Reality check- hybrids, fuel efficiency

Hmmmm. UK Imperial gallon is 10% larger than the US gal. So a my HCH getting 50mpg is the equivalent of 55mpg in the UK. Add to that the emissions - being ULEV puts 50% less CO2 into the atmosphere. Compared to the typical 20mpg US car that is 5 times less emissions.

It might not save the planet - but I sure wish everyone was driving hybrids right now.

And lets not forget the smart (now available in Canada) is also a 3 litre car and has the best milage in North America for a conventional engine.

Yeah, but I don't live in the UK, or anywhere in Europe. Hybrids are the best thing going so far in the US, so thats where my money is going.

And I fail to see how marketing hybrid technology is going to help SUV sales in the slightest. Sure, it might improve their image, but if I was looking for an SUV, I probably wouldn't give 2 rats' a$$e$ if they offered hybrid cars or not. And people who are looking for hybrid cars probably don't care what SUV's are offered (except in the case of ppl who want both).

If anyone is trying to slight the government and the public, its probably GM. They're installing a kinda-sorta-almost-fake hybrid system into a few of their cars, but it's not truly a hybrid technology because the electric motors won't be pushig the car much, if at all. The motor is really there to facilitate the use of the "auto engine stop" feature that is just a neat side-effect of today's hybrids.

Toyota and Honda are doing a fine job leading the hybrid cause, and kudos to them for not only offering the first hybrids in the states, but also for forking out enough money to have their production lines reworked to accommodate the hybrid technologies. Also, kudos to them for spurring the US manufacturers into high gear in getting more fuel efficient vehicles on the road. Kudos to them for making not only fuel-efficient vehicles, but also very clean vehicles. Kudos to them for adding extremely revolutionary new technologies to their product line with no knowledge of how the public would accept it. They deserve every penny of profit they make from hybrid sales, and I just pray that they use some of that profit to fund research into still better systems.

Give it time? Sure. But they are using this hybrid technology to push cars through that are not really raising our average fuel economy much.

The Accord might be a nice car but it is not that much more fuel efficient than the regular Accord. Some of these hybrids they have comming out aren't even real hybrids (Saturn Vue with the integrated starter motor- a very good feature but not a hybrid). Hybrid is just becomming a branding name that's essentially meaningless.

And an SUV or truck might not be the most fuel efficient choice, regardless of what is under the hood. People haven't been looking around at cars much, but there are plenty of cars with lots of interior room and good fuel economy. The Toyota Matrix will get 36 miles per gallon on the highway, can come with AWD, and it's not a hybrid, but it does have as much interior room as a small SUV. The Scion cars also have alot of room for small cars Even a Dodge Magnum with the basic V-6 engine will do twice as good as driving around a Ford Explorer.

Some people bring up safety as a reason to buy an SUV, but that is also mostly BS. Truck based vehicles really don't perform that well in most real-world crash tests, not as well as some people are lead to believe. Look at the Insurance Institutes crashes for trucks and SUV's. The IIHS uses very brutal tests that are more "real world" than the tests the government does, where only a fraction of collisions are truely fully head-on. They are littered with poor and average ratings. The Ford F-150 in particular got very bad crash ratings, the Ranger only got average, and the Dodge Durango also got an average (there are many more). So just what is so good about driving around something that looks like a tough truck? They did a test where they smashed a Mini into the front of an F-150, and the dummies in the Mini did better than the dummies in the Ford.

Some of these trucks and SUV's are not offering any more protection than a smaller car, not really that much more useful carrying capacity, but they will cost more to fuel thanks to the heavier weight and larger engines.

I would have the same problems, BTW, with putting a large V-6 or V-8 diesel engine in a truck or SUV, selling those in large numbers, and calling that "fuel efficiency".

The only people who need trucks or SUV's are people who are going to use them to actually haul things- routinely. Groceries or kids don't count.

WE WASTE SO MUCH! I think an important point needs to be made here on driving habits. I can only speak about Americans because this is where I drive. Since I ordered my Escape Hybrid and started reading about them, I made a major change in my driving habits.

People own SUV's for different reasons just like people who own fast sports cars, Vans, trucks and small cars. Money, image, noise, repair, fuel, use and many other reasons are why they select a certain vehicle.

Look around, most Americans are living in the fast lane. If the stress or car accidents don't kill us, the pollution will.

"REALITY CHECK - HYBRIDS, FUEL EFFICIENCY" A good title. For me, I had a real reality check on why I was spending so much money on gas. It was my driving habits. I took off fast at lights and was fighting to stay in front of the slow pokes that would delay my time on the road. Time was my enemy on the road.

My Hybrid has changed my driving habits. Best therapy anyone could give someone with bad driving habits. When I drive now, I see the madness on the road. I was that madness and wasted gas and polluted to the hilt. No more, I now get better MPG than the EPA ratings.

Hybrids are addicting and good for everyone till something better comes along.

I like to see an energy balance break down before I drop my scepcism about hybrid cars. Despite several requests on bloggers' sites nobody ever provided me one.
Hybrid cars are in the end powered by their combustion engine and have to overcome the energy losses from their electric charge/store/discharge/propel driveline. (at best an efficiency ratio of 13%. So 85%plus of the energy generated by the combustion engine to enable the electric powerline IS WASTED !!!!!)
On top of that comes extra weight for the batteries.
All those losses have to be offset by 1) regeneration of brake energy and 2) more optimal running zone of the combustion engine.
Can't believe that it makes sense. Those good EPA numbers could have been derived by running a car with full batteries in the 20 (or so) minute cycle the test takes. At least they should test them with empty batteries too and average.
You can also make a traditional car more fuel saving by applying certain aspects of some hybrids. Like underpowered engines, high pressure tires, narrow treads, (gas-)engine turn-off at each stand-still. However, the discomforts accepted in hybrids are commercially viable in traditional cars. So in some way we're also comparing apples and oranges.
I therefore wouldn't be surprised if hybrid are just a passing fad. Just good marketing by the predominently Japanese manufacturers until somebody really exposes the weaknesses in the logic of the concept. Nobody has been able to find a perpetuum mobile as yet !!!!

"I like to see an energy balance break down before I drop my scepcism about hybrid cars. Despite several requests on bloggers' sites nobody ever provided me one."

Frank, I guess your skeptical about Hybrids as far as I can follow you here. I'm not sure a "bloggers' site" can answer your question, what ever that is. You make alot of assumption about Hybrids, the EPA, Marketing by the Japanese and logic of the concept of Hybrids.

Alot of people though the earth was flat at one time. Now, Tim just pointed out that better MPG is what he gets with his Hybrid in tring to answer your question.

You don't believe in Hybrids and you want answers, right! About your fully charged battery theory and the EPA. I can drive my Escape Hybrid with a fully charge battery at 30 MPH on elec. only for 1.6 miles before the engine starts and has to charge the battery. The engine charges the battery for about the same distance to have another fully charged battery. Say I got 30MPG with the engine pushing the car and charging the battery at the same time. That would mean I'm getting 60 MPG. Now the EPA sets city driving at 36 mpg. I can get 40mpg and the engine is not broke in yet.

Your high tire presure suggestion is good but what about safety and traction? Narrow treads? What about plaining in the rain. Marketing Japanese? Not much marketing, only waiting list from what I see. Logic? saving gas and the environment is a good logic I think.

Hope I answered your question.

Frank asks "how can a hybrid be more efficient than the driveline upon which it is based?"

Fair question. The answer is that ultimately it isn't, of course. However, the hybrid has a number of tricks up its sleeve that allow it to capture more of the energy than a conventional car with the same engine would. Regenerative braking is the most obvious example of this. However, Prius and its related designs can also capture additional power from the engine when it's being run at less than peak output by siphoning off that energy to the battery (or to the traction motor). Since gasoline engines are more efficient at or near their peak output than they are at lower outputs, this is more efficient than a conventional auto which would just run the engine at a less efficient RPM/load.

There's also the factor that a hybrid's gasoline engine is smaller than an otherwise identical conventional car's would be. Because the eletric motor can assist with peak power requirements, the engine can be sized closer to the average power requirements of the vehicle instead of the peak power requirement.

At a given vehicle size and performance level a well designed hybrid will therefore always be more efficient than an otherwise identical conventional car.

Frank, I agree about the thin tire theory and I'm sure most here would agree. I took your original statement that you thought that having thinner groves (threads) in the tire would somehow improve mileage. Boy, you sure jumped hard on that issue and not any of the main issues discussed. Do you work for Dodge or GM?

Thanks everybody who responded to my initial blog and follow ups. You're all great and have helped to focus my thoughts.
Since I was looking for more scientific "beef" about the subject I turned to university web pages.
Good stuff there. Still several questions left which I will take up with the authors.
If you're interested, here are some interesting sites that I found in a quick search.
http://web.mit.edu/chemistry/deutch/policy/65HybridCarsNow2004.pdf,
http://greet.anl.gov/publications.html

While I don't own a hybrid Civic, I've owned a 97 Civic HX since purchased new 8 years ago, and my parents have a 97 Civic LX. While the driving conditions are different (they're on the east coast with 35-40mph city limits and 65mph highway, I'm in AZ with 40-45mph city limits and 75mph highway) it's still roughly comparable.

My parents have reported that their LX will usually get 35-38mpg in mostly highway cruising, which seems in line with it's 32/38 rating. My HX will get anywhere from low 30's in heavy, dense city traffic to high 30's for easy going suburban traffic. I'll typically see low 40's when cruising at 65-70mph for trips and usually 36-38 for 75mph trips.

If you're driving in mainly lower speed limit highway conditions, such as the 65mph highways that seem to be common on the east coast, then if you compare to the Civic LX at 37mpg or so, your 53 would be 43% better. If you compared to my HX's 42mpg or so for highway trips around 65mph, then you're still seeing about 26% better mileage, which is pretty impressive.

