As a new owner of one, I mean this as a serious question. The EPA estimates for this (2003) vehicle are 46 city/51 highway for the 5-speed manual, and 48 city/47 highway for the CVT (which I own). For comparison, the corresponding numbers for a Civic LX are 32/38 (manual) and 29/38 (automatic). My experience with cars has been that I have NEVER gotten the EPA estimates; I've usually averaged 10% or so worse. Early into the break-in period my wife is averaging about 34-35 city, which is about 27% lower than the EPA estimate.
Honda's website (www.hondacars.com) invites folks to compare the gas mileage and savings of the Civic Hybrid to other gasoline-powered cars. The thing is, the comparison is based on what may be very unrealistic numbers. Having a huge difference between theoretical gas mileage (EPA estimates) and actual gas mileage could be a big problem for Honda. I for one will be very disappointed if my Civic Hybrid doesn't get much better gas mileage than a regular Civic LX. How are other folks doing with respect to mileage? Does anyone have any practical tips for getting the most mileage out of their vehicle? I shudder to think what the gas mileage will be this summer with the AC on regularly.
Civic hybrids are only a ulev while something like the nissan sentra is a partial zero emitions vehicle Greenhouse gas emissions in tons per year (best to worst variation within a model is due to choice of transmission or engine. Note that Prius is not available with manual transmission). Honda FCX: 0? Honda Insight: 3.1 - 3.5 Toyota Prius: 4.0 Honda Civic Hybrid: 4.0 - 4.1 VW Golf TDI: 4.7 - 5.5 Honda Civic HX: 4.9 - 5.2 Honda Civic GX: 5.1 Nissan Sentra: 6.1 - 7.7
Note: I have found that if I really baby it, draft a few trucks, get favorable winds occasionally, I can sneak the mileage up to the 50 mark. But it's a lot of work.
>> The electric motor PREDATES the IC engine, >> it is NOT a "young" technology!
Ahh... Fuel-Cells are over 140 years old now! What do you have to say about that?
It's the fact that neither fuel-cells nor electric motors have ever been used this way before. The way they were first used really doesn't mean much for this different type of implementation.
The goal now is to reduce cost, decrease size, decrease weight, increase power, and increase efficiency to propel a 5-passenger car or larger. All those in a single design really weren't priorities until now.
And yes, the electronic rather than mechanical control increases the differences too.
>> which is about 27% lower than the EPA estimate.
Winter is just awful on MPG.
*ALL* vehicles suffer significant drops during cold weather. (I have proof too. There's spreadsheets from my 2 previous vehicles on my website in addition to my hybrid.) If you have a tachometer, just watch the RPM speed during warmup. It's much higher in the winter than in the summer. And in a hybrid, the auto-stop doesn't shut off as soon (or at all in the coldest conditions), especially if you run the heater on "hot" rather than "warm". All that consumes more gas.
Tire pressure drops significantly in the cold too. So if you haven't checked recently, that is also what's impairing MPG.
In the summer, even with the A/C running, you should still get better MPG than in the dead of winter (now).
Yes the application of electic motors to HYBRID VEHICLES is a recent application with potential for development. The use of the IC engine in hybrid vehicles is NO LESS A NEW APPLICATION and they have and will demonstrate technological refinements to optimize the hybrid application as with electric motors and drives. It is the hybrid system that offers the opportunity for development, the components enter the field with similar maturity.
I had a 97 Civic HX 5sp that routinely got 41 mpg (summer) all city driving. That's 115HP with no motor assist. The answer to all of these mileage problems is the diesel (and hybrid) engine running on low sulphur fuel. Diesels now are the majority engine choice in Europe for milage and performance, but still totally unaccepted in the US. In the UK, cars are not only rated for their mileage, but rated (numerically) for their CO2 output and taxed accordingly. And you thought the US was the leader in environmental policies, not so anymore.
> The EPA estimates for this (2003) vehicle are 46 > city/51 highway for the 5-speed manual, and 48 > city/47 highway for the CVT (which I own).... > My experience with cars has been that I have > NEVER gotten the EPA estimates...my wife is > averaging about 34-35 city, which is about 27% > lower than the EPA estimate.
In my 8 months of experience, the EPA estimates for this vehicle are surprisingly good. HOWEVER, winter mileage is *very* temperature dependent, which is what your wife is probably experiencing.
On my 10-mile, suburban commute (no highway but also no true stop-and-go), I had no trouble getting 51 mpg (on the gauge; actual calculated mpg runs 2-3 mpg lower) last summer and through the fall until the temperature fell below about 50. Now, I get about 45 if the temperature is in the 30s and 40s, 40 if it's in the 20's and 35 if it's in the teens and single digits as it has been in the Chicago area recently.
Other things to consider: (1) There's a mechanical break-in period; many owners have reported better mileage after 5,000-6,000 miles (2) There's an even more important "break-in" for the OWNER--the car trains you to drive it better over the first several months (3) AutoStop doesn't work well in cold weather (4) How you use the heat influences mileage; ditto the A/C in the summer (5) Driving conditions matter a lot; this car performs best when it can do some "cruising," and its performance suffers greatly in true city gridlock (this of course is true for other cars, as well, but many of the sophisticated features of this engine are not designed for bumper-to-bumper or constant stop-and-go traffic).
A good place to look for more tips and info. is on the Yahoo! civic_hybrid discussion group.
diesel fuel is usually the price of PREMIUM gasoline. Given the more unpleasant nature of diesel fuel to handle and the particulate problem, it's no surprise to me that we're not clamoring for diesel cars. Add to that the low engine speed regimen and modest power of diesels, I see no future for one in my driveway.
...with the advent of low-sulfur diesel nationwide [which the Congress has allowed to slip until 2006], I'm hoping for a number of diesel choices that will give gasoline hybrids real competition. And yes, they will meet all of the emission requirements...this is not the great technological leap of the century...all of the EU manufacturers have clean diesels that simply need low-sulfur fuel to operate. They are quicker, more economical, and actually more fun to drive than any hybrid now available or on the drawing board.
We passed on a Civic Hybrid because of some of the issues that have surfaced on this board, including the fact that really big mpg numbers are hard to achieve consistently with the current technology, but drop-dead easy with any contemporary diesel. The only obstacle to getting on with real choices is the crap that is sold as diesel fuel in this country...
I'll also post my lament at the Yahoo! Civic Hybrid group. I drove my wife's CVT for about 15 miles around the DC suburbs yesterday (temp was in the high 30s). Mixed highway and city. I managed to get the computer mileage readout to 34.0 mpg from 33.4 mpg. This is really weak! What is going on? If the mileage readout was in the low 40s I wouldn't complain, but less than 35 mpg! Does anyone have any concrete suggestions? Is this to be expected from a new hybrid? I'll check the tire pressure and experiment with using the auto climate control, but something seems to be amiss.
I've got a mysterious creaking noise that comes from the left of the driver's seat whenever the car makes a turn. The sound is analagous to the creaking of a door opening in a haunted house. Got the idea? I thought at first it was perhaps in the door hinges, but lubrication there did not stop the creaking.
I'm open to suggestions. Will take the car in for routine maintence on Valentines day and hopefully get the creak fixed there.
OK, solved my own problem. The driver's seat was the culprit. I had to unzip the back of the seat to expose certain mechanisms that I blasted with white grease. Noise is gone.
and relatively ignorant about (although interested in) the Civic hybrid. Why does the use of more heat reduce the mileage? Does the use of an engine-driven water pump require that the AutoStop be disabled in order to deliver heat? I can't imagine that, once the engine is warmed up, it would have to run that much more just in order to produce enough heat to keep the cabin warm. The residual heat in the stopped engine should produce more than enough heat without cooling itself down much.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
> Why does the use of more heat reduce the > mileage?...I can't imagine that, once the > engine is warmed up, it would have to run > that much more just produce enough heat to > keep the cabin warm.
That's true. The key is *once the engine is warmed up.* This small, efficient engine warms up slowly and cools down quickly, and it must be at full operating temperature to give the best mileage. If I turn on the heat right away on a cold morning, it takes 10-12 miles of surface-street commute to get all the way to operating temp. If I leave it off for the first 5-10 min., I get much faster engine warm-up and thus better mileage.
> Does the use of an engine-driven water pump > require that the AutoStop be disabled in order > to deliver heat?
No. As far as we can tell, the disabling of AutoStop at low temperature is strictly to keep the cabin from getting cold while you're stopped at a light (which I wish were optional). If the engine is warmed up, you can turn off the heat, AutoStop at a light and immediately turn the heat back on without starting the engine.
Hey, am considering a Hybrid Civic to replace my Jetta TDI. Would appreciate an unbiased assessment from those of you familiar with the hybrid tech.
I am averaging 47 mpg combined city-highway real-world mpg on my Jetta TDI 5-speed over the last 10,000 miles.
I am considering a Hybrid Civic, since it seems that I would get similar mileage as the Jetta, with less immediate environmental impact ( soot from diesel ). However, I wonder how many toxins are released into the environment in the production of the battery pack/cells on the hybrid, and long-term, where are tens of thousands of old hybrid battery packs going to go, under a mountain in Nevada, leaching into ground water, etc? I wonder if by skipping the diesel I would be just trading one kind of pollution for another in the big picture...any ideas? Thanks!
Since there are many 100s of thousands of 18 wheeler trucks roaming the country spewing large amounts on soot, I wouldn't worry too much about your VW TDI. You may get close to the 47mpg in the Civic Hybrid, but you will lose a boat load of torque and with that reduced performance. I'd keep the Jetta, much nicer car than the Civic in every way.
>> Since there are many 100s of thousands of 18 wheeler >> trucks roaming the country spewing large amounts on soot
That's a *HORRIBLE* excuse! The upcoming new federal regulations will require those 18 wheelers to have their emissions systems upgraded. The owners will have no choice but to do that, since replacing a $100,000 vehicle is completely unrealistic.
Owners of diesel cars won't have to do that. They can continue to pollute until their vehicle finally dies. Then they'll replace it with a gasoline hybrid or a clean diesel.
The fact that there are cars like Prius and the 2003 1/2 Civic-Hybrid that meet the SULEV rating means "clean" will be the theme from this point on.
I am interested in the 5speed and want to know what kind of price the car is going for. Which dealers seem to have the best pricing and are fair? Any suggestions/ideas? I would appricate your feedback.
thank you too all for your informative postings...
Hey, again, rather than bashing diesels, ( personally think my Jetta TDI has several key advantages over a Prius or Civic Hybrid, and they have several legit advantages over my Jetta ), can anyone answer with FACTS: How much toxins are released into the environment during the production of thousands of battery packs, and although the batteries may have been DESIGNED to be recycled, in the real world, do any facilities exist or will they exist that can handle tens of thousands of spent Hybrid car battery packs? Is it theoretically possible that the pollution generated by the manufacture of battery packs and the eventual disposal of spent battery packs is equivalent to, or greater than, say, the emissions of a standard Civic, Echo, Corolla, or even a diesel Jetta? Would appreciate educated insight on this with facts, not just conjecture. I don't know the answer, just looking for someone who can shed some educated insight on it. If someone can show me that the pollution from the manufacture and disposal of battery cells is negligible, you've sold me on a Hybrid. Until then, I'm guessing we are trading less air pollution for more other types of pollution, with a net gain of virtually nil. Anyone?
The Honda battery-packs are literally D-cell NiMH batteries assembled into a handy unit. The Prius battery-pack uses the same NiMH materials, but the cells themselves are constructed differently. You can just go to you local retailer and purchase batteries with the same components. So direct your info searches to the popular NiMH rechargable market.
As for the diesels emissions, just go to the EPA website. Certain vehicles have restricted quotas because their emissions don't meet some regulations. It's really sad that low-sulfur diesel & biodiesel simply don't hold much interest here. That along with the cleaner diesel emission technologies the European countries will begin using would change the market. And a diesel-hybrid would really be impressive.
You may encounter problems finding true diesel production pollution information, since each refinery can very tremendously. Where I live, we've witnessed the problem of ethanol production. In some cases, it's actually cleaner overall just using gasoline instead.
> I'm guessing we are trading less air pollution for > more other types of pollution, with a net gain of > virtually nil.
