Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Hybrid Honda Accord

1140141143145146163

Comments

  • vietviet Posts: 847
    Some of my Accord got more than 250K miles since 1992. They have never broken down once. Maintenance cost is great and affordable.

    The other day I mentioned about a car that half of its body was litterally lifted up when I turned right to a shopping center at 8 MPH. It was a Camry 1990, not a Chevy. I felt really funny at that time. That's why we love to buy newer models every 3 or 4 years to enjoy better technology.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,676
    Is Honda really interested in hybrid technology? They do not seem to be pushing their hybrids at all. 1080 cars, is just half of the April sales figure. Are they going to let the HAH slide into history like the Insight?

    http://www.hondanews.com/CatID2001?mid=2005070148995&mime=asc
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,624
    Based on the major improvements coming this fall in the HCH, I'd say Honda is very interested in hybrid technology (see the '06 Honda Civic discussion for details). Maybe these improvements, which include the ability to run only on the electric motor for short distances (ala HSD) and higher fuel economy, will work their way up to the HAH.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,676
    HCH sales seem steady. Maybe the 2006 HCH will be the one to compete against the Prius. I have felt all along the HAH image as a Hotrod Hybrid was the wrong message.
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    Gary, we had this discussion a few months ago, but here is my two cents again, because you still have the wrong idea about the HAH.

    It's not a "Hotrod Hybrid" and is not marketed as such.

    Honda has ALWAYS SAID from Day One that they can and will "hybridize" *ANY* car in their model line.

    What that means is that they are saying "Hybrids are NOT just 70 MPG Insights and 50 MPG Civics."

    Hybrids are ANY CAR which has a hybrid drivetrain installed.

    That means from Civics to their largest van or the Ridgeline, ANY car can be hybridized to help it improve MPG "in it's own class" of vehicle.

    Translated to it's most simple form, it means this:

    Hybridization is NOT only for small cars with small engines.

    That philosophy is not a mistake - it's a great long term vision.

    Toyota has pledged to make hybridization an option on ALL of it's cars by 2010. Does that mean they are dropping all their cars and trucks and only making Priuses? No - it means that LIKE HONDA, they want to hybridize ANY CAR in their line to improve IT'S MPG in it's own class of vehicle.

    The idea that "hybrids" are small, underpowered, goofy looking cars is outdated and is not reality. By saying you think the HAH was a mistake, you are denying the current reality of Hybrid Cars and Trucks and SUVs in the year 2005.....
  • dwynnedwynne Posts: 4,018
    I have felt all along the HAH image as a Hotrod Hybrid was the wrong message.

    Wrong for YOU, maybe. If someone wants the quickest Accord sedan and the one the gets the best mileages then the Accord Hybrid is both. To me that breathes some excitement into hybrids.

    One problem is that SOME folks just assumed they were buying a hyper-mile car like an Insight or maybe the Civic hybrid. Not doing their homework let to some folks being disappointed.

    Now if Honda made the Accord hybrid run on batteries alone (for the commuting crawl) and MAYBE made an I4 version for those that need something larger than a Civic/Prius and wanted REALLY GOOD mileage - I would have no problem with that.

    But Honda pretty much hit the mark they were aiming for with the Accord hybrid. Sounds like it was the wrong target for YOU, though. I do think no spare (save weight, right?) and no moonroof (open roof adds drag, no roof saves weight) were the two big misses. If you pay $32k for a car it should have a spare (there is room) and it should have a moonroof.

    Dennis
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,407
    I would have also liked to see a 4-cyl hybrid. It would have been nearly as quick as the regular V-6 with much better fuel mileage than the current hybrid.

    The V-6 hybrid does not interest me at all. It has speed that I don't want or need, and it does no better than a 4-cyl manual tranny at the gas pump (in real driving conditions - not EPA).
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,676
    Dennis & Larsb,
    You have missed my point. IF the HAH was successful as you are saying, it would not have dropped in sales from 2000 units in April to 1000 in June, the best car sales month so far this year. The HAH is not a popular vehicle. I believe if Honda was serious they would have made it in the 4 cylinder first with much better mileage. With a price closer to the other Top of the Line Accords.
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    The HAH does not have to be a "roaring success" to be a good car, a car which reduces emissions over it's gas-only V6 counterpart and uses less fuel than it's V6 gas-only counterpart.

    Remember: in coming years we are going to have MANY MANY Hybrids as options on *NOT ONLY* the most popular cars, but cars which only sell a couple of thousand a month.

    And remember also: Hybrid acceptance is in it's INFANCY in the USA. It will grow and grow and grow as more people become educated about the benefits of the technology.

    The HAH is not that popular for the same reason the HCH is not the most popular car - people see the higher price and shy away, without taking the time and effort to understand the real benefit.

    That issue will change as we have MORE and MORE Hybrid models available and the price comes down accordingly for the technology.