One other link:

There is a useful comparison of the civic versus the civic-hybrid on page seven of this document, showing MPG, acceleration, cargo space, etc.:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/tech/TechSnapCivic_Final.pdf

Is it just you? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe it is the way you drive, or the speed you drive, or maybe it is just your environment (cold temps, bad commute). All of those things make a major difference in mileage, no matter what kind of car or truck you drive.

Or maybe there is something amiss with the car?

You can visit the GreenHybrid database to see a lot of folks who enter their mileage for the Honda Civic Hybrid. I think the average mpg is around 46, with the range going from 38 to 60. There is one regular poster who gets around 38 mpg there -- you might have similar circumstances with him.

My personal experience on my six-mile city commute is now (springtime) about 45 mpg, and on the freeway it's 50 or better. For whatever reason, I think I'd have to be dragging Rosanne Barr or a couple Oakland Raiders to get below 40 mpg. :-)

Great mileage!

You can find the greenhybrid database at http://www.greenhybrid.com/. Note that I'm not advocating one web site over another -- obviously this hybridcars site is loaded with phenomenal articles and information -- but over there at greenhybrid they have a place where you can enter miles, gallons of gas, comments, driving conditions, etc.

At 58.2 mpg you would be tied for fourth, out of 87 cars. :-) Top mpg is 58.7.

I am at 911.4 miles and counting on one tank of gas. The meter is reading 70.0 mpg.

Thanks Kip, and I definitely agree with you. I think the real-time mileage readout can make almost anyone energy concious. It makes driving like playing a video game. My other car is a V-8 Dodge Durango, and I even catch myself driving it like the hybrid in some respects. I don't know why all cars don't come with the real-time mileage readout, and auto-stop. I think those 2 things could really help boost gas mileage/conservation and cut air pollution nation-wide.

By the way, I bought gas today before I ran out on the road (although I had a gas can in the trunk just in case). My trip meter was at 945.6 and 70.0 mpg. Certainly my best trip ever.

Bob

Kip, yes I read your blog... but most of that stuff you are talking about is not exclusively hybrid technology. Unless you mean hybrid is a "package of fuel efficient technologies".

Most Honda and Toyota engines use variable valve timing right now. Electric power steering and/or variable hydraulic power steering are used on a few cars now and will be more common in 2006 and onwards, and it probably accounts for substantial savings in fuel economy for the HCH (probably about 5 percent increase). Low rolling resistance tires are definitely not hybrid technology- I have some on my current car, and again, if you use them will increase your fuel economy by about 5 percent.

The biggest reason that hybrids save fuel- they have small engines and low acceleration. Try convincing most people they don't need all that horsepower- it's hard to do. People invariably want more. My VW Jetta diesel, or the average Toyota Corolla/Prius, Civic, etc., accelerates about as fast as a sportscar did 30-40 years ago, but for alot of people, that's not good enough. They want 8 seconds 0-60, 6 seconds 0-60... in FAMILY SEDANS! This is what's really ridiculous. Cars so overpowered they need traction control to keep the tires from squealing and spinning.

If you need a 0-60 of less than 10 seconds to go pick up your kids at school, or go pick up some Starbucks or whatever... you need a reality check. Maybe if American drivers weren't so addicted to weaving through traffic, passing on the right, jackrabbit starts, tailgating, and all those other bad driving behaviors, they wouldn't want all that wanton horsepower. (they don't know the meaning of slug... not until they've been in a VW Rabbit or a Mercedes diesel... now that's slow, but amazingly enough, people survived just fine on those kinds of cars).

I'm glad to find a place where people are discussing the pros and cons of various fuel efficient technologies. I was not able to read through all of the comments made, but I am wondering about hybrid technology that combines current electric (toyota/honda) tech. with diesel. Is this around the corner? Also, in terms of fuel efficiency, please help me understand how EPA can list the Prius at 60/51 mpg city/hwy when everyone I've talked to, including my father who owns a 2004, averages in the mid 40s. I certainly understand that many other factors contribute to mileage (i.e., driving habit, tire pressure, speed...). And certainly mid 40s isn't too shabby, but what does it say about mileage estimates accross the board if the prius average mileage is 10 mpg less than EPA estimates. Perhaps I'm naive. I've already read somewhere that the new Honda Accord hybrid will likely get no better gas mileage on average than it's counterpart combustion-only sister.

All good points above but I'm not sure if there really is a negative for Toyota.

Smart Marketing, Gee Whiz Technology, Creating a Market ....

If this is considered bad, then Intel, Apple, Dell, HP, Texas Instruments, Microsoft and every other technology company selling us unnecessary junk should be relegated to social purgatory.

Personally, I bought a Prius because it is an elegant efficient design and it has more functionality than your regular car (hatch back).

As far as the other stuff I just took the fuel savings and stuck them together with all the cost considerations and in the end decided to buy Toyota because I see a lot of old ones still on the road and the Prius because it is the second generation of the next best thing, like my DVD handicam. Oh, and like with my handicam, what I was replacing had become non-functional economically. With the handycam, I determined 10 minute clips were what I wanted so the direct to DVD system was OK ... the same kind of considerations when looking at cars and deciding to buy a Prius.

