Hybrid Vehicle Conversion Services?

OverkillTASF asks: "My '94 I6 Jeep Grand Cherokee has once again eaten through a transmission... at 105k miles. For one reason or another, this has led me to the following question: Are there any companies/individuals out there who do hybrid vehicle conversions? I'd like to retrofit my Barbie Jeep with the necessary equipment to eek out 5 more MPG, be a little more environmentally friendly, but still allow me to get where I need to go out here in the sticks? Do such after-market conversion services exist?"

Comments

in short...

[Anonymous Coward]

no.

No problemo

[Henry V .009]

Make it lighter. There is all sorts of stuff built into the frame for "safety" and "roll-over protection" that you'll probably never need. Remove a few hundred pounds of this dead-weight (also go on a diet yourself), and watch your gas mileage go up, up, up.

Re:No problemo

[kingkade]

And those airbag assemblies are just chock full of heavy cases and those dense airgs themselves. Get rid of these cumbersome, life-saving material and you should be good to go.

Re:No problemo

[Anonymous Coward]

In the words of Al Bundy, "I got him to cut another $100 off the price of the car. Why pay for seatbelts when you don't have brakes?"

Re:No problemo

[zbuffered]

Also, the Air Conditioning unit not only adds weight, but when it's running it saps power from your engine, lowering your efficiency. But don't roll down your windows--that reduces airodynamics!

Re:No problemo

[daviddennis]

Actually, if you fasten your seat belt, it is my understanding that airbags offer only marginal extra protection.

It's probably not legal, though, and compared to the massive weight of the SUV mentioned I doubt that the airbag mechanism makes much difference.

Vehicles are designed with specific weight distributions in mind and so I would think removing things from it willy nilly is likely to create a safety hazard, including an increased likelihood of tipping in SUVs. So watch out.

D

Re:No problemo

[Grab]

I hope no-one thinks you're serious! :-) Yeah, most of the time it's not needed - but if you do need it and it ain't there then you're a thin smear of raspberry jam...

Grab.

Diesel pickup

[Anonymous Coward]

Throw away that Cherokee POS. It's not as good "out in the sticks" as an F-150 with decent tires anyway. Get an older used diesel truck or Suburban, and add the tires and raised shocks necessary to get where you need to go AND NO MORE. Don't raise it if you can get there without it. Then make arrangements to collect grease and fryer oil and make a 55 gal batch of biodiesel every six months, and use it to cut your fuel costs. If you live out in the sticks presumably you have space and some sort of metal shed (or can get one) where you can store the grease and oil and setup for the conversion. Do it in larger batches, otherwise it doesn't pay off in terms of the work you put in.

Re:Diesel pickup

[Yonder Way]

"Throw away that Cherokee POS. It's not as good "out in the sticks" as an F-150 with decent tires anyway."

I've got some great video footage from Kodak Rock in Uwharrie Nat'l Forest that would take that line of BS and throw it right out the window.

Re:Diesel pickup

[guyanonymous]

Do you have a link?

Re:Diesel pickup

[cjsnell]

Throw away that Cherokee POS. It's not as good "out in the sticks" as an F-150 with decent tires anyway.

-1 Retard. You won't get very far "out in the sticks" with the independent double-wishbone front suspension and 20 degree angle-of-departure on that F-150. Sorry bud, but the Jeep's solid axles and much steeper angle-of-departure and breakover angle have your F-150 whipped. Believe me, I've owned two F-150s and a Jeep and there is no comparison.

That said, if you want a true off-road machine, I suggest a Land Rover Defender 90. Though my D-90 runs on gas (and premium unleaded at that), you can find diesel models available and there are lots of people converting them to diesel, as well. Some folks are even converting them to run on vegetable oil. And, as they say, it's the Best 4x4xFar!

Re:Diesel pickup

[woobieman29]

Not to mention the fact that pick-up trucks in general are about the worst configuration available for an off-road vehicle. The weight distribution is the main problem - all of the weight in a pickup truck is over the front wheels, which creates serious issues with traction on the back tires. Sure, you can add weight to the bed of the truck to help keep the tires planted, but then you have the disadvantage of more weight.

Give me an older Toyota Landcruiser (1970's) or a Jeep TJ/YJ/CJ instead, thankyouverymuch.

Re:Diesel pickup

[Anonymous Coward]

1) Post link to footage or STFU, you fronting liar.

2) "Out in the sticks" implies a rural residence, with perhaps some field/forest driving for ag side businesses, not Kodak Rock.

3) An F-150 will kick any GM or Chrysler product in terms of haulable load, lifetime, and repairs and repair costs for any environment where the truck can still make it. The original poster's Cherokee is considered old and on it's last legs, but an F-150 of that age is just getting broken in, probably only 2/3 of the way through the first engine.

Probably only a small toyota or mazda truck will do better financially, at cost of not being able to haul as much.

Re:Diesel pickup

[Yonder Way]

I had it out on eMule for awhile. I have the full SVCD-length video on my hard disk now. I'll have to edit out just the Cherokee bit and put that up. The Cherokee in question is not something that had $20,000 worth of upgrades done to it. No lift. A rear locker, offroad tires (small ones at that), and a confident & experienced driver.

Most people who have a bad impression of a Cherokee's abilities have never seen one riding on the Jeep trails. The Cherokee is no joke.

Re:Diesel pickup

[Anonymous Coward]

As a side note, the Mazda truck is the same exact truck as the Ford Ranger. Only the trim is different.

Re:Diesel pickup

[n9hmg]

The Cherokee is no joke
And neither is the Grand Cherokee(a completely different vehicle, not just a larger version of the Cherokee) - particularly the last generation back - with live axles. The extra width hampers them on narrow spots, but is doubtless a comfort when off-camber.

Great idea.

[jimmypw]

Creading a vehicle conversion service is a great idea. As yet I have not heard of any that exist.
You may have stumbled on a mulit million pound business venture. I am not sure however if there are any patents or anything sililar stoping people from
1)creating a hybrid car, or...
2)Converting a car to a Hybrid model.

Re:Great idea.

[The Clockwork Troll]

How cheap (and this how practical) could this be made to be?

If the break-even point is beyond the typical service life of a vehicle anyway, the appeal is just environmental. And if that's the case, do I want to fork out 5 figures to hybridize my car ... or simply invest in legitimate alternative fuels research?

Nice thought

[kingkade]

It's noble to want to do something for the environment, but I have to mention (and you probably already have realized this) such a conversion would cost more than you'd be able to make up for with the slightly better mileage in less than (at least) a few years. Look at Civic hybrids: they cost about $4k more than their gasoline counterparts.

IMO, I think your money would be *much* better spent on a healthy down payment on one of those more economic, eco-friendly vehicles thna retro-fitting an older, gas-guzzler SUV.

Re:Nice thought

[Halfbaked Plan]

If the vehicle is already paid for, it only costs him $4000 (your figure) to do the conversion. That's the only cost and he presumably gets a new engine and drive train for that money. Which would be a good deal.

Re:Nice thought

[ConceptJunkie]

Why would it cost $4k to _convert_ a car? I'm betting it would cost 3 times that. A TV might only cost twice as much as a microwave but you couldn't convert one for the same money.

You are discounting labor, which would be huge, and the difficulties of dealing with a car not designed to be a hybrid being altered to work as a hybrid. I would imagine just fitting the new equipment could be a real problem. For instance, where do you stick the batteries?

So how is the original poster's $4K figure relevant?

Re:Nice thought

[Halfbaked Plan]

You are discounting labor, which would be huge, and the difficulties of dealing with a car not designed to be a hybrid being altered to work as a hybrid.

Based on your analysis, all those custom cars and restored vintage cars should be priced in the medium six figures. Not all labor is billable at full hourly rates. It's a hobby project.

Google

[lezerno]

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Electrochar ger

Re:Google

[jpostel]

It's still not available to the public, but it's a step in the right direction. I think it's cool that it is being sold as a competitor to superchargers.

Re:Google

[RingDev]

That thing will be good for extra torque, but I doubt it would effect most people's gas milage. basic physics in play, you can't use more energy then you create. The place where it would be most advantagous is charging while the car is idleing at a stop, the energy the engine generates at that point is just wasted. But when cruising at speed, any power it takes from the drive train to charge it's battery pack can not be converted perfectly back to drive train power, so you will actually lose gas mileage. So this will be better for stop and go traffic, and for hard drivers who race to 60. But if you are a highway commuter, you'll be wasting gas.

-Rick

Re:Google

[Smidge204]

I could easily see designing and building your own system based on this concept, though.

For a proper hybrid design, you would need a way to disconnect either the engine or the electric motor. Extra clutches...

I would consider getting a motor from an electric golf cart, which are pretty damn strong. The electric golf carts I'm familiar with use 6 rather large lead-acid batteries and have up to 10HP motors in them.

I tend to cruise at about 60mph with my car, so I would have to work out some means to connect the motor so the RPMs match at the motor's peak efficiency. Also, disconnecting the engine somehow would be nice so I'm not working against the internal resistance of the engine. Ideally, being able to shut the engine down completely on long highway trips.

And a plug-in recharger would be a must.

Of course, I own a 1964 Rambler with a straight-6 cyl. engine. I can practically sit next to it under the hood... that gives me plenty of room to work with!
=Smidge=

Re:Google

[Smidge204]

But when cruising at speed, any power it takes from the drive train to charge (it is) battery pack can not be converted perfectly back to drive train power, so you will actually lose gas mileage.

The idea being that you use the stored energy while stopped/idling to power the car while cruising and to assist the car while accelerating. So even though there is loss, it's not 100% waste like it would be without the hybrid system.

You need a rediculously small amount of power to keep your car going once it's up to speed. 10-15HP would be enough for a light and/or aerodynamic vehicle to maintain highway speeds on even a slightly hilly road. The idea is to not run the engine at all at these times.

Plus, your engine runs most efficiently at a particular RPM with a particular load on it. A hybrid system is designed to run the gasoline engine as efficiently as possible by hitting that sweet spot, saving you gas.
=Smidge=

...forgot to mention:

[kingkade]

Be sure to research some of these hybrid SUVs http://outside.away.com/outside/news/200404/hybrid _suvs.html>. They should be robust enough (unless you're looking for a nice long range) than a paved-road wanderer like a Civic.

Hydrogen?

[MoonBuggy]

This is moving slightly off on a tangent from the question, but it seems worth saying: United Nuclear are currently working on a hydrogen conversion kit for various cars, and have apparently clocked 50,000 successful miles on their prototypes. Probably the kind of thing to take with a pinch of salt, and the estimated cost is $7-10k, but it will come with a solar powered hydrogen generator, so might be worthwhile.

Re:Hydrogen?

[spectral]

I saw this before, I read the comments before suggesting it. I don't know if this company is legit or not, but the idea seems interesting.

I think this is the closest you'll get to a conversion kit. Hybrid gas-electric vehicles require a vastly different transmission, onboard computer, massive batteries, and likely a lot of engine work to make it stop and start when the vehicle is not in motion. In short, look at around 12k+ if it's even possible and the parts are widely available.. which they aren't.

Re:Hydrogen?

[moosesocks]

Somehow, I've got a good feeling that you're gonna end up on a LOT of government watch lists if you start dealing with a company named 'United Nuclear'

Re:Hydrogen?

[MoonBuggy]

Don't worry, their mind rays can't get to you through a RadMax hat.

Re:Hydrogen?

[Bill Dog]

Don't know where the asker lives, but in California at least, I'd definitely skip the hybrid conversion and go for hydrogen, even if it meant waiting a couple of years. Going hybrid is admirable now, but I think of it as only a stop-gap measure, until we have the means to really cut our dependence on oil. Bush has proposed and Congress has passed funding for hydrogen fuel cell R&D -- http://www.fuelcellmarkets.com/article_default_vie w.fcm?articleid=9961&subsite=2541 -- but don't know how long before the average citizen sees anything come from it. But our "Governator" here is more aggressively pursuing this, and plans to have hydrogen refilling stations accessible by every Californian by 2010 (sooner in San Diego, Los Angeles, Sacramento, and San Francisco) -- http://www.hydrogenhighway.ca.gov/facts/faq/faq.ht m

Re:Hydrogen?

[arminw]

.....the means to really cut our dependence on oil.....

Hydrogen is not an energy SOURCE, only an energy carrier. The only practical ways of making hydrogen is to use electricity or extraction from some hydocarbon. The efficiency of doing this conversion must be compared to the effciency of refining and then burning gasoline or diesel in a vehicle. Also, the very expensive new infrastructure needed for handling hydrogen must be amortized by including it in its price. You best bet right now is to buy a hybrid for day to day transportation and use your SUV only when it's heavy duty capability is really needed.

Are you serious?

[kawika]

For a one-off conversion to a decade-old Jeep Cherokee, it would take lots of unique parts and experienced labor. You are probably looking at tens of thousands of dollars and when you are done it will still look like an old Jeep.

If you are fixated on going hybrid with an SUV, why not buy a brand new hybrid Highlander or Lexus? You'll spend as much and get the same marginal gas mileage increase, but you'll also get that new-car smell.

Re:Are you serious?

[Blkdeath]

If you are fixated on going hybrid with an SUV, why not buy a brand new hybrid Highlander or Lexus? You'll spend as much and get the same marginal gas mileage increase, but you'll also get that new-car smell.

Or you could look at the Ford Escape Hybrid and enjoy upwards of 50% fuel savings in a brand-new 4x2 or 4x4 small SUV.

To put things into perspective; the Escape Hybrid has $0 fuel tax, whereas the Highlander carries a $75 tax. Why? The Highlander uses a large 6 cylinder engine and, as you said, only experiences marginal fuel economy improvements.

The Lexus is a nice SUV - but it comes at a Lexus price. A person driving a 12 year old Jeep Cherokee isn't likely to run to a dealer and drop $62,200 CDN (base MSRP) on a new SUV. Even the Highlander comes in at $44,205 while the Escape Hybrid starts at a reasonable $33,495.

The Escape Hybrid uses an Atkinson Cycle variant of their popular 2.3L Duratec engine which, in and of itself is a highly efficient, near zero emission engine. Combined with a 70KW electric motor it produces the same power as the V6 Escape.

The One Tank Challenge demonstrated that on a 62L gas tank it's possible to drive Toronto city traffic for 972 KMs getting better than 5.9L/100KM (or roughly 50MPG).

Re:Are you serious?

[fm6]

You made half the point I was going to make. The other half is that a a Jeep Cherokee is a good candidate for an all-electric conversion. And there are plenty of people who do that.

Re:Are you serious?

[Baloo Ursidae]

If you are fixated on going hybrid with an SUV, why not buy a brand new hybrid Highlander or Lexus?

The early 90s Jeep Cherokees were off-road vehicles, not like the toys you named, or the toys that replaced it with the same name. They won't go into the sticks, they'll tip over or high-center on something the first time they see dirt, ugly as sin, and won't readily fit in a standard sized (for Oregon anyway) parking space.

I would have suggested a Kia Sportage if you were going for something newer, but Hyundai bought out Kia and replaced the Kia Sportage with a rebadged Hyundai Tuscon. In another words, they took the exact opposite of a Sportage and called it a Sportage. The Sportage was fuel efficient, sub-compact yet still comfortably seated four, 8.5 inches of ground clearance standard, yet a relatively low center of gravity, with enough off-road capability and reliability to become the vehicle of choice for the South Korean and other east-Asian militiaries. The Hyundai Tuscon knockoff that replaced it is too large, too gas guzzling, practically no ground clearance, a center of gravity somewhere around midway up my CB antenna mast on the roof of my Sportage, and impossible to paralell park.

The age of getting a new utility truck (as opposed to a sport utility toy) is over. If you want something that does everything, you have to look in the used market, they just don't make what gets the job done anymore.

Re:Are you serious?

[Kris_J]

I don't suppose there are any rumours about a Toyota Hiace-based campervan hybrid with a solar panel on an angled pop-top roof? (Just searching their site, do they even make campervans anymore?)

Re:Are you serious?

[Dan Ost]

Where do people get the motors for an all electric conversion?

Re:Are you serious?

[fm6]

The electric motor store?

Re:Are you serious?

[schon]

The One Tank Challenge demonstrated that on a 62L gas tank it's possible to drive Toronto city traffic for 972 KMs getting better than 5.9L/100KM (or roughly 50MPG).

While that's interesting, it doesn't quite match up with what others have reported. Seeing as the people touting the 50MPG are Ford themselves, I'd have to take their numbers with a grain of salt.

Re:Are you serious?

[pla]

If you are fixated on going hybrid with an SUV

...Then you deserve your pitiful 9mpg!

C'mon, people, you DO NOT NEED an SUV. You need a 4-door sedan or, if you have trouble with the basic idea of "don't breed until you run out of room", a forced tubal ligation.

99% of the time, who do you see in an SUV? One person. On a cell phone. Usually dressed too nicely to have any sort of construction projects planned for the near future. And how do these fine upstanding safety-conscious folks drive? Cautiously and courteously? HA! Assuming they can see you with that nice 80 degree blind spot on both sides, they drive like the most aggressive, inconsiderate, self-centered assholes on the road.

"Oh, but not me, I need my SUV, and drive like a saint". Uh-huh... Whatever it takes to help you sleep at night...

Re:Are you serious?

[bluGill]

You forgot the GreenPeace bumper sticker on your description of the typical SUV. Otherwise it is pretty close.

it's possible, but...

[zogger]

...you'll need to do a lot of the DIY, perhaps just in the configuring. You can always sub out the actual work. You'll be retrofitting the entire drive train, plus adding space for batteries as well if you want any sort of at least minimum range before you are forced to use the fueled engine. What you are contemplating is a self propelled generator basically, with you along for the ride. That is in essence what a hybrid is.

Here is a generic link to get you going

http://www.evworld.com/

As another poster pointed out, this is a fabulous new industry idea, some places are doing it, but it's still in the mom and pop shop stage most places, sort of like the original mom and pop whitebox shops back in the haydays of making decent money at it.

pure electric conversion kits and links

http://www.electroauto.com/

Now what I think might be a useful idea, one already built at ACPropulsion, is to make the vehicle pure electric, and have the generator part that makes it a hybrid be in a tow behind trailer. Short range, run pure electric, extended range, tow the trailer.

read about that and more info here, these guys know their stuff

http://www.acpropulsion.com/ACP_FAQs/FAQ_products.

good luck and do a blog on it, would like to see the project as it unfolds

Wow such lofty goals.

[/dev/trash]

A whole 5MPG. What will you spend that money on?

Re:Wow such lofty goals.

[forkazoo]

A whole 5MPG. What will you spend that money on?

At current gas prices? Probably a private island.

Re:Wow such lofty goals.

[Baloo Ursidae]

5MPG for me would be the same difference as adding another 1.5 gallons to my gas tank, but without having to pay to fill that 1.5 gallons every time. That's a savings of upwards of $4.50 with current gas prices per tank, or $234/year.

To me, 5MPG could mean the difference between using my vacation days for more than one or two vacations a year instead of just spreading out what I can't otherwise use for fun out for when I just don't feel like going to work. And I already get 4-15MPG in 4WD, 30 city/35 highway.

Personally, I wish I could go biogasoline since I see stations selling it for under $1/gal, but they're perpetually out. (Not sure why, it's not like anybody eats soybeans in this country...)

Re:Wow such lofty goals.

[i.r.id10t]

So look at getting a "crate" engine - diesel of course - get it installed and working and then go to biodiesel.

Re:Wow such lofty goals.

[commanderfoxtrot]

You must be in the UK as well!

(UK petrol i.e. gas is about to hit 7 USD per US gallon - a pound a litre).

40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

Let's say you work over your truck to get 28mpg. You drive 40miles round trip every day to work. You driver to work 250 times a year. And for the moment, we'll put gas at $3.00.

That means every year you spend $1072 on gas. $1429 per year when gas hit's $4

Compared to a full electric. A (relatively) cheap conversion to a 9" DC motor and lead acid battery pack can easily pull a 40 mile range. And at about $8-12k it's about the same cost as a few year old decent used car. A DC system like this should run at about .4kWh per mile (AC can get as low as .18kWh)

If we use the same standards (250 40mile round trips @ .4kWh/mile) and put electric at $0.10 (my last bill was $0.85/kWh). That means you're spending $400 a year on fuel. Now, with the 'el-cheapo' 6c deep cycle lead acid battery packs, you're only going to get 3-5 years out of them. So if we figure in blowing $1200 every 3 years, you're looking at $800/year in fuel. Even if electric jumps to $0.13 (a 33% jump like the gas jump $3 to $4) You're still only looking at $920/year

28mpg Gas @ $3/gal = $1072
.4kWh Electric @ $0.10/kWh = $800
28mpg Gas @ $4/gal = $1429
.4kWh Electric @ $0.13/kWh = $920


-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, investing $12k and loosing the ability to take longer trips for $272 in yearly savings isn't worth it. Put your money in an ordinary interest bearing savings account, use that interest to pay for gas, and you come out ahead.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

12k @ 3% is only $360/year. and that's not likely to grow.

Gas is going to hit 4 dollars, and at that rate you will be saving over $500 a year.

My situation is slightly different though. I drive a 2 seat compact sports car for my commute (20mpg). My wife is looking to swap out her aging compact suv with a Golf TDI (45mpg Diesel). I'm looking to convert my 2 seater to electric. Drops my yearly fuel cost from $1700+ to $800. And we would still have a high efficiency vehicle that doesn't depend on crude oil.

Which brings up the next point. At some point in time, there will not be enough gas to go arround. US consumption is still growing, although not as rapidly as it had been. But China and India are exploading into their industrial revolutions and their oil consumption is skyrocketing. Going Electric saves you from the future where gas prices will surge, lines will form, and shortages will exist. Going diesel you can atleast run bio-diesel from veggie oil or soy beans.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[maxume]

$300 to $500 a year in savings to take all the utility out of my vehicle? Sign me up! Really, what is the maximum range going to be on such a configuration? If it's only 100 miles or whatever, what are you supposed to do when you want to go further than 40 miles from home? Also, how does that 9" DC compare to an ICE for performance? 30-60 mph is important to me...

max

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[nmos]

Unfortunately much of our electricity comes from natural gas which is likely to become more expensive for basically the same reasons as gasoline so expect electricity prices to go up as well.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[Kris_J]

hit'

ARGH!

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[Anonymous Coward]

The amount of oil extracted is also going to continue to rise for a while; of course the cost of extracting it wil also go up.

Since we are not adding hydroelectric or nuclear capacity, the increased electricity you use to refill your batteries comes from the same place as oil (natural gas), so it's price will track that of gasoline. The savings will remain in the "not justified by the capital locked up in the batteries" range.

Diesel/biodiesel is definitely a way to save money for a while. But if you believe we will run out of oil you have to acknowledge to yourself we will exhaust the supply of fryer grease shortly thereafter. Each person doesn't eat enough deep-fried food to produce fuel to drive themselves to McDonald's; intensive agricultural production of soy oil or peanut oil will probably cost much more than it costs now, because the fertilizer and transportation of that is highly dependent on petroleum right now.

As oil supplies tighten it's important not to use oil to fuel things that don't need to be fueled by oil, to stretch it out as long as possible. Biodiesel and maybe photo-voltaic panels on your roof, or windmills, and electric cars were appropriate, are all good ideas. But it's pointless to blow a bunch of money into an electric conversion that doesn't save you money and just shifts how you pay for roughly the same amount of fossil fuel.

Basically, if you really believe that we are about to run out of oil, you need to get a bunker in the hills and arm yourself like for Y2k, because when the shit hits the fan it will be worse than New Orleans. If on the other hand, you want to use the argument that we are about to run out of oil to promote certain political alignments, but not really and truly prepare for it like you believe it, please Klerk yourself immediately.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

Electric motors theoretically have infinate torque. If you have the money, you can out perform super cars. Look up the AC Propultion T-Zero. The latest Lith ion prototype does 0-60 in 3.68 seconds and a range of 300+ miles. Most DC system do not perform that well however.

But cheap technology doesn't perform as well. Most electrics don't perform as well in the 1/4 mile because they have lower top speeds (That T-Zero tops out at 90mph). Most cheap technology doesn't perform that well, but if the vehicle is a short distance commuter you can completely ween yourself from the pump. Need to go further? Have a spare car, or car pool.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

Actually most of the electricity in the US comes from Coal. North America also has the worlds larges coal deposites in the world. So while my heating bill is likely going to be over $300/month this winter, I don't expect my electricity to raise more then a peny or so per kWh.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[arminw]

....You're still only looking at $920/year ....

I just got a Toyota Prius hybrid which gets consistently at least 50mpg. For 10K miles and $3 gas that comes to $600. For $4 gas it would be $800 and the nice thing is that it'll go over 500 miles on a full tank. It is a really nice car for general running around in, but I'll still keep our old Ford diesel pickup for hauling things.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

Interesting, I had heard that their 45mpg sticker rating was "generous". You are the first person I've seen claim over 45mpg though. But for a trade off, you'll still have to replace your battery pack, and if it goes out at 3 years, just after the warenty, you're still looking at a $1200 bill, which up's your yearly fuel costs to $1000. Which at $3/gal is only a hair under a 30mpg car. Also, a new Prius cost what, $22k+ msrp? VS a $10k conversion kit. And that electric will be cheaper from the start in fuel costs. There is a finite amount of oil on this planet, and we, not our children or grand children but you and I will see the end of cheap oil in our life times. Commuter electrics, hydrogen and bio-diesels will be the future.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

whoops, I was thinking the Honda Civic Hybrid. It's gas milage is lower then advertised, not the prius. Sorry bout that.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[arminw]

...but you and I will see the end of cheap oil in our life times...

That mantra has been chanted for over 40 years now. Oil can also be made from coal and we have enough coal to last for centuries. Here is an intersting article:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv27n1/v27n1 -1.pdf

Electricity for making hydrogen and running electrics comes mostly from fossil fuel, mostly coal.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[nmos]

" Actually most of the electricity in the US comes from Coal."

True but over the last few years almost noone has been building new coal powered generating stations due to the perceived polution issues.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

That article proves two things. 1) Not all MIT students are smart. and 2) Engineers make poor market analysts.

The oil made from coal (gasification) is good power power production, not so useful for transportation however.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

oh, and many people would consider $70/barrel no longer cheep. I consider it cheap enough for our economy to continue depending on, but this holiday buying season will show us for sure.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

The Milwuakee, WI plant will be the decision maker. WI okayed the replacement of 2 40 year old boilers with 2 newer pulverized coal buring units. Illinois sued because building pulverized coal plants is illegal there, and they are only 80 miles down wind. Michigan also sued over the mercury emissions into the lake. Switching to the more expencive process of Gasification would greatly reduce polution, mercury emissions, and water consumption, but it's expencive. If WI wins there are 120 coal plants nation wide waiting to get built. If Illinois wins, those other 120 will need to be reconsidered.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[dattaway]

The natural gas turbines are used to peak the coal powered generators when peak demand quickly accelerates. Much of the natural gas is tapped from fields here in Kansas. Coal is cheap, natural gas is just a backup.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[dattaway]

That guy has a lead foot to get 50mpg out of a Prius. I average 62mpg to work and back. The best mileage is in the city, where I attempt to run on batteries most of the time. The killer is the highway speeds where it takes over 10 horsepower to overcome wind friction. The electric can get the car to cruise around 35-40mph until the battery gets hot and tired and the engine kicks on (to heat it some more!)

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[feijai]

Even if your computations come up suggesting that your wall outlet is a cheaper energy source than gas (and I very strongly doubt this), you didn't include the weight of the batteries.

For the same amount of power, batteries are EXTREMELY heavy compared to gas. Particularly given that, as you're hoping for 3-5 years out of deep cycle packs, you'll be needing rather more than your stated 40 mile capacity in batteries so that you can still hit those necessary 40 miles as the 3-5 year range nears an end.

Electric cars are great for the environment. But I am not convinced they have ever been more cost-efficient than gas cars, unless we get a breakthrough in solar cell technology. There's a reason Detroit crushed all those EV-1s.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

"you didn't include the weight of the batteries"

Err, the weight of your vehicle has no effect on it's cost. And the weight of the vehicle is included in the power consumption (.4kWh/mile). Most electrics weigh in under 2 tons (4000lbs) which is less then most full size SUVs. In fact, you can build a full battery geo on less then 3000lbs. A new Grand Prix V6 (30+ mpg) weight in arround 3600lbs if I recall correctly.

" you'll be needing rather more than your stated 40 mile capacity in batteries so that you can still hit those necessary 40 miles as the 3-5 year range nears an end."

True which is specificly why I chose the numbers 40 miles and 3 year replacements. People can hit 100miles peek on cheap DC systems. Most people can maintain ~60 miles for the first three years of the battery pack's life. But after three years, you're probrably under the 60 mark and quickly closing in on your 40 mile limit. Thus why I used 3 years in the battery replacement yearly costs. If you want to push it 5 years, drop another $150/year off that bill.

"But I am not convinced they have ever been more cost-efficient than gas cars"

I'm sorry simple math eludes you.

"unless we get a breakthrough in solar cell technology"

Due to current limits in photovolataics, there is a theoretical maximum of 30% efficiency. Some of the new nano-tube technology is helping us get closer to that mark, but it's still going to max out at 30% of the light's energy that reaches the planets surface. you're looking at about 1kW per square meter, at 30% efficiency over an 8 hour day you can get about 2.4kwh. So for a square meter of solar cells you might get 6 miles of travel. There are some new technologies being developed to try to widen the range of light that PV cells can use, but I still haven't seen any with > 30% efficiency.

In any case, for solar power it makes much more sence to invest in distributed power generation. Or building solar cells into the roofs of every home. New technology even allows you to use solar shingles, which look similar to traditional shingles, can be layed by standard labor, and are not that expencive. Given a couple of square meters on your house you could easily build up enough of a charge to fill up your car and run much of your in house circuitry, or sell back to the grid.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[bluelip]

Electric can bite my balls.

I drive on the freeway (over 45 MPH). Electric just won't cut it.

Ethanol gets my vote. And about that conersion... Oh, wait? What? No conversion necessary? Oh damn... I apologize, you can keep your car unmodified and still get the benefits.

Sorry, at least google it before posting you troll.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[kat_skan]

Perhaps I'm missing something, but even if you're saving $629/yr in fuel ($1429/yr in gas vs. $800/yr in electricity), it's still going to take almost thirteen years just to recoup the cost of the conversion kit.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

LOL, that was funny!

You want performance? Check out the T-Zero, 0-60 in 3.68 seconds. Tops out at 90 due to a 1 gear tranny.

And enjoy your ethanol, see how well it performs over the winter. And guess how much it costs to farm enough acrage of corn to generate a gallon of ethanol. Ethanol can offset fuel consumption, but it can not replace it. If you're going to go bio fuel, soy-diesel is a much better choice. It doesn't require nitrogen fertalizers, and it can run in more efficient, lessor poluting diesel engins also with out a conversion.

Next time you want to point the troll finger, look up some peer reviewed documents. I can search Google for proof that Bush is a freaking space alien, doesn't make it true.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

Correct, just going out and doing a conversion is not economical. But, if you drive an older car, and are looking to trade it in and buy a newer (used) better fuel efficiency vehicle for $10k (~$200/month), it would be cheaper in the long run to sink the $10k into a conversion kit.

Similar to integrated solar roofing. You'll never make your money back if you tear off a perfectly good roof and install solar shingles. But if you are going to replace your roof anyways, using solar shingles will cost less in the long run.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[bluelip]

>> It doesn't require nitrogen fertalizers,

Thank you for the polite response. I had tunnel vision in regards to ethanol. I should've broadened that to include all ag-based fuls.

I will argue your fertilizer point though. The fertilizer for soybeans isn't any better/worse than that used for corn. Soy is more widely used in the organic market, but in commercial use it isn't that far ahead.

What range does the T-Zero get? Do you have any other info about the transmissions? Doesn't seem like a tranny that has only 1 forward gear is really that much of a transmission at all. are they incorporating some CVT or the like?

BTW, Bush isn't an alien, but I'm having my doubts about Cheney's existance. :)

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[Joe5678]

The batteries are included in the 8 year/100,000 mile warranty (Unless you are in a state that uses California's stricter emission laws, then it is 10 year/150,000 miles)

The batteries are also made of individual replaceable cells, so in theory if a cell goes bad they can replace only that cell.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

"I will argue your fertilizer point though. The fertilizer for soybeans isn't any better/worse than that used for corn. Soy is more widely used in the organic market, but in commercial use it isn't that far ahead."

Soy actually creates it's own nitrogen, is more hearty, uses less water, and all round mops the floor up with corn. A lot of corn farmers will alternate crops (for many reason) but soy is a good choice because it adds nitrogen to the ground with out fertalizer. Also, if Brazil had the farming technology the US does, they could provide enough soy in one year to feed the entire world for 6 years.

The T-Zero (google: TZero AC Propulsion) has 5 prototypes, the first 3 used cheaper batteries, had a 0-60 time of 4.1 seconds and a range of 50-100 miles depending on the driver. The last 2 prototypes had the more expencive Lith Ion batteries. It hit the 3.67 0-60 and had a range of up to 300 miles. All of them could be charged overnight. The tranny is actually a geo-metro with all of the gears removed. They then put a 9:1 reducer gear in and hook the motor up. The AC motor can spin at 9k rpms no problem. Unfortunaltly the first T-Zero concepts sold for ~$125k and the last two went for a cool $1/4 mill. But you can buy the full AC system (minus batteries and tranny) for $25k. A cheap battery pack (FLA) goes for $800-1200, Li Ion packs go for about $8000-12000 though. But if you want to sink $50k+ into a high end performance machine that will out accelerate anything you see in the US, it's a great option. Especially when you compare gas milage. A full 300mile range charge will cost you pennies on the dollar of 300 miles in a C06 corvette.

-Rick

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[ArsonSmith]

My Civic only gets below sticker price when I run the AC and or drive with 3 passangers. Driving through the mountains I have gotten as low as 36MPG. but that is the worst I've ever got. Typically running ac back and forth to work I get 42MPG. In the winter when I don't have to run AC I get from 47 (sticker) to 50.

And my batterys have a 7 year factory warrantee and a 10 year extended warrantee.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

That's good to know. I don't know any Prius drivers, just one friend who has been very disappointed in his honda hybrid. I thought he said the batteries were warentied for 3 years (in Wisconsin)

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[bluelip]

Creates it's own Nitrogen? Dang! Oh wait, you mean converts what nitrogen is available. :)

All of my years farming tells me you're not going to get out of the soil what you don't put back. Crop rotation helps, but if you're harvesting the plants, the soil will need to be replenished. (Yes, I know plants can pull out airborne N2)

How are those vehicles being recharged? What is FLA? (Sorry, but i'm ignorant when it comes to electric vehicles) Is there an easy way to compare mileage w/ electric vehicles? IOW, do they have something along the lines of KWH/mile?

What do the $250k T-Zero's offer that the $25k model don't? What's the battery lifetime on these?

I still don't think any of these vehicles will be able to outperform my 11 year old ride. I'd gladly race any of them. They can select the first half of the race, I pick the second. I drive a YJ. ;)

Rick,
        Thanks again for the courteous responses and useful info. Dump any links you have handy into this thread,

Mike

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

AC Propulsion: http://www.acpropulsion.com/

If you want to race on a paved surface, I'm sure you can find some takers. For some other great electric race vids, check these links: http://chicagotalk.net/forums/showthread.php?t=105 3

"How are those vehicles being recharged?"

Plug it in. The TZero has a gas generator trailer that can increase range on even the cheap batteries have a range of 700 miles. Many people opt for home solar arrays also to provide "off grid" power.