    Remember: We are on pace for about 200,000 Hybrids to be sold this year in the USA, up from only 80,000 in 2004. It's a GROWTH thing !!! :D
  • molokaimolokai Posts: 313
    I also believe the lackluster sales can be attributed to dealer apathy as well. I am sure some shoppers came in wanting the hybrid and the dealer said,, hey,, I have this 4 cyl which you can have for MUCH less. I believe Honda is comitted to the technology, but it appears that Toyota advertises it much more. Regardless, it is a step in the right direction. Based on sales figures for the Silverado, I seriously doubt GM will continue making that option available. They don't advertise it at all.
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,719
    "Toyota has pledged to make hybridization an option on ALL of it's cars by 2010. "

    I too have read this, and I will have to see it to believe it. With the exception of the Chevy full sized pickup (which was hybridized mainly to provide 240 volt outlets), no vehicle larger than 4500 lbs has been hybridized. The larger engines simply consume too much fuel, the vehicles are too heavy, and the frontal area is too great; the increase in MPG is not sufficient to warrant the extra expense. But who knows, maybe by 2012 the Sequoia will be only 4500 lbs, maybe that is what they are assuming.

    And from an environmental standpoint, the extra "green" cost to manufacture (for example) a hybrid Sequoia would never possibly be recouped by higher MPG. It takes the Prius almost to the end of it's normal life cycle to overcome the high initial pollution caused by the manufacturing.
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    quote Stevedebi-"And from an environmental standpoint, the extra "green" cost to manufacture (for example) a hybrid Sequoia would never possibly be recouped by higher MPG. It takes the Prius almost to the end of it's normal life cycle to overcome the high initial pollution caused by the manufacturing."-end quote...

    Did you get that info from Gary? It's an Urban Myth....I have the actual study that shows there is no such thing as a "high initial pollution" caused by the manufacturing process...It is "slightly higher" but nothing like what happens by the end of the cycle:

    The Lifetime pollution figure of the non-hybrid car VASTLY overtakes the hybrid (by about 35% ) when the entire lifetime of the two cars (including recycle) is taken into account.

    Here is a link to my original post which has the PDF link:

    larsb, "The Future of Hybrid Technology" #522, 14 Feb 2005 3:00 pm
  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    Dealership apathy did not hurt Toyota with the Prius.

    I know this personally. During the summer of 2003 I went to two Toyota dealers and showed interest in the new and upcoming Prius2.

    First sales rep told me that my money would be best spent on a Camry vs. a Prius. In fact any Toyota but a Prius was well spent according to the sales rep.

    At the second dealership the sales rep told me he thought I was crazy in selling my BMW 3 series for a Prius.

    My impression was that a Prius was a car that required little salesmanship!
  • molokaimolokai Posts: 313
    I am sure Toyota dealers have swayed folks away from the Prius as well. I guess only the well informed are driving the Prius as they know what's best. ;)
  • molokaimolokai Posts: 313
    Thanks for that PDF Larsb. I know I'm at leasting partially contributing to a cleaner environment. I love my Prius!
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,676
    The Lifetime pollution figure of the non-hybrid car VASTLY overtakes the hybrid (by about 35% ) when the entire lifetime of the two cars (including recycle) is taken into account.

    This is Toyota's own LCA on the Prius vs comparable Non-hybrid. It is very clear the only significant gain is in CO2 and HC over the 150k mile life of the Prius. It never passes the non-hybrid for particulate matter. It is well toward the end of the life cycle when it gains an advantage over the non-hybrid on both SOx & NOx. I don't know what is so hard to accept about this chart it was part of your link to Toyota. Toyota knows the truth that it is a marginal over all gain.

    image
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    Regardless of how the data is sliced, there is no "significant increase" in pollution during the mfg phase that is not "SWALLOWED UP" by the end of the car's lives.....Which is my point......

    There is no huge discrepancy, even by this chart.....
  • molokaimolokai Posts: 313
    I wonder if there is a chart showing that for the truck Gary just bought. Anyone have any data on that?
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,676
    That is very true. What started this was comparing the larger hybrids and the difference in emissions associated with their manufacturing process. Does the percentage of gain on fuel consumption make them a cleaner car overall than a non-hybrid SUV? You do not get the percentages with an RX400h that you get with the Prius. In fact there are RH owners that claim they are not getting any better mileage with the hybrid than they did with the RX300 they traded in. Or in a couple cases only 1-2 MPG increase. I'm not the only one here that is skeptical on the value of larger hybrids. I would not have bought mine if it did not have the engine and towing capacity that I was looking for and they knocked off most of the hybrid premium. I like the way the truck shuts down at stop lights. I hope it gets decent mileage. I will keep you all posted.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,676
    I would be most interested to see one. I am concerned about the batteries that are only warranted for 3 years 36k miles. There are a few things that have a 8yr 80k mile coverage. Mostly controller modules.
Sign In or Register to comment.