Hybrid technology is a good option, but it is probably more important to change the general public's attitudes about driving cooperatively rather than competitively. Most auto and truck commercials stress power, speed, and aggressive driving behavior, and actually belittle those who choose better fuel economy. I have a 1998 Saturn SL1, which I bought for $3400 in July 2004, and have averaged 35 MPG. Recently, after changing spark plugs, fully inflating the tires, and going on a long trip, I got over 45 MPG. It has over 100,000 miles and runs fine, with enough power to accelerate safely and exceed any posted legal speed limit. Hybrids are presently too expensive for me to consider. I like the technology, but overall energy conservation must come from a change in driving attitudes and simple, common-sense vehicles.

you bring up again a reason why EVERY car in usa should be provided with a mileage gage. that feedback alone will likely lift most cars 2 to 5 MPG.

no hybrid required to get these easy gains.

see ya

steve

We would drive a lot less .. and use a lot less fuel... if we all lived closer to work and to each otehr. I bet the per-person fuel consumption of somebody living in downtown Boston or New York is very low, compared with somebody driving 2 hours to and from work. Americans have decided not to live in cities anymore; they want rural areas with bigger yards and safer neighborhoods, and they will pay to the nose to get them. I will make an uneducated guess that most Europeans have very short commutes. If somebody has a short commute, they would walk or bike to work or to the store more often, and the fuel efficiency of their vehicle would matter less. And if you live in a rural area, it isnt unreasonable to use a pickup for commuting, since you will need it. Just consider that most people must pay 500-1000 a year to insure each vehicle, so having an additional car with additional costs to save 500 or 800 a year on gas doesnt make financial sense. How many 4-door pickups do we see owned by residents of a downtown metro areas? Parking, costs, and ease of use of public transit discourage it.

Now, if the cost to purchase and maintain and insure and fuel an additional hybrid or electric car was notably LESS than the cost of just paying for extra fuel for the family utility truck, then things might chage. I have a hunch that even at $100 a barrel we still wont be there.

Solve the root problems of urban sprawl and out of control insurance costs in the United States, and you will be playing a part in "Saving the planet".

"Americans have decided not to live in cities anymore; they want rural areas with bigger yards and safer neighborhoods, and they will pay to the nose to get them"

I'm not sure about it being more expensive but you do site some other reasons for our rural home. A few years ago our family bought a 2,800sq ft 5 bedroom/3 fl bath new home on a 1 acre lot in rural N. Georgea. We paid about $142K for it. The same property "in town" would easily go upward of 450K. City and county taxes are much lower and less general restrictions outside the larger cities. Among other things, our family enjoys clean air, picturesque skies, wild grassy fields, forest, peace and quiet.
The cost of fueling our old car was terrible so we bought our hybrid car, and I learned how to drive it.
Most everyone I know in our area commutes with smaller cars.

The pickup thing...
While it is true that many people like the pickup trucks many more people are driving other kinds of vehicles- the vast majority are smaller Corolla-Civic-Malibu size cars and a number of SUV's.
(At least here around Atlanta)

Myself in case we also have a Grand Caravan both for hauling things and general family comfort.
But it would soak us dry if it was our daily commuter vehicle.

I haven't seen any real number of inner city pickup trucks....a few large vehicles but the vast majority is smaller cars- probably for the parking issue as you've mentioned.

I heard years ago that Toyota plans to offer a hybrid of every model by the year 2010. The magazine Auto Age reports that Toyota will introduce 12 new hybrid models over the next 24 months. And the newspaper Asahi Shimbun reports:

Toyota to double hybrid car output
07/06/2005
The Asahi Shimbun
Toyota Motor Corp. plans to double its production of gas-electric hybrid vehicles to 500,000 units in 2006 from the 2005 level to meet rising global demand, especially in North America, company sources said.
Toyota, the leader in the field of hybrid technology, expects demand for such vehicles to increase amid rising oil prices and improved performance of the autos.
The increase in production will focus on the Prius, Toyota's main hybrid passenger car, as well as on sport utility vehicles (SUVs) Harrier and Kluger. By the end of 2006, Toyota plans to add hybrid versions of its luxury sedans sold under the Lexus brand.
Toyota affiliates making hybrid-vehicle parts, such as batteries, have reinforced their manufacturing facilities, making it much easier for Toyota to obtain key components.
Toyota plans to increase monthly production of hybrid Harriers and hybrid Klugers by 50 percent to 12,000 units each from September at Toyota Motor Kyushu Inc.'s factory in Fukuoka Prefecture.
The Tsutsumi Plant in Toyota, Aichi Prefecture, will increase production of the Prius by 20 percent to 30 percent.
The hybrid SUVs have become popular in North America since their introduction there in March. But consumers still have to wait three to four months to receive a hybrid Harrier.
Global demand for hybrid vehicles has grown so much that Toyota will start overseas production of the cars next year for the first time.
In 2006, the company intends to start production of several thousand Prius cars a year at its factory jointly established with China FAW Group Corp. in Changchun, China. Toyota will also build 50,000 hybrid versions of the Camry annually at its factory in Kentucky starting in 2006.(IHT/Asahi: July 6,2005)
Any of the Georga members know Dr. Walter in Sautee?

Correct me if I'm wrong but are you saying that we shouldn't buy fuel efficient vehcles because you personally drive a large 16MPG hog?

Are you gloating for working at home while wishng a large fat tax on the rest of us?

Are you saying that Europeans are driving less or just wish a large, Socialistic bloated U.S. tax?

we interest import hybrid car .request quote.

The real beauty of a hybrid is if it is modified to be a plug-in hybrid. Since most commutes are 30 miles or less a plug-in hybrid can dramatically decrease the use of oil since 97% our electrical power grid energy comes from other sources. If we start installing wind turbines in high wind locations, adding some photovoltic sources to the grid, and add coal gasification to the equation, America will be nearly ready to declare energy independence. The environment wins and so do we.

If we really want to destroy the environment then we should keep funding terrorism through oil money. Or a conflict with China over the last remaining oil in the Middle East.

I have to somewhat agree that it is not necessarily the hybrid technology that makes these cars get great gas mileage, but the fact that they are small and use smaller engines (for the most part, as the civic is the same as a regular civic, for example.)

I had a 1985 Sentra. A very small, slow car. I ALLWAYS got 40mpg in that car no matter what. That was even using it for pizza delivery, or drive like a young punk. Why did it do so well? It was a small, under powered, nothing that you didn't need car.

My girlfriend has a 90 something Protégé. She ALLWAYS gets 40 MPG as well. Once again, it's an underpowered car. It's not small, but has better technology than my 85 Sentra (fuel injection for example).

But, "nobody" wants underpowered cars. So sure enough, you are going to see hybrids with "power" and we'll be back to where we started. Hell, it they are putting them in SUV's and Accords that only get 30 MPG, they are already on that route. It's just a path to more efficient power.

And the question still hasn't been answered: "Why not a diesel hybrid?"

If everyone drove sensible cars like most Europeans, we probably woudn't even need hybrid technology. I cringe when I hear things like "0-60 in 10 seconds is slow", when we're talking acceleration, not speed, on a car that can easily exceed 100 mph. Our TDIs do not do better than 10 seconds 0-60 but who cares? (and with the torque, mid-range passing is excellent).

But back to speed. A bit of simple arithmetic: here in Canada (Quebec) it is routine to drive 20 km/h over the speed limit, even on short drives. How many times have I been passed by some idiot doing 20 over only to be next to him at the next light? Too many.

On a short (say under 30 km) trip, driving 20 over the limit will, on paper, save you 3.64 minutes (110 km/h vs 90 km/h on a two-lane rural road). I say in theory because in reality, on a 2-lane road, you routinely have to slow down for other traffic, cyclists, traffic lights, curves, etc, so going 20 over the limit does not mean a 20 km/h higher average speed, but more likely only 2-5 km/h higher average speed. Real-world, the savings is probably no more than a minute or so; I've done tests that bear that out.

On a longer trip, say 100 km +, the time savings is 10 minutes per 100 km, assuming a steady cruising speed of 20 km/h over the local 100 km/h speed limit on autouroutes. But here again, traffic, stops, construction zone slowdowns, etc, contribute to make the increase in average speed somewhat lower than 20 km/h. On my daily commute (104 km each way), in fact, the difference is more like only 5 minutes per 100 km.

How much does that 5 minutes cost you? In my case, with my diesel, about $1 per day in extra fuel costs, or $ 5 per week. Which is $250 per year, which more than pays for the $225 per year license fee for our car. Again, real-world tests.

To get real gains in time you have to drive at significantly faster (read: unsafe) speeds like 85-90 mph. If you really need to save time, fly! (or in Europe, take one of their fantastic high-speed trains).

Mike G.

Adam --

Don't know about other hybrids, but in my FEH I have the option for 3 different types of a/c. 1) regular a/c, which shuts off when the vehicle goes into EV mode; 2) maximum efficiency a/c, which recirculates the cool internal air and also shuts off when the vehicle goes into EV mode; and, 3) full-time a/c, which means the gas engine is on all the time.

Since the only time the car runs in total ev mode in my travels in when stopped at stoplights or traveling under 25 mph on city streets, option #2 works 90% of the time. For me, the only time I tend to use #3 is when I'm driving home into the setting sun, and sitting at stoplights during commute time for multiple light changes. Even with that I've still averaged 28-30 mph this summer.

Hope this helps!

From an earlier post:
"How much you benefit from a hybrid depends on how and where you drive it. You will benefit less if you

1. Drive very short distances in cold weather
2. Drive extremely fast
3. Drive up mountains
4. Drive with your AC blasting all the time.
5. If you drive right up to the light and jam your brakes vs slow stops. "

Funny thing is I do all these things in my 2002 VW Golf TDI (yes, it's a DIESEL) and my TDI *STILL* consistently gets it's published EPA numbers of around 42MPG/City and 49MPG/Hwy. I consistenly get around 45MPG and go around 700 miles between fillups while driving it aggressively.

I also did some simple power mods (chip tuning, bigger injectors) to it which brought it's stock 90HP and 155ft-lbs torque up to 130HP and 235ft-lbs. It now has butt-kicking torque and can beat the pants off a lot of gassers in a drag race. The neat thing is my mileage actually IMPROVED slightly!

After logging 170k miles and still going strong (actually doing better than when new), my TDI is definitely a long-term keeper.

I hope the carmakers are successful in meeting the tighter emission standards in 2007 using ULSD. Honda and BMW have announced plans to have DIESEL cars here in 2007. I'd love to see the Honda Accord DIESEL in the USA. A Civic DIESEL (already in Europe) would also be cool.

I'd buy an Audi A2 TDI (gets near 100MPG w/DIESEL) or a VW Lupo TDI (rated 81MPG) in a heartbeat if they were available here.

Too bad we're not getting the 77MPG DIESEL version of the Zap/Mercedes/SMART car. We have to settle for the lower MPG gasser version instead.

DIESELS Rule; gassers drool. :)

most of the exmple hybrids discussed are early birds in this strive for technological solution to fuel consumption. I dont find the results as attractive as the possibilities. For I come to this debate from the view of one who has worked on diesel/electric submarines, which have some profoundly different approaches. Where the electric drive is configured behind a diesel powered generator plant, and peak needs come from the battery supply (yes on the surface). NO rigid mechanical drive is used, and only rigged for emergency use.
Given this, the fuel efficiency of a constant speed diesel plant will far outstrip any petrol plant u can describe, and be smaller to boot.
So if this where a car, it would be slower and suffer in acceleration i hear the sceptics say. The facts are this, electric propulsion in acceleration is better met by electric drive, for acceleration is from torque, and speed from power. Where rather odly, the electric motor can provide max torque at start (and sythesis can multiply this by a factor of 4) against a petrol engine, that needs to get on the power, to provide any useful torque at all. Seen in this way, all that one needs to do is calculate the torque required for user friendly acceleration (recall the GM electric effort would out accelerate all but the Corvette) Yes HP would be short, and hence max speed quite some way from the 120mph u all seem used to :)
Im wondering at what point some of u guys will find it acceptable to start saving on fuel, when theres non left? when its $5 a gall, $10, $20?
think about it

A response for the (Un-named) above:

You had mentioned in your previous post:
“I have NEVER had an issue with finding diesel fuel. Certainly with a range of 1000 km+ per tank you have plenty of time to plan ahead.”

You make my point …with a gasser you don’t have to plan ahead. Where ever there is a station there is fuel.
Also, 1000KM = 621 miles which is good but...
Personally, I've beat that by 320 miles.

“Can one honestly say that hybrid drivers, not driving in marathons, consistently get the high numbers you cite?"

-Yes-
While some are disappointed, 99% love their car and get close if not better than the EPA rating.
Shall I suggest the multitude of Jetta complaints ranging from windows falling out to glow plug failures to filler tube fires and successful lemmon claims?

“(ABS and ESP) available on even the most humble Golf CL for only $400 CDN. Not even available as an option on ANY Civic”

Yes, the Hybrid Civic has both of these and many other features that the regular Civics do not.
Not for $400 extra though, it comes as standard equipment.

http://automobiles.honda.com/models/specifications_full_specs.asp?ModelName=Civic+Hybrid

“hybrids probably DO make better sense for city driving and short trips where regenerative braking shines”
Actually, regenerative braking accounts for only about 5% recharge. Prius is the best choice for city and shorter commutes, while the HCH is a great longer distance runner.
I commute my HCH almost 100 miles a day. 50% is highway, 45% freeway and the rest is terrible 5:00PM rush hour Atlanta traffic.

The Accord question-
While the Accord Hybrid offers scant MPG benefit, it does offer the highest performance Accord they make… with improved economy.

While most people won’t get near my MPG, can you (Or anyone you personally know) consistently pull almost 1,500Km tanks consecutively in a stock Jetta…and with an automatic transmission?

Honestly, I’m not anti-diesel and can understand the excitement by their owners.
Should I post my mileage and say that hybrids are better than diesel in a popular Jetta forum and point out all the problems associated with diesel autos?
No, I’m not going to do that.

The attraction of hybrids is in the possibilities. Diesel is limited as hydrocarbons still must be burned and the potential economic energy sources are limited. I've looked through the bio-diesel arguments and find them almost as unsatisfying as the "hydrogen economy. Diesel is a little more efficient than standard gas but mostly gets better economy because a gallon of diesel has more energy than gas. So diesel advocates are to a certain extent fooling themselves about efficiency. For example, a methanol engine can be more efficient in turning all available chemical energy into motion than a diesel, but will never match the diesels MPG because it contains less energy.

Gasoline/electric hybrids can easily become plug-in hybrids, which is where hybrids get really interesting. Now your energy sources become potentially very diverse since not only can electricity come from any source including wind, hydro, or coal, but a gasoline engine with simple existing modifications can run methanol, ethanol, or any blend of three. I don’t see diesels (other than trucks) having any long term future in the USA. Hybrids on the other hand will have difficulty in Europe where existing tax laws discriminate against the higher weight of hybrids (i.e.- batteries and electric motors).

