+ Reply to Thread
Results 21 to 30 of 37
03-09-2008 12:01 PM #21
I'd also like to add that
I'd also like to add that according to Consumer Reports. Toyota is pretty much getting an A+ in quality, whereas Hummer is getting an F- in quality. So the study is totally backwords seeing as Toyota's are known for lasting forever whereas w/ the Hummer quality being near dead last I really doubt they're going to be lasting 35 years. Honestly, if we look at total cost of ownership Prius' are going to be very inexpensive considering very little gas, cheap insurance, cheap tires, virtually no repair bills, etc. HUmmers on the other hand would be completly opposite w/ tiries costing nearly $800 for 4 and high fuel costs and high insurance etc.
Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
03-12-2008 02:15 AM #22
There are many things wrong
There are many things wrong with the logic in the article showing energy cost per lifetime mile. First of all, the Prius is made from 90% recycled material. Secondly, not only are the batteries recyclable, Toyota has a repurchase plan in place to directly buy them back if the car is totaled. The batteries are then remanufactured (according to reports). Very little is wasted.
The final thing is repair costs. Yes, some Prius parts are expensive, but normal repairs are not. With an Oil change rate of 5,000 to 7,000 miles with no color change of the oil, tires (not the original) lasting 60,000 miles, brakes lasting 200,000 miles (regenerative braking benefit) and batteries that can last 400,000 miles (New York Taxi Driver reports), the operating cost is much lower than any report states. In fact, I kind of get bored walking into the auto parts store with nothing to buy. I can handle it! Headlight wax, headrest springs, lighted windshield washer sprayers, what next? Try to match that with operating costs of a Hummer.
03-19-2008 12:56 AM #23
You are all making incorrect
You are all making incorrect assumptions. The report is using data by Toyota that says that the expected life of the car is 100,000 miles, not that drivers will only drive it that far. Also the Hummer may have 3 or 4 owners over the life of its 300,000 miles. It is the life of the car not the original owner that the report is talking about.
Also if any of you actually read the report you would see that the reason the Prius uses so much energy in production is because of the materials it is made of. Hummers are basic steel and aluminum and have been produced for decades in this manner. Therefore they are easily produced and easily recycled. The amount of energy it takes to produce and recycle one Prius versus one Hummer is doubled at the least. Mainly because of the special fiber bodies and batteries that are extremely hard to recycle.
03-25-2008 04:50 PM #24
I love my new Prius. As far
I love my new Prius. As far as this report by the CNW, who cares? It is apples or oranges...the bottom line for me is that I have driven 275 miles in my Prius and have not even used half a tank of gas. My Jeep Commander demands a full tank every 236 miles. So as far as adding up the minutia of the matter: I personally notice that my Prius gives off LESS fumes than my Jeep and Mercedes, LESS noise and uses LESS gas. That is enough for me. If any of you are truly "green", then get a bike or walk.
04-15-2008 10:48 PM #25
"If you took that Jeep
"If you took that Jeep Wrangler or Scion Xb, and put in a hybrid drivetrain, you'd find it would stack up well above it's pure ICE counterpart if you use the study's criteria."
You didn't understand the study, I'm afraid. This statement assumes no cost to design, and implement a hybrid drivetrain in a Scion xB. Being a one-off custom job, I assure you the material and labor costs would be exceedingly high. The entire point of the study was to take into account design, manufacturing, and material costs. Being a one-off custom vehicle, if I were to resell it, it would have something similar to collectors value, and only someone dedicated to keeping it on the road would be able to maintain it.
I would love some sort of drop-in hybrid kit for my xB, but as it is, I am quite happy with the results of this report. The xB used a lot of components from the already-in-production Echo, so the cost to bring the xB to market was extemely low, compared to the Prius.
04-18-2008 09:08 AM #26
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
MCart, The best pure EV that
The best pure EV that one can buy today is a converted xB. It's called the eBox by AC Propulsion (www.acpropulsion.com). It's pricey at $55K on top of the cost of your xB but its a blast to drive. Here's a piece from a (previously) neutral 3rd party who got a chance to test drive the eBox: http://www.stefanoparis.com/piaev/ac...stPeekMov.html
The eBox gets well over 100 effective well-to-wheels mpg.
04-26-2008 06:22 AM #27
What's happened to this
What's happened to this site?? Ownership must have changed because this article, and other things, are making me question if this site has been bought out by GM or Exxon? The whole premise of "I was just about to buy a hybrid camry UNTIL!!!" Seriously? You read this "one" report and that's all it took? What did you do? Buy a H2 Hummer?
04-26-2008 08:56 AM #28
One more thing, I drive a
One more thing, I drive a 2001 (yes 2001) Toyota Prius and love it. I get an "real-world" accumulative (yes accumulative) 41 MPG annually. No, this isn't based on a few particular trips in which I was driving in perfect weather. To the contrary, I live in Michigan. I also run the AC or heater 90% of the time. I have a heavy foot...I accelerate fast and drive 70-75 on freeways.
And again, "accumulative" 41 MPG! Meaning, in the winter (especially this long long cold one we just had) I get an average of 36-37 mpg. This is my true and honest average and hey, for the kind of winters we have, I'm ecstatic to get anything above 30!...It's still twice what most people get. Spring and summer I get 42-43. BTW, I drive about 18,000 miles per year.
I have good all season tires (top of the line) and noticed no reduction in MPG and improved handling...much worth it! I feel proud when I'm driving down the road and a SUV is slipping all over the place and I drive past him in my tic-tac of a car. According to this report, I was supposed to buy the cheapest and crappiest tires I could find. Sorry, my mistake.
Overall, I'm very happy with the car. I grew up driving big cars...I love big cars. I liked my Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited and especially my 1994 Country Jeep Cherokee 2 door (oh how I miss that car). But, I finally got over the small car thing and now with gas nearing $4 a gallon...I'm even more content.
I did more research on this dust to dust report...bogus bogus bogus. I do, however, agree that in these attempts to produce alternative fuels and new technologies, we need to be aware of their adverse affects. Ethenol is a perfect example of that...what a mistake that is turing out to be! While hybrid technology is expectedly not perfected, it's a good start...at least it's heading in the right direction and showed the industry that if they build it, we will come. By the way, I'm nearing 100,000 miles...I guess, according to this report, I better find a cliff I can push this thing off of soon. Maybe I'll use my new Hummer to tow it there?
05-01-2008 03:50 AM #29
Why is ethanol a mistake?
Why is ethanol a mistake?
05-01-2008 10:53 PM #30
The "Dust to Dust" report
The "Dust to Dust" report has generated considerable controversy and conversation, which could be a good thing; the report itself is BS. Among the many, many criticisms: the actual authors didn't sign it, the methodology used is unknown, many questionable assumptions were made, it was not peer reviewed, and some of their conclusions contradict all reputable studies.
For a good, readable summary of these criticisms, check out Cecil Adam's column on the report:
Other good, thoughtful criticisms: