Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
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.
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
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!
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.
There is no huge discrepancy, even by this chart.....
Dennis
There is no huge discrepancy, even by this chart....."
Take a look at the chart again, the Prius has a large green area for manufacturing, larger than a conventional ICE car. This is what I was reffering to when I said a "significant increase in pollution during the manufacturing phase". Over the life of the car, this initial "environmental cost" is compensated by the higher MPG, thus burning less fuel and releasing less pollution. One must compare the HAH with the 4 cylinder Accord to determine how much better MPG the hybrid will achieve. BTW, the chart came from a Toyota website. One should also bear in mind that this chart is comparing the Prius to a similar sized vehicle, not an HAH to an ICE Accord. The HAH would fare much worse when compared to the I4 Accord, and probably worse (over the life of the car) than the V6 version also. Those batteries are environmentally expensive to produce.
For a hybrid SUV, it does not get high enough MPG to compensate like the Prius does. The worse the MPG compared to a comparable ICE vehicle, the longer it would take to compensate for the initial production.
None of this is to detract from the HAH, which is a fine vehicle. But it must be noted that just being a hybrid does not automatically make the vehicle environmentally friendly compared to a similar ICE vehicle.
Gary at one point had said he thought that Hybrids could never be produced in the USA because of the "pollution during manufacture" which I thought was bunk at the time, and it is still untrue when the life of the car is figured in, at least for the Hybrids we have NOW. Ford is making them here, and Toyota is going to make the Camry here and Nissan the Altima here.
Time and future studies will tell how the HH and the RX400h fare in that regard....
I would agree only for the Civic and Prius hybrids. The HAH doesn't get significantly better gas mileage than it's ICE cousins. The other Hybrids are SUVs, and there is no way they are going to "Break even" on emissions over the normal life of the vehicle (set at 150K miles in the chart). Even if they double the MPG over their ICE contemporaries, they just won't be efficient enough. And the RX400 actually only gets a few MPG better than the RX330 (for most drivers, but don't get me started on the driving patterns)!
Similarly, the Escape Hybrid gets (at best) about 31 MPG, compared to my 2003 Honda CR-V, which gets 23/27. That is only about 8 and 4 MPG benefit to the hybrid. It won't work out in dollars over the life of the Escape for the return on investment, and it certainly won't work out in environmental numbers.
RE: Manufacturing in the USA. Well, we are the only G8 nation that didn't ratify the Kyoto accord, so I should think the US would be the most likely country to manufacture a Hybrid...
Yes, but we have the most stringent EPA/CARB setup, as evidenced by the five states which disallow diesels......:D
Which means that one of the other 45 states will get the business of building the Hybrids...
As well as those 45 MPG diesel cars from VW... no batteries required (except 12 volt).
I wonder what the emissions are to mine, refine, and transport those extra few thousand gallons of crude oil and gas? Do these lifetime emissions charts take that factor into account?
I for one would like to see the data (not supposition) on lifetime emissions of a hybrid SUV like the HH or RX400h vs. one of similar power that gets about 1/2 the average mpg. With the conventional SUV polluting at least twice as much during its running life (and considering the emissions rating of V8s isn't very good), that would be a huge gap to make up during manufacture and disposal. And throw in the gas-production emissions while you're at it.
Gary, you did not go look at that original study I posted, the PDF which I posted again yesterday? If not, GO read it and get yourself more educated about cradle to grave emissions, so you can present a more educated and well-rounded opinion when we have these discussions !!
What would be the point of major changes to the Accord when it will go through a major overhaul in a year or two after the date of the 06 intro.
Happily commuiting in my new Accord Hybrid....
http://associatedcontent.com/content.cfm?content_type=article&content_type_id=701
im thinkin about getting one so this helped me out a lot!
anyone got any other stuff for me on them?
I would like to hear feedback from those who have had this done or have knowledge of an HAH with one installed. I know Honda does not condone this, but I do not have any problems with that. I also would like to know it there were problems with the active noise cancellation system since the front microphone is so close to the probable roof location.
Thanks and looking forward to many great years with my HAH.
Of course I wouldn't be asking if HAH offered one as an option.
Now my S2000 won't be lonesome in the Garage!!! Woopee.
I saw the article. It was somewhat upbeat but at the same time critical with not any any more input than what is already published.
I am not buying the HAH for driving around NYC. If I live there I would likely have bought the HCH.
I live in suburban/rural areas and I hope, with judicious driving to get 35 or more mpg with about 50% of my miles, expect the car to have the legendary reliability of a Honda AND have an ample amount of power, if needed, to aid in less clean traffic patterns.
Not a bad reason at all.
The article does match my personal judgment of the HAH, which is a mixed bag. My initial disappointment with the car has worn off and I'm starting to see some of the Honda charm which keeps buyers coming back over and over.
I spent the entire day today driving around NYC and got somewhere around 22 MPG for the day. Traffic was heavy and it was very hot out. For this type of driving this economy is outstanding. A couple of times I shocked people with the acceleration, including a V6 Accord owner that was trying to push me around. Very satisfying.