So lets no follow Europe’s path as it is a dead end that will only transfer our dependence to a different single source energy (mostly Middle Eastern oil!). Soon it will be the Europeans that are questioning why they are not using hybrids like America. It will be nice to see the tables turned.

Good points. I didn't think about the lower energy requirements of diesel refinement. Can a diesel engine start/stop like a gas engine? What other fuels can a diesel engine run?

VW tested a very high-mileage versio of the Lupo with a small TDI diesel engine in the hopes of making a "3 liter car", that is, 3 liters/100 km fuel consumption. That's 79 mpg folks!

They succeeded and one trick was to have the engine automatically shut down if stopped at a stop light, and then relight when you pressed the accelerator to go.

My experience with our two diesels is that well-maintained, warm diesel engines will fire instantly. Even deep cold starts go OK (I'm talking down to -40) with modern glow plug technology, though I admit the engine sounds like crap for several minutes. And you do have to take some precautions like turning off unnecessary electrics to make sure all the battery juice goes towards cranking the engine. In "normal" cold weather though, say down to -25, no special precautions are needed. We don't even have block/engine heaters, and we live in Canada.

Hello

Just jumped over this site.

I'm from Denmark and I am the proud owner of an Audi A2 3L(3L stands fore 3 litre car car = it uses 3 litre diesel to drive 100km)

If you have any qustions about this car, pleace feel free to send me an e-mail. And I will answer.

KristianMikkelsen@gmail.com

Joe,

Weight is one factor but as you hit speeds over 50 mph, you also have to factor in aerodynamics. Drag increases with the square of the speed, and over 50 mph it becomes a very important contributor. The "from the ground up" hybrids like the Prius or Insight (and probably the new Civic) were designed with aerodynamics in mind. High square vehicles like the Escape or Highlander were not.

Mike G.
Canad

I could not agree more with Fern. I will be buying a Prius in the spring. I also would prefer it if there was an American auto that was similiar but there is not. Yet. GM and Chrysler are slow to react and Ford is still ramping up. I will be curious to see how the Fusion hybrid turns out.

OK...lets be claer. the Prius is NO flagship for reliability...Toyota is "updating " them by "fooling people into thinking they are getting a free oil change! Come on...Toyota is using Americans as test dummies. the reason the Big3 aren't knocking down the doors is because the know what it takes to make a reliable vehicle....and don't send out product that "leaves you stranded on the freeway (eg Prius). You'all need a wake-up call. Some talk earlier in this thread talks about reduction in the dependance of foreign oil....you want to do that...use E85 fuel. For every gallon of "fuel" you put in an E85 vehicle, only 0.15gal is gasoline....yes so for those that can do math, a 20 gallon SUV only uses 3 (YES...THREE) gallons of gasoline...and the rest (17 gallons of ethanol)...YES my friends this is true. go to e85fuel.com and see for yourself...OH and by the way, it reduces green house gas (like most don't even know what it is but know we want to reduce it), cost much less at the pump (generally $0.30-0.40/gallon) and although your "range" will go down, the lower price puts MONEY in your pocket!....and did I tell you it is 105 octane!!!!Talk about rocket fuel....put that in your tuners if you want a boost!!!!! If all else fails - YES it improves the US economy by keeping farmers and others busy....

TRUST ME ON THIS!!! GO TO THE E85FUEL.COM WEBSITE AND SEE FOR YOURSELF....DON'T BUY WHAT I'M TELLING YOU. ..IF its about saving US petroluem and reducing dependence......these HEVs don't hold a candle to the savings....and it does not cost YOU any more....DEMAND IT!!!

So, if

Personally, I won't rule out the possibility of ethanol or bio-diesel as part of a long term solution since some form of bio-fuel is probably the best sustainable, renewable, and PORTABLE fuel out there. Based on inputs from several (albeit possibly biased) sources, it isn't clear that:

1. there is sufficient unused biomass available on the planet to fully replace today's use of petro-chemical fuel.

2. clearly, it takes more energy to manufacture ethanol than you can get out of ethanol. This may be offset by use of 'alternative stationary energy' sources such as burning agricultural waste or other bio-waste but I'm a bit skeptical as to the economics of this and whether making ethanol would be the most efficient use of those 'alternate stationary energy' sources.

Coming from a Nebraska heritage, it is clearly heretical for me to say such a thing but I'm a bit skeptical of some of the proponents of ethanol (including NEVC) as they stand to gain a lot from pork barrel ethanol programs.

Even if use of bio-fuel is viable, it is clearly harder to produce (and thus more expensive without artificial subsidies) than petro-chemicals. There are also likely to be emissions issues surrounding the generation of ethanol (ever been near a beer brewery?). Therefore means of using even bio-fuel more efficiently (like hybrid engines) is still essential to reduce the amount of it that we really need.