Virtually nil multipled by 60 million new vehicles per year worldwide amounts to quite a lot. Every little bit really does make a difference. For more info on that, research the upcoming "Tier 2" requirements.
> can anyone answer with FACTS: How much toxins > are released into the environment during the > production of thousands of battery packs...Is it > theoretically possible that the pollution > generated by the manufacture of battery packs > and the eventual disposal of spent battery packs > is equivalent to, or greater than, say, the > emissions of a standard Civic, Echo, Corolla, > or even a diesel Jetta?
These are good questions, because often we forget that the tailpipe is not the only source of emissions or energy use ("zero emissions" fuel-cell cars are a good example...how are we going to make that hydrogen?)
Unfortunately, I don't know enough about battery manufacturing to answer that question directly. Maybe the best place to look would be the "honda-hybrid" group at groups.yahoo.com; it's populated by many very hard-core Insight enthusiasts who seem to know an impossible amount about every aspect of their hybrids.
There are certainly many ways to look at the pollution problem. Someone in another group bought an SULEV Accord over the ULEV HCH, being very concerned about the difference in pollutant emissions and wanting to take advantage of low-sulfur gas (whenever it gets beyond CA...). Others feel that the reduction in greenhouse gasses based on burning less fuel is more important than a small difference in specific pollutants.
I looked seriously at the Golf diesel for its high mileage, but didn't like that the EPA rated it only 1 out of 10 for emissions (44-56 pounds of pollution per 15,000 miles; see www.epa.gov/emissweb). The HCH is rated 7 (8-12 pounds), which I thought was a very significant difference. (Of course, if room for children isn't a limitation--as it was for me--the Insight beats both on both gas use *and* emissions.) Any pollution cost in making/recycling the batteries (one set should last at least 100,000 miles) has to be balanced against the 200+ pounds of pollutants I wouldn't be putting out over those 100k miles.
A discussion of any battery life requires that the conditions which constitute end of life be defined. As a battery ages, its capacity will decline and its internal resistance will increase and either of these conditions will diminish the already marginal performance of the present hybrids. A battery may decline to a relatively small fraction of its original capacity before outright failure occurs. What level of degradation is considered acceptable?
>> What level of degradation is considered acceptable?
In Prius, you get notified of the impending failure long before before it actually happens. The "turtle" symbol with illuminate informing you there will be degraded performance, but you'll be able to drive that way just fine. Then later on down the line the car will fail to start (enough power won't be available to power the motor).
That's much better than when a traditional battery fails. In my Taurus, it gave me absolutely no warning whatsoever. I was just abruptly stranded at the mall one day.
A clue in the Honda hybrids would be charge-level indicator only showing a few bars and never charging above that anymore.
I'm not concerned how the on-board diagnostics indicate failure, but rather how much loss in capacity is allowed before failure is indicated (and more importantly, replaced under warranty).
I realize that you do not agree, but the hybrids' performance is marginal with a new, full capacity battery and that will decline as the battery ages. Under what condition will Honda or Toyota replace the battery under waranty? 80% capacity? 50%? 25%?
Failure to start may be an adequate failure criterion for a conventional starting battery, but hardly so for a hybrid which is dependent upon electric drive for adequate motive force.
> Under what condition will Honda or Toyota replace > the battery under waranty? 80% capacity? 50%? 25%?
The battery-pack in Prius is designed to deliver between 150,000 to 200,000 miles of service. The odds of needing a replacement within the 100,000 mile warranty period is extremely low. The capacity wouldn't have diminished anywhere near enough to notice a capacity drop yet. So I doubt you'll find any measurement value listed in fine-print; they'll just be dealt with on a per case basis since there will be so few.
The question I ask of the engine-only vehicle owners is: how much compression-loss in their cylinders do they allow before considering replacement of the rings, head-gasket, pistons, or perhaps even the block itself?
The point is these decisions won't occur within the warranty period. The vehicle will be much older before major replacement is needed. And then of course in the case of a battery-pack, just a few modules may be needed, not the whole thing.