Anyway Edmunds is due for another installment in the HAH Long-Term test, let's see what they have to say.
Be safe and happy in your new car.
I was making a U-Turn in the Bronx, and when I put the car in reverse it didn't do anything. There was a whining noise. Not knowing what to do I put the car in Park, then back in Reverse. Same problem. I tried again, this time the car worked properly. I drove for the rest of the day without any further symptoms at all.
Please report your experience or if you have heard anything about this on either a HA or HAH.
Thank You
My dilemma is whether to do the initial oil change before or after this larger 2000 mile trip?
Dennis
This is just something I learned about when researching oil back in 2000.
Here is the reasoning behind the 1,500 mile early oil change: All cars, to a lesser or greater extent, depending on the machining of the engine combustion chamber parts, lose and "shave off" microscopic and sometimes larger slivers of metal as the engine breaks in and the metal parts grind against each other internally. It's inevitable.
It's better practice to get those shaved off parts out of the oil around the 1,500 mile mark for a new car, when most of the metal has been shaved off, and start fresh with clean oil after the metal shavings are gone, instead of leaving those shavings in the oil to dirty up the filter and your oil.
This is not a commonly practiced oil procedure, but it does make sense and is recommended in some oil industry circles. The sooner you get those metal shavings out of your oil, the better off you'll be. (A Google search of "slivers" and "oil change" will net you many forums where people report finding metal slivers in their oil pan, or on their oil plug, upon their first oil changes.)
I recommend it especially for people with new cars who change their own oil like I do - it's no big deal to people like us to spend $20 for the peace of mind.... .
P.S. As far as "changing the oil too soon," there is no such thing. Your car would be fine if you changed to oil every weekend !! There is a time frame you might want to wait before switching from dino oil to Synthetic oil, but that's not the issue here.
The service manager at my local dealer said if it bothers you to wait until 10k to change the oil (per the owner's manual) then follow the harsh duty change recommendation, which is 5,000 miles per change.
If there was any reason or benefit from an early oil change, Honda would tell us to come in and get it. I might be mentally hard to wait to 5k, but to change it sooner is really a waste of money and good oil.
The waiting to change to synth is pretty much a wive's tale as well, since lots of new cars (like my '00 'vette convertible and both my BMWs) came from the factory with full synthetic it them. The M5 DID call for an early first oil change - real early, but the others did not. I saw switch whenever you feel like it - but again regular changes with dino oil beats prolonged changes with synth oil for most folks. Now changing often with synth is the best but also is really spendy.
Running LOW on oil during the life of the motor would do more harm than waiting until 5k (or even 10k) for the first oil change. So check it often, but I am not going to bother changing it until around 5k (on my wife's car). On mine, I drive a lot fewer miles on each so I change it every few months no matter how many miles are on the clock. The guy at Valvoline was giving me funny looks last time I changed the oil in the pickup truck. He finally asked me why the oil was so clean. It had only been in the truck about 1k - which worked out to about a year. I looked up the records and since I purchased it used I have put about 1k on it a year - helping folks move, picking stuff up too big for another car, and taking stuff to the dump. I get the oil changed about once a year no matter if I need it or not
Dennis
I don't think there is any "proof" there is anything in the initial oil, other than the statement to not change it too soon. The rough service change interval in the manual calls for 5k changes. So just check your oil level and wait until you get back. Then if there IS something special in the first oil it WILL get more chance to work. You for sure will have more money in your pocket if you change every 5k-10k as Honda recommends and not every 3k or 3,750 or whatever.
Dennis
All I can say about the "no early oil change advice" from the manufacturer is that they don't want to bring liability issues into their advice, or conflict with their service schedule advice. There are definitely solid Logical and Real World reasons for changing the oil to get the metal shavings out, as I mentioned in my previous post.
And the "wait for synth" is not a wives tale - it you do so to early, the engine will reach optimium efficiency (fully seated) at a LATER DATE than it would have without the change, so you are losing MPG by changing too early to Synth. This I know for sure, as Synth was my main thrust during my long research period back in 2000.
Those engines you refer to which come with Synth oil from the factory have higher compression ratios or something which allows them to be sold new with Synth oil, unlike a "normal" car - I cant remember the full reason exactly, but it's a real one and explains why those engines are different from most engines.
Maybe we need to move this to a Oil Change Forum somewhere on Edmunds?
I can't speak to the HAH, but with the CR-V, the factory oil is special. I changed my oil at 7500 for the first time, thereafter at 5K intervals on the severe schedule. I suspect that all Hondas are shipped with the special oil.
Here is the quote from the owner link site FAQ:
Why should I wait to change the oil the first time?
Your Honda engine was delivered with an oil that is specially formulated for new engines that have not yet developed their "natural" wear patterns and may contain minute particles from the manufacturing process.
American Honda strongly recommends this special oil be left in the engine long enough for these wear patterns to develop, usually until the first maintenance interval specified in your Owner's Manual, based on your specific driving conditions.