While I'll support any thinking E85 users, I'm happy to continue to support pushing electric technology into automobiles since that clearly is a win regardless of the fuel used.

Sure the first few generations will have a few infant mortality problems - where's your sense of pioneering adventure? I'll refrain from calling you a chicken :-). Besides, I've felt the kind of performance that an electric drive CAN offer (not that any current hybrids DO) and I can assure you it's a guilt-free kick like few pure ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) cars can deliver!

Dave, I recommend you go back and check your math. If what goes in = what comes out, then the ethanol is just a wasted process. ie, if it takes a gallon of gasoline to produce a gallon of ethanol, why not just burn the gasoline in the first place?

If you're interested in farmer welfare (I'm not), I'd rather pay the farmers to leave their fields fallow than waste growing resources that don't produce anything useful.

Your greenhouse gas reduction doesn't take into account the burning of 1 gallon of gas that it takes to generate 1 gallon of ethanol. In this case, you're actually creating 40% to 80% MORE greenhouse gas.

Sustainability can only come from ethanol if you can generate the ethanol using some energy source that you can't use any other way.

This is why I see bio-diesel as having more promise than ethanol since the processing requirements are much less.

I hope this is making sense to you.

BTU International and Boston University Expand Relationship with Fuel-Cell Joint Development Program
Wednesday November 16, 4:30 pm ET
BTU International and Boston University to work on improving manufacturing processes for Solid Oxide Fuel Cells (SOFC)

NORTH BILLERICA, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 16, 2005--BTU International, Inc. (Nasdaq NM: BTUI - News), a leading supplier of advanced thermal processing equipment for the electronics manufacturing and energy generation markets, today announced the signing of a license and joint development agreement with Boston University, focused on improving processes used to manufacture solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC). The technology is applicable to both high-temperature and intermediate-temperature material systems. The development program will be conducted in BU's Manufacturing Engineering Department by Professors, Uday Pal and Srikanth Gopalan.
ADVERTISEMENT

"The insight and knowledge regarding SOFC material systems to be contributed by BU is significant," said Paul J. van der Wansem, chairman and chief executive officer of BTU International. "Combining this with BTU's extensive experience in thermal processing applications will allow us to develop a unique and important body of knowledge that will be used for the cost-effective manufacturing of solid oxide fuel cells."

"BTU and BU have had a productive relationship for several years," said Donald A. Seccombe, Jr., director of research of BTU International. "We are expecting that this joint development will allow us to address topics--such as one-step co-firing, lower sintering temperatures and faster binder removal--that have an impact on planar SOFC manufacturing costs."

"We chose to partner with BTU on this program because of their significant knowledge in thermal processing technology and integrated manufacturing systems," said Dr. Uday Pal, of BU. "BTU provides invaluable applications knowledge and real world experience which has been instrumental in the success of our program to date."

I have owned a 00' Honda Insight and got a average of 75.5 mpg .
I got a chance to drive a Ferrari 308 GTSC and noticed it taught u how to drive ?U had to drive it very aggressively and hard or,else it bucked u.
The Honda Insight doesn't buck u in matter of fact it changes ur driving habits like the Ferrrari but,its just the opposite.
I have noticed if u drive a Honda Insight like a drag racer for example ur mileage will go down and u will cuss at the end .
Just like a Ferrari in a way if u lug the gears in the slightest she will beat u up.
I think the Honda Insight and the Ferrari 308 r cars that r a rarity .Even though they r very much go to extremes .I give them a bow .
So if u wanna drive one I would suggest a Honda Insight it's cheaper ,lol but, in a extreme it does the same it forces u to drive the car like it wants to be driven.Very rare in today's cars.

OMG

When I first saw the lead in I thought I would see some straight dope on hybrid milage. Sadly, I did not. I have no problem with hybrids or the people who drive them. I just haven't seen one that I wish to own - especialy at the price.

Back to the meat of the subject - milage. Most independant tests show that the improvement isn't much. Consumer Reports, which accepts no advertising from anyone, say most hybrids are in the range of 3 to 5 MPG better than comparable gas only models, and to get that you have to be in city driving. They are no better at all at highway speed.

I know, every little bit helps, and I hope something better becomes available soon.

Jeff B,

Don't know if you got your answers regarding the most economical / practical way to accomplish better travel to work.

I face a similar problem, driving 40 miles to work each day, mostly highway (60mph). I've heard from two different Honda dealers, two different versions on whether I will acheive fuel efficiency in the Civic Hybrid. Having read the blog (from the start) I'm a bit clearer, but would love to hear more about whether I will acheive the stated economy.

One dealer said that I had to be doing lots of stop / start driving to get the efficiency from the braking, and lots of low speed driving to get the efficiency from the electric rather than the petrol engine.

It's getting too hard to decide, lol.

Anyone with any suggestions, please let me know.

Hack again?!

It's a great post,it's so helpful to me,I agree some viewpoints in your post, and your blog is very good,I've learned a lot from your blog here,Keep on going,my friend,I will keep an eye on it,One more thing,thanks for your post!welcome to car DVD GPS.