"What is FLA?"

Flooded Lead Acid. IE: Cheap batteries. A 144volt system (standard highend for DC systems) in FLA batteries will likely be close to $1200.

"Is there an easy way to compare mileage w/ electric vehicles?"

The most accurate calculation is BTUs, but that requires plenty of math. I'm lazy and found someone else who had already done the math. DC systems get arround .4kWh/mile and ACs get about .2kWh/mile. My last electric bill was $0.085/kWh which means running a DC electric 30miles would be about $1.02 vs a Gas 30mpg vehicle at about $3.00. Going to an AC system like the one AC Propulsion offers would drop that down to $0.51 per 30 miles.

"What do the $250k T-Zero's offer that the $25k model don't?"

The $25k option is just the motor, charger, control circuitry, regenerative breaking, contactor, etc. No car, no batteries, no tranny, no frame, etc. They can make a tranny for you, but it's about $5-6k. You'd still have to provide either a donor car, or build a tube frame of your own.

"What's the battery lifetime on these?"

Lead Acid (el cheapo) you'll get 3-5 years. LiIons I've heard can last for up to 10years.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[bluGill]

My local co-op is planning a coal plant right now, to be built in about 8 years.

I'd rather they use nuclear, but in this day of Luddites scared of that word, it just isn't worth trying.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[kat_skan]

Ah, yes. That would absorb much of the initial cost. I admit that since I've always looked at this from the perspective of simply wanting to spend less on fuel, I haven't looked too closely at these kits. How would a low-end conversion kit like this perform as compared with something mundane like an old econobox? If you go by the USDOE's numbers[1], a '94 Metro would actually be cheaper still, mileage-wise, and can be had for considerably less than eight grand.

[1] http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/2001cartablef.jsp?i d=10740

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

True. If you can get a 55mpg vehicle for $1000 (rough guess on what a good condition 94 metro would go for), it would take a long time to repay the difference to make an electric cheaper. Likely longer then the life of either vehicle. And a low end el cheap-o DC conversion would probrably perform similarly to a geo metro, with a shorter range.

The issue is oil futures. At some point, world wide demand will out pace world wide supply. Even before that point hits, gas will continue to rise in costs. At $3, a cheap old Geo will be cheaper for a realistic time frame. But what about $5? $7? What if shortages occur? Then the efficiency of the gas engine doesn't matter. But that's all just speculation.

The thing that I'm interested in is that AC Propulsions is rummoring at joining up with Suzuki(?) on the Scion lines to offer a factory full plug in battery powered vehicle in the US. If they can introduce their system into a Scion for under $20k, I think it could totally shake up the compact car market.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[kat_skan]

Sorry, I didn't word that as well as I could have. You'd likely never make up the difference, since up to about $8/gal that Metro is cheaper to run than the electric vehicles. We've already passed the point where it's cost-effective to tap the Canadian oil sands, so I'll be (unpleasently) surprised if gas actually gets that high.

You're right that none of this addresses shortages, though. The only way around that is to not make oneself completely dependant on any one resource--gasoline -OR- electricity.

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[RingDev]

The nice thing about electricity though is that you can make your own. Solar cells, integrated roofing, wind generators, etc.

And a 55mpg vehicle @ a 40mile commute 250 times a year would be $1455/year at $8/gal. Assuming electric also jumped x2 1/3 I would pay 22.7 cents per kWh would still only by $908/year($1308 including 3yr batteries).
At $5 gas would run $909/year. Electric would be $567 (967 w/ 3yr batteries). So bargin basement style, you are better off going for an old super cheap geo metro. But look at the other side costs. An oil change every 6 months will run you $30 or so (if you do it yourself). Yearly maintenance can easily hit $100. And a 12 year old geo will likely have a high milage engine, not to mention exhaust, ignition system, coolant, etc that are specific issues for combustion engines. I would say at $5 you are probrably pretty even given total cost of ownership.

-Rick

Re:40 mile commute? Go Electric!

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, I hadn't noticed that your $800/yr figure included replacing batteries. That does change things. I imagine a significant portion of the cost of these kits must be the usual "early adopter's tax". Perhaps these gas prices will spur enough interest in this sort of tech that it'll drive the prices down a bit. It certainly seems like they won't have to drop much to become appealing to Joe Commuter.

Back to the future

[Deanasc]

I'm waiting for a hover conversion.

Re:Back to the future

[beerman2k]

I'm waiting for a hover conversion.

Don't forget Mr. Fusion!

5 mpg?

[the eric conspiracy]

I'd bet you could get that just with conventional mods - tuning, air filters, bigger exhaust, special camshaft new ingintion computer chips etc.

Re:5 mpg?

[Grab]

More realistically, he could get it by not driving a big fuck-off tank with a big fuck-off engine. But that would be un-American... :-/ Sigh.

Grab.

PS. Yes, I know most SUV owners say "oh, but I need them to get up gravel tracks, in snow, carry stuff, etc". Similarly, most obese people say "I have problems with my glands". Both are self-deluded.

Re:5 mpg?

[the eric conspiracy]

Yes, I know most SUV owners say "oh, but I need them to get up gravel tracks, in snow, carry stuff, etc.

You really didn't read the question, did you?

In this case it actually seems to be true that the owner needs his vehicle to be able to do these sorts of things since the author, at least acccording to his question lives in a remote undeveloped area.

Here is a hint for you - rather than jumping to conclusions and stereotyping people you really should pay attention to what they are saying if you don't want to come off as a total jerk.

Re:5 mpg?

[Grab]

"The sticks" to me doesn't necessarily mean that they're 100% offroad. Nor does it mean that their roads are untouched by snowplough. And here's some news - most SUVs are not significantly better than a regular car on tackling the rough stuff, simply because most are designed for looks and not performance. To the original poster's credit, Jeeps are one of the real performers, but anyone with a Lexus, BMW, Ford Escape, Toyota RAV4 or any similar Barbie crap can forget it. Especially if you've been sucked in by one of the FWD ones instead of a proper 4x4.

More important is having the right tires (a regular car with snow tires or snow chains is a damn sight better off in the snow than any SUV), and more important than that is having the skills to use it properly. The same applies for rough tracks, only there the skills thing is your only get-out. FYI, I hang-glide, and that's taken me up a decent number of rough tracks. So far, I know of two that I wouldn't go up in my car, and one of those isn't legal for car access anyway! ;-) And I'm not a very skilled driver either.

Grab.

Stuff on teh internets!

[Rod Beauvex]

I once saw a website selling these devices that fit on your engine that help take the strain off of it when starting off, supposedly saving on city miles. Anyone ever seen something like that? Any good? It cost about 1800, so I would hope so.

Re:Stuff on teh internets!

[bluGill]

Who knows. Might be, might not. I've seen other such things (not that one though), that looked good until I found the following phase in the how it works section: "ionizes the hydrogen in the fuel". Sent my BS alarm off the scale and I closed my browser. Too bad, I really would love some product that could do what that promissed.

I've seen other devices that work. They don't promise everything, but when you read the how it works section you get something that a mechanical engineer would agree could work. (which until you take it apart is all you have to go by)

BioDiesel?

[hahiss]

Why not try biodiesel? If you're thinking about doing a serious conversion project anyway, I suspect that it might be easier to swap in a diesel engine and convert that to biodiesel than to go hybrid.

Re:BioDiesel?

[big ben bullet]

There's no conversion needed for a diesel engine to run on biodiesel. Biodiesel is processed veggy oil to make it compatible with ordinary diesel engines.

You only need to convert it when you want to run it on raw veggy oil. And that conversion typically only means installing a second fuel tank that can heat the oil to make it a bit thinner (i.e. increase its viscosity).

some real MPG improvement tips

[Anonymous Coward]

The easy option - remove weight:

* roofrack
* rear + passenger seats - if you're always driving solo.
* the spare tire - got a cell phone? got someone who can give you a ride to get your spare if you get a flat? then don't keep it on your vehicle.
* carpeting - this can add up.
* air conditioner - if summers aren't too hot where you live.
* radio + speakers - again, the weight adds up.
* trash that you've littered the interior of your car with, vacuum the dirt out while you're at it and wipe down the dashboard - removing interior dirt won't help mileage, but it'll make you feel better about driving your car.
* anything else you have in, on or under the car that can be removed but is not essential for your safety or for the vehicle to go, remove it!

Switch to:

* road tires (or less extreme offroad tires) correctly inflated with lightweight wheels (note that cheap & simple stamped steel can be lighter than alloys depending on the alloy's construction)
* synthetic engine oil - it'll keep your engine cleaner and running smoother than regular oil.
* higher-flow (and lower resistance) air and oil filters like those from K&N.
* consider trying one of those "engine cleaner" formulas I've seen in the automotive shop (they're typically a gasoline or oil additive that supposedly helps un-gum the inside of your engine - although you may not see the results for 1 or 2 gas/oil cycles) - although I have no idea if they're snake oil or if they can actually help.

