likewise with fuel economy, a bad driver can make the most efficient vehicle guzzle gas while a good driver could get some decent range out of an SUV. The point is, a car's technology is only as good as the driver.
I think a lot of people out there get a gasoline-electric hybrid vehicle and assume that they don't have to think. That's not the case. There's a very good reason why the Prius and the Civic Hybrid show you whether the motor is assisting or charging and show you your instantaneous fuel economy. These tools help the driver alter their habits to get the best performance. If people are dumb enough to spend the money on one of these vehicles and then not use the technology correctly (understand how to drive with maximum efficienty and change their habits), it's not the fault of the engineering, it's the fault of the consumer.
Join Tor today!
My city mileage is less than what is advertised, and I'm doing my very best with slow accelerations and maintaining constant speed where I can.
But overall, I'm pretty happy with getting my 50 MPG.
Don't use air conditioning, ever. (2 to 4 mpg)
Drive at a steady speed, about 40 mph, in top gear.
Choose a route that doesn't involve hills.
Don't use oxygenated gasoline. (as if you have a choice!) (15% efficiency loss)
Don't drive through snow. (It takes energy to push the snow aside.)
Don't drive in very cold weather. (Cold makes rubber stiff, so tires absorb more power.)
If you can, adjust the spark timing for maximum efficiency. This setting may disagree with manufacturer's recommendations.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Look at the authors previous articles and you'll see he just wrote an article promoting fuel cells and hydrogen powered vehicles....
He looks/sounds more like a shock-jock than anything else. We're averaging about measured 45 MPG over 40,000 miles with a 2001 Toyota Prius(purchased in 2000).
IMO, the story headline should be more like this: "Car owners with poor driving habits get upset when shown actual MPG", or even "EPA rating is NOT REAL, it's a baseline for comparison dummy".
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
I own a Civic Hybrid, and I've found that the way I drive severely affects the gas mileage, as others have already mentioned. A couple of things I'd like to add are:
* If you are driving uphill, never go above 55. The mileage up hills is much more related to speed than on flats.
* I drive to work every day 85 mph on the freeway, and through city traffic. Ok, so I get 42 MPG, which is not the advertise MPG, but so what - find any other car that gets 42 MPG under those conditions.
LS
There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
I have owned my 2004 Prius for about six months. During a typical week, where most of my driving consists of the commute to and from work, my gas mileage ranges from 46 to 49 mpg. I live in San Diego, California and the drive has a lot of up and down stretches which may tend to keep the numbers down. My best mileage is on the freeway during the rush hour commute. With speeds down around 15 mph, the car spends a significant part of the drive running on battery only. Unfortunately (or fortunately) my work schedule has me doing most of my commuting during non-rush hour times. During one week however, when I did have a 9 - 5 work schedule, I averaged 52 mpg as reported by the dashboard MPG readout. My wife and I have made one 840 mile round trip to Nevada since we have owned the car. We averaged 49 mpg on the trip with speeds in the 65 - 75 mph range. When I bought the car, I didn't expect to get the EPA mileage. Considering that I haven't changed many of my driving habits since I got the Prius, I am very happy with the mileage that I am getting.