Modify your behaviour:

* drive no faster than 55, try to use the brakes as little as possible by keeping an above-average distance from the vehicle in front and driving smoothly.
* don't use cruise control if you can help it (it keeps constant speed not constant throttle and can't account for, say, wanting to keep excess momentum right before going up a hill).
* don't open the windows - SUV bricks are an aerodynamic nightmare, which is only made worse if you open holes in the side.
* if you've got a manual transmission, make sure you drive in the highest gear suitable for the situation, with the lowest engine RPMs and lightest throttle touch possible. When cruising you should be loping along in high gear and low RPM with almost no throttle! Drive smooth, smooth, smooth!

And that's about all I know on squeezing higher mileage out of a vehicle without being a mechanic!

Re:some real MPG improvement tips

[edwdig]

* drive no faster than 55, try to use the brakes as little as possible by keeping an above-average distance from the vehicle in front and driving smoothly.
* don't use cruise control if you can help it (it keeps constant speed not constant throttle and can't account for, say, wanting to keep excess momentum right before going up a hill).

At least from my experiences with my '04 Sentra, I've got to disagree with that. If I go on a long highway trip at 70-75mph with the cruise control on most of the time, I'll get close to 40mpg. If I go about 60-65 without the cruise control, I'll get about 30 mpg, or with the cruise control 31-32.

Cruise control does have the problem you speak of, but it's generally more than made up fo by regulating your speed. You're not going to be able to maintain the speed of your car nearly as well on your own as the cruise control can, so you'll constantly be alternating between lightening up on the gas and hitting it harder, which is worse on your fuel efficiency.

Re:some real MPG improvement tips

[bluGill]

the spare tire Your rescurer will loose more gas than you save if you even get one flat over all the cars you own in your lifetime.

drive no faster than 55. Try 65-70. Most cars (this depends greatly on design) get their best milage at speeds greater than 55. My truck gets better milage towing a boat at 65 than unloaded at 55!

if you've got a manual transmission, make sure you drive in the highest gear suitable for the situation, with the lowest engine RPMs and lightest throttle touch possible. When cruising you should be loping along in high gear and low RPM with almost no throttle! Actually your best efficiency is if your throttle is wide open, at the RPMs where you engine is generating peak torque. Most people are unwilling to put up with the acceleration such a tuning will give you though. (Even my Geo Metro has more power than that)

TDI!

[frn123]

Buy a used small turbodiesel engine for it.

1.9L diesel will have more than enough oomph (unless you're suffering from penis envy) and will move you around with insane mpg.

Cheaper than hybrid. Cleaner than hybrid.

Re:TDI!

[Blkdeath]

Buy a used small turbodiesel engine for it.

Cheaper than hybrid. Cleaner than hybrid.

Cheaper, perhaps, but CLEANER?!?

For the record, he's interested in an SUV because he's out in the country. A TDI isn't exactly SUV-esque.

Re:TDI!

[stu42j]

I've never understood why people like the diesel engines so much. Ok, let's compare a Prius to a Passat TDI (similar in size). According to the EPA:

Average MPG: Prius (47.9) Passat (35.5).
Annual Fuel Cost: Prius ($838) Passat ($1405)
Air Pollution Score: Prius (8-9) Passat (1) (from 0 to 10, where 10 is best)

So, you said:

Cheaper than hybrid. Cleaner than hybrid.

Alright, if this guy buys a TDI engine for his Jeep, he'll spend more on fuel but the engine will probably cost less than a new Prius so I'll give you "cheaper". But how on Earth is a TDI cleaner?

Re:TDI!

[ottawanker]

According to actual drivers (from the EPA website, the Prius gets about 40-48 MPG. A Diesel Golf gets 40-49 MPG, slightly better.

The Diesel Golf is rated at 42 city/49 highway. The Prius is rated 52 city/45 highway.

Also, Diesel fuel is quite a bit cleaner than most people would believe, especially when using low-sulfer fuels.

Re:TDI!

[nmos]

First, many diesel cars get considerably better than 35mpg. If most of your driving is on the highway you'll get similar milage out of a hybrid as a diesel but in stop & go traffic the hybrid will win.

Second, diesels tend to be cleaner than gasoline engines in terms of greenhouse gasses but dirtier in terms of particulates.

Re:TDI!

[thebigmacd]

For the record, he's interested in an SUV because he's out in the country. A TDI isn't exactly SUV-esque.

Neither is Barbie...

Re:TDI!

[Grab]

Cheaper is *the* major factor. Hybrids are way expensive right now.

Cleaner isn't really in there though. Diesels are bad for particulates, and currently there isn't anything forcing people to sort it (although future standards will do).

The ultimate clean engine though would be a diesel-electric hybrid, because the diesel emissions happen at low-efficiency load sites. Run the engine at max efficiency, and you're sorted - this is why trains have been diesel-electric for years, because even with the conversion inefficiencies, the efficiency of diesel at its best point is mindblowing. But the American market won't buy diesel, sadly, due to the disastrous diesels rushed out in the 70s and 80s. Ho hum.

Grab.

Re:TDI!

[arminw]

.... the Prius gets about 40-48 MPG....

I have a Prius and get better than 50mpg very consistently. We also have a Honda Accord hybrid which gets 33-35mpg which is not bad for a roomy comfortable car with a 255hp drive system. We had a VW rabbit diesel which made 55mpg when it was new, but compared to the Prius it was a gutless snail that made it unsafe to pass anything on a two lane road. The Honda will really go when tromped, but I seldom do that.

Re:TDI!

[stu42j]

Which version of the Prius are you looking at? According to the site you linked to, the '05 Prius gets 36 - 58 MPG or an average of 48.0.

And, yes, the Diesel Golf does get good mileage but is smaller than the Prius which is why I used the Passat for comparison. The Golf is classified as a Compact car at 88 ft3 whereas the Prius is a Midsize at 96 ft3.

Re:TDI!

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, let's compare a Prius to a Passat TDI (similar in size).

A Prius and a Passat are similar in size? What planet do you live on? The Prius is smaller than the Jetta!

If you want to compare the Prius to a TDI, compare it to a Jetta or Golf or Beatle, or maybe even a Polo.

According to the EPA: [...]

Interestingly, if you read the online forums, Prius owners consistently get lower than the EPA claims -- often much lower -- while TDI owners often get at or above EPA ratings.

The EPA "pollution scores" seem to assume petroleum diesel fuel; I know many TDI owners, and not one of them runs it on petroleum. This isn't representative, true, but with a diesel you have the *option* of running on cleaner fuel; with gasoline engines, you don't.

But how on Earth is a TDI cleaner?

Compared to gasoline engines, diesels are better at some things, and worse at others. They tend to have more larger particulates (while gasoline engines have more smaller particulates), and they tend to have lower CO2 output. In America, diesels are considered "dirty" because of the large particulates; in Europe, they're considered "clean" because of the low CO2.

In America their reputation is so bad these days that people will use the large particulate count to try to convince you that you are a loser.

For example, many (all?) places in America require regular "emissions tests". These tests measure various things, but never CO2. CO2 is the leading greenhouse gas, and every car puts out (literally) tons of it every year.

A TDI running biodiesel comes close to closing the carbon cycle.

How somebody can call any car that moves by exploding fossil fuels "clean" is beyond me. How they can turn around and call a TDI running vegetable oil "dirty" just boggles my mind.

Re:TDI!

[Anonymous Coward]

Cleaner isn't really in there though. Diesels are bad for particulates, and currently there isn't anything forcing people to sort it (although future standards will do).

Ah, you must be American. (It's OK; nobody's perfect.)

If you were European, you'd probably be saying "Gasoline is really bad for CO2, and currently there's no regulations or limitations on CO2 emissions".

Consider PHEV conversion instead

[Laven]

http://calcars.org/

Conversion to regular hybrid probably will not be worth it when you consider the cost/benefit ratio. However a conversion to PHEV (plugin hybrid electric vehicle) may be well worth the effort. The above site describes this new type of car that allows you to go 30-40 miles in your daily commute off of electricity charged batteries. If you drive longer than that commute, then it behaves like a regular hybrid burning gasoline.

Their earlier conversions were modifying existing non-hybrid cars for PHEV capability, which would be similar to what you are looking for. Despite the benefit of PHEV, it may turn out to be too expensive to be worth it, but you should still look into it.

Re:Consider PHEV conversion instead

[Baloo Ursidae]

Know any place that can do a PHEV conversion to a '95 Kia Sportage? I could make it to work and halfway home on a charge then.

Solar Powered Hydrogen Generator?

[mOoZik]

Even if you were to cover your entire car roof in solar cells, it would still not be an efficient way to generate hydrogen. Even if it is meant to stay in your garage and generate hydrogen, it still would not be ideal.

The real breakthrough will come from companies that are doing innovation, not applying inefficient techniques to prevailing problems. The said company has developed safe hydrogen storage pellets, which is just the kind of thing that is needed to solve the hydrogen density probem without resorting to ridiculous pressures and expensive materials. Now, develop cheap fuel cells that don't use a lot of platinum and other exotic materials!

Re:Solar Powered Hydrogen Generator?

[Halfbaked Plan]

Why would I cover my car roof? I'd cover the garage's roof. And if that wasn't enough area I could dedicate a quarter acre or so of the pasture out behind the house to it.

Re:Solar Powered Hydrogen Generator?

[mOoZik]

The cost of that alone is very prohibitive. Also, high-compression hydrogen in your trunk or wherever is not safe. It's just a stupid way of attempting to solve a problem.

Re:Solar Powered Hydrogen Generator?

[rcw-work]

Why would I cover my car roof? I'd cover the garage's roof. And if that wasn't enough area I could dedicate a quarter acre or so of the pasture out behind the house to it.

For a large installation such as the side of a house, you may find it cheaper and more productive to use tracking mirrors (heliostats) to focus sunlight to concentrate heat to drive a turbine or sterling engine (see Sandia's Solar Two) instead of spending the money on less-efficient solar cells. Engines, while not cheap, are usually at least 30% efficient, while only the most expensive solar cells are that efficient (most are about 12% efficient). And more/larger mirrors are cheap.

Hibrid SUV?

[fdawg]

*RANT* My question is "Why bother?".

Why bother buying an SUV at all?

Do you really need to be in the sticks? You're online and you read slashdot. That, in and of itself, proves to me that wherever you are, you have decent connectivity and probably go online often. The two (slashdot and the sticks) are mutually exclusive.

Benefit of the doubt time: Maybe you're a contractor or environmental scientist who needs to get to very remote places often. Well since, in this country, our major roadways are PAVED, I'm going to go as far as to say you spend 80 percent of your time on relatively level and suspension friendly average run of the mill ROADS. A place were an SUV is not the only mode of transport. You could (wait for it...) buy a CAR for every day travel and use your SUV only when needed. Thats still cheaper and more environmentally friendly than your hairbrained hibred SUV. A hibred SUV will never have better gas mileage than an ULEV like a civic.

Chances are you're just a selfish individual who needs to feel superior because mommy said you're special and aren't enjoying the anal pleasure Dubya and Haliburton are giving you every time your at to the pump.

I say its time to suck it up. You dug your hole. Now lie in it.

*/RANT*

Re:Hibrid SUV?

[Anonymous Coward]

Im assuming Mommy never said you were special...?

Second car

[usrusr]

Dunno if your usage profile allows for this, but in most cases one should definitely consider getting a light and fuel efficient street car for the usual ways to the supermarket, work etc and keep the old jeep exclusively for the serious "in the sticks" kind of stuff. guess off-road abilities could even benefit from not having to care for street abilities so much.

smart fortwo cdi

[peterbrowne]

The most obvious answer to your question is to have a Canadian friend buy a smart car for you and have them register it in their province. The official mileage specs are: 56 MPG. One even got 100 MPG. www.thesmart.ca www.smartforum.ca www.100mpg.ca all good websites to look at!

Re:smart fortwo cdi

[peterbrowne]

Correct Links:

http://www.thesmart.ca/
http://www.smartforum.ca/
http://www.100mpg.ca/

Buy a Subaru

[Anonymous Coward]

You'd probably be better off just buying a used Subaru.

it worked for revolvers

[E8086]

When the cartidge became popular back in the late 1800s it was cheaper to have your gun converted to use cartridges, from ball and powder, then buying a new one. But modern vehicles are a little more complex. It would probably require a change/redesign of the entire engine, if it's at 105+k miles just replace the entire engine block, and may not be possible with the limited room offered by jeeps. If an autobody shop exists that offers those conversions I wouldn't expect it to be cheap.

Austin EV

[blindseer]

When I lived in Texas I came across a group of electric vehicle enthusiasts. Check out the website for Austin Area Electric Auto Association. They give some pointers on conversions, give some suppliers of parts, and show off what people in the area have done.

Long live my used cars.

[theapodan]

Jeep has really gone downhill, the auto transmission in recent jeeps really blows.

I have a jeep grand wagoneer with the old amc/chrysler tranny and its worked with heavy towing loads without a sweat. I change the filter once a year, and it doesn't even show metal shavings, this is a tranny ~150,000 miles old.

With the new jeep "commander" coming out, representing "urban style," which is synonomous with "bling bling" in the ads, I'd never buy another jeep again. Jeep used to make cars that were good dependable vehicles that would go where you needed them to, now they're status symbols.

I wish that AMC hadn't gone, those were the heyday of Jeep. And the AMC cars were pretty neat themselves. I saw an AMX about 3 weeks ago at a car show, what a neat sportscar.

Of course, none of this matters now. Cars feel cheap. They used to be made of steel, iron, and leather, now their plastic, like tupperware.

The only thing that will change the auto industry is for me to crack myself out on meth until I can not longer be sad that cars are total pieces of shit now.

That having been said, motorcycles are now the only way to get a real chunk of steel under you.

Long live my used cars.

Yes, really no problemo

[n9hmg]

It's probably not legal,
I don't know about full removal, but I have the fuses for my airbags in the glovebox. I always wheel with everybody belted in, but an airbag detonation would be worse than useless at low speed, and this way, my son gets to sit up front.
It's funny to me to see this idea brought up with a Jeep as the subject vehicle. I've never had anything to do with a Grand, but even though most offroad accessories purchased for them are for purely aesthetic reasons, I have seen some of them, particularly the older ones, which still had live axles, do some competent manoevering. Anyway: The architecture of a traditional body-on-frame engine/transmission/transferase/driveshaft/liveaxl e 4WD vehicle lends itself to just such modifications. If I ever implement the specific thing I have in mind, you'll see it on ROF, and maybe even on /..

Mechanical advice for Chryslers

[chrisbro]

Offtopic, but if you find that you keep the Jeep and deal with the transmission (I'm assuming it's automatic), here's an item of interest: my father owned a '94 Chrysler Lebaron (Chrysler owns Jeep, as well), and went through three transmissions on the car before he realized that the way they designed things, the transmission fluid gets too hot and therefore destroys the transmission in just 50,000 miles or so. I'd look into that problem, seeing if your model shares the same problem. We fixed the problem with a cheap radiator for the transmission.

Re:Mechanical advice for Chryslers

[brakk]

So, you're saying he's put over 200,000 miles on that car? By that time everything else should be falling off the car anyway.

Re:Mechanical advice for Chryslers

[chrisbro]

Yes, he keeps repairing the car himself. Laid off from Worldcom before they tanked and hasn't found an IT job since.

Right tool for the right job

[SPY_jmr1]

Soo... you're comparing a 10-15 year old UNturbocharged diesel which may or may not use direct injection with a pair of modern hybrids?

Here is some advice from someone who has driven both a 05 prius extensivly along with a 02 VW TDI (which was admittedly electronically upgraded to european power): The hybrid can and will do better on mileage. The VW will MAUL it on acceleration, along with most other standard cars. (a modern corvette could match it off of a stop, but not much else,)

ANYWAY, you know, grain of salt, not scientific...Just remember, when comparing apples and oranges, don't use rotten apples to make the oranges look better.

Re:Right tool for the right job

[arminw]

.....The VW will MAUL it on acceleration....

The VW may out-accelerate the Prius, but I suspect that my Honda Accord 6cyl Hybrid will leave the VW looking at the tail lights every time from a standing start. The Prius has only a 1500cc engine whareas the Honda is 3000cc. A turbo at least traditionally has always taken some time to reach decent acceleration. The old Mercedes 300SD turbo I had would be slow to get going, but once running would stampede up the long mountain grades we have here in Southern Oregon, keeping up with or passing all but the biggest muscle cars.

Re:Right tool for the right job

[SPY_jmr1]

I don't see your arguement... You're trying to say that while the VW "may" out-accelerate the Prius, the Honda will win all (which it may, i've not driven one to compare the two) because the prius' *gas* *HALF* of its powerplant is half the displacement of the Honda's.

The Prius uses the electric half for nearly ALL of its "Off The Line" power.

As you say about turbochargers, they normally take a while to spool up, yes.

But the turbo that the new(er) VW's use is rather atypical... It is a variable vane turbocharger, with a output of 14-18 psi, which is far more then about any other in the engine displacment class (1900-2000 CC).

And i'm curous how the comparison between a 300SD and a TDI|PRIUS|HONDA'BRID is valid. It's a diesel, but that's about it... It's older, heavier, and an entirely different make of car.

Semi trucks are diesels too, but I never said they would have outstanding preformance from a stoplight either.

TDI's have no fangs

[SaDan]

I'm sorry, but TDI cars are slow, slow, slow off of the line compared to just about anything else on the road.

I don't have any problems getting around the new Golfs and Passats after a toll booth, all the while they're blowing black smoke, trying to get up to speed.

I drive an '88 Honda Civic LX with 273,000 miles on it. It gets 40-42mpg average per tank right now (it'll go down a little in the winter). I do 90% highway driving.

I LOVE diesels, but you're very much mistaken on the straight-line performance of the new TDIs. Tweak them, they'd be OK. Stock, they're very slow cars indeed.

Re:TDI's have no fangs

[SPY_jmr1]

*sighs*

Please re-read my post, there in it, i said I have driven a TDI extensivly, (as my primary transportation) and not just for a little while.

Yes, you are correct, many many of the TDI's sold are slow off of the line. This is for a reason, and I forgot about it: 90% of the VW diesels sold in NA (I do not know the figures for other regions, sorry) are automatic transmissions. The one I owned was a manual.
There is a large difference in preformance.

I never claimed it the fastest car on the road, but frankly, a lot of people who have them don't know how to drive the things. Most drivers don't know/care that the torque peak is at 1900rpm, and the HP peak is at 3750. I fully admit that the VW diesels have to be driven precicely to get (good)preformance out of them.

But please don't tell me i'm a liar, esspecialy without having actually read my post; Mine WAS chipped, but it still was a quite decent car any which way.

SPY

PS: as for the smoke, it's mostly regional. Until next year, USAian diesel fuel is mostly crap. Some places are less crap then others, which goes right into the ammount of black smoke.

Re:TDI's have no fangs

[SaDan]

Well, don't think I don't know how to drive diesels either. I've driven a few of the new TDIs for test drives, and I used to drive plenty of diesel powered vehicles on my parents farm, including passenger cars and trucks. I know about low-end torque, manual versus automatic transmissions, etc.

Even with the manual trans, it's still a vehicle that makes all of its torque at lower RPMs (although the torque curve is nice on those TDIs to allow for SOME revs), and as you point out, must be driven with precision in order to get the performance you speak.

You're misrepresenting TDI diesels with claims of performance that 90% (your number) of said cars will most likely never achieve. I know how you feel, because personally, I'd prefer it if everyone switched to diesel powered cars and trucks. Great efficiency, simple technology, and normally a longer life with diesel engines.

I know of an old 1977 Chevy step-side pickup with a twin-turbo setup on a 6.2L V8 diesel that did 9 seconds in the 1/4 mile on regular diesel fuel. That doesn't mean I think all GM 6.2L powered trucks are quick (very far from it).

Black smoke happens with gas and diesel engines any time you apply the maximum amount of throttle under a high load. It very little to do with how clean the fuel is.

Re:TDI's have no fangs

[SPY_jmr1]

I can agree with you on the main points, truth someplace in the middle, i'm guessing.

The fuel, you're right, it isn't a matter of sulfur content (which is most of the "crud" in the diesel), but the cetane rating of it which tends to be subpar. The black smoke produced when the engine is loaded is due to the incomplete combustion of the fuel delivered to the combustion chambers. (The smoke is mostly partially burned fuel, is it not?)

So, if the fuel is of a standard that burns correctly, the smoke is minimized/eliminated.

If i remember correctly, the TDI's are designed for a minimum of 47 cetane, but the USA minimum standard is only... I want to say 43, but 45 also comes to mind. Either way, it's below specs for the engine, which causes a lot of the so called "problems" with diesels.

Only one time have I seen a pump marked with it's rating on it, but it still wasn't a absolute; there aren't any rules that say that the diesel has to be anything but the minimum, unlike gasoline and octane.

I bet a gas engine would run pretty bad if you fed it 84 octane gas, too.

SPY

PS: How do you get black smoke out of a gas engine, anyway?Only kind that comes to mind is blue oil smoke from bad rings... Anyway...

Re:TDI's have no fangs

[SaDan]

Here's a link to a site that explains how to read "smoke signals" from gasoline and diesel engines:

http://www.co.missoula.mt.us/EnvHealth/AirQ/Smokin g%20Vehicles/svindex.html/

Smoke has nothing to do with sulfur content, just the health of your engine, really. If it's not tuned properly, it's gonna smoke all the time.

I don't know how correct their analysis for black smoke from diesel engines is, though. It's probably true for a vehicle that smokes constantly.

As for cetane ratings, I've seen pumps that advertise 50 cetane fuel at truck stops. I think I've seen even higher than that, but I wouldn't swear to it.

Re:TDI's have no fangs

[SPY_jmr1]

I'll take a look at the link when i have some more time, thanks. I also corrected myself, sulfur != smoke, (but sulfur does equal bad fuel, or bad fuel,emissions-wise) What I was trying to say about the pumps and the labels was like this: In the US, the agency that regulates things like this (is it the weights and measures bureau? I think it's something like that), such as markings on gas and diesel pumps, and calibrating the guages and such, while the requirements for octane in gasoline are very strict, the requirements for cetane in diesel are not. All it has to be is over a threshhold, which is about 40, i beleive, and it's fit for sale, even if the pump claims it to be of a higher grade,they do not require and/or do not inforce that the pump dispence what it claims. Hopefully things change next year with ULSD fuel.^_^

Re:TDI's have no fangs

[SPY_jmr1]

Gah, goddamn HTML mode...

here it is indented...

I'll take a look at the link when i have some more time, thanks.

I also corrected myself, sulfur != smoke, (but sulfur does equal bad fuel, or bad fuel,emissions-wise)

What I was trying to say about the pumps and the labels was like this: In the US, the agency that regulates things like this (is it the weights and measures bureau? I think it's something like that), such as markings on gas and diesel pumps, and calibrating the guages and such

While the requirements for octane in gasoline (labeling and actual content) are very strict, the requirements for cetane in diesel are not.

All it has to be is over a threshold, which is about 40, i believe, and it's fit for sale, even if the pump claims it to be of a higher grade,they do not require and/or do not inforce that the pump dispence what it claims.

Hopefully things change next year with ULSD fuel.^_^

Re:TDI's have no fangs

[SaDan]

Yup, get rid of the sulfur, let's start modernizing some of these diesel engines. Direct injection, no sulfur, and turbos for everyone!

LPG

[Anonymous Coward]

In the UK you could get your vehicle converted to run on liquified gas, which is stored in a cylinder in your boot (trunk). Low emissions, more efficient and cheaper fuel.

The modification leaves the vehicle capable of running on its original fuel, and uses the original engine, transmission and fuel system.

PP.

Hybrid != Electric

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do all the responders assume that hybrid is synonomous with electric? Hybrid is literally the combination of two or more propulsion (fuel) technologies. A hybrid solution does not HAVE to include either a petrol or electric engine.

Paul

Poor baby!

[Anonymous Coward]

I almost feel sorry for you but, frankly I don't give a shit.

My Escalade is so roomy and has lots of creature comforts. The techno gadgets are cool too CD, DVD, satellite radio, heated leather seats, multi-zone airconditioning, nice. The power is awesome, I can haul my 30 foot boat up steep hills, no sweat.

As for the "environmental devastation" that I am creating? I don't see any devastation. And, for those that will pose it, "Global Warming" as a man made event is horseshit.

Now gas recently went past $3.50 per gallon. (I use Hightest in my baby because I want to maintain its power and durability.) Sure, I'd rather not spend $65.00 for a tank of gas but, it still isn't a big deal to me. You see, I don't subscribe to this free everything, communist bullshit mentality that most Slashdotters suffer from. I got a real job that pays real money and lots of it. $60.00 twice a week for the comforts of the Escalade is nothing. Especially when it costs $500 or more to fill up the boat on Saturday and there's no way in hell that I'm giving that up.

Sucks to be you I guess. Just don't stop short in your TDI or Prius or whatever tree-hugger-mobile you drive because if I'm on my cell, I might drive right over you and with the Escalade's suspension, I wouldn't even feel it.

Chevy Truck

[Anonymous Coward]

Chevy Truck with a big engine. The only way to travel. Crushing hybrids with the greatest of ease...

If you're serious about the environ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Never, never, never buy a new car. The materials and energy required to produce a new car far outweigh any efficiency advantages they may have over an older car. Keep the old Jeep if possible, or buy a used replacement if that works better for you.

Performance

[koopero]

I see where you're coming from, man. The old Cherokees were solid vehicles before marketing idiots turned SUVs into yuppie fashion accessories. Although I don't know of anyone who does the type of converison you're talking about, I can sure see the advantage of it. If you look at it strictly from a fuel effieciency versus money issue, it probably doesn't make sense. However, I think there's a lot of potential for hybrid conversions for performance reasons as well. If the system was set up right, after everything the internal combustion was putting out, there'd still be another 50-100 horses coming out of the electric. Even if the conversion added another few hundred pounds, I think the power to weight ratio would work out better. It's too bad these douchebag Prius things are giving hybrid a bad name among 'car people', because there's real potential for hybrid technology as a horsepower boost as well as a planet saver.

Butane Gas

[moj0e]

Here in Brazil people have been focusing their efforts in making natural gas/gasoline hybrids instead of electric hybrids. They use (which I assume is butane) natural gas along with gasoline. (they can switch to either type of fuel with a press of a button) It has become so popular, that there are gas stations who only sell butane.

Probably not a practical solution in the US, but... it leads to futher thinking : ) (maybe)

FFV

[guroove]

How about a Flex Fuel Vehicle conversion? I know they exist, and that it's pretty simple. All it entails is replacing the fuel tank, some modifications to the fuel delivery system, and a reprogramming (or replacement) of the computer. It allows your car to run on any mix (up to 95% ethanol) of gasoline and ethanol.

Doh!

[SaDan]

Take off the trailing slash to make that link work. Sorry.