I am happy to anounce that there is another satisfied Hybrid owner on the road (just 650 miles so far). I had a question about the nose mask. I have heard that if it gets wet that it can ruin the paint and that you have to remove it and let it dry when it gets wet. This seems to be an awfully big hassel. Could anyone give me some help on this since I am wanting to order one, but am worried that it will never be on the car.
once again you are comparing apples to oranges. A battery's capacity will gradually decline over its useful life, which in many applications is considered to be about 50% of its original capacity. The degradation of an IC engine over its useful life is a much smaller proportion and I dare say that few engines would ever approach 50% as they would have long since found the scrap heap. Moreover, in a hybrid vehicle, the degradation of the electrical system is ADDITIVE to that of the IC engine.
And since the performance of the hybrids is at the lower margin of acceptability for contemporary vehicles, they have little reserve to accommodate significant degradation of any component. What is your basis to expect that a hybrid battery will experience the insignificant decline that you suggest in such an extrapordinary lifetime? If you do not know what the acceptance criteria are, how can you profess to know whether one would "notice" the decline?
It is best to understand a technology before becoming its proponent (or apologist).
I had one on a Fiero for years. Make sure the area under the mask is always well waxed. Keep it as clean as you can underneath the mask. I never noticed any major damage.
Overall, I think it doesn't do any more damage than bugs and stones.
Well, I can't comment on engine heat, seeing as the Fiero was mid-engine. Does the Hybrid produce alot of heat?
From personal experience, I can say I never had a major problem with sand/dirt getting under the mask. Then again, the car was silver and scratches aren't as easy to see in a lighter color. But, the Hybrid Civic's are also light so, I can't see it being a huge problem.
I guess it all comes down to how clean your car is originally and how much dirt driving you do. I drove my car on paved roads and never had a problem. I have heard horror stories about them though.
>> A battery's capacity will gradually decline over >> its useful life, which in many applications is considered >> to be about 50% of its original capacity.
Those applications are battery-only in nature. Hybrids have more than one power source making your comparison apples to oranges. They also don't draw from the battery-pack as much as you imply.
>> What is your basis to expect that a hybrid battery >> will experience the insignificant decline that you >> suggest in such an extrapordinary lifetime?
It's based on the Prius design, factors not relevant to the Honda hybrids. Ask for details in a more appropriate forum.
if not relevant to Honda hybrids, why are you posting here?
Secondly, There is no reason to believe that Toyota has a revolutionary, proprietary, Nimh battery design that eliminates any and all of its characteristic limitations and will deliver its full capacity undiminished for all eternity.
But most significant of all is that NONE of the present hybrids can provide even marginally adequate performance with EITHER drive ALONE and are therefore dependent on BOTH. A (present) hybrid with a significantly discharged battery is a crippled vehicle. In fact, the battery is even more crucial in the Prius, which relies on electric drive for a larger percentage of its total power output than does the Civic.
IC/electric hybrid technology may be the most significant increase in vehicular efficiency since the horse, but it is not without compromise and limitations, particulary as represented by the current examples. It is important that we UNDERSTAND those differences and rabid, naive enthusiasm does not help that cause.
The first rule remains inviolate: there is NO free lunch!
>> A (present) hybrid with a significantly discharged >> battery is a crippled vehicle.
When I accelerate onto a highway, I don't even draw from the battery-pack. The same is true for when I climb a hill. You really don't understand that fact, do you?
The reason I participate here is to stimulate discussions about the differences in design. The Honda hybrids are quite capable of holding their own too. An owner will chime in explaining why.
"But most significant of all is that NONE of the present hybrids can provide even marginally adequate performance with EITHER drive ALONE and are therefore dependent on BOTH".
Not true. The Civic hybrid is perfectly cabable of running on its engine alone. Having said that, a 50% depletion of battery capacity would render the hybrid advantage to just about nil. When (and not if) that occurs, depends on a number of factors, not just mileage. Cold weather, hard driving, hilly terrain and vehicle load all affect the life of the battery. When that heppens, no one really knows yet.
>>The Civic hybrid is perfectly cabable of >>running on its engine alone.
If you define "running" as the ability to move without external assistance, perhaps. But the output of the IC engine alone is inadequate to deliver competitive performance for a vehicle as heavy as either the Civic or Prius. If John can operate his Prius on the less than 50hp/ton provided by the IC engine, he obviously demands very little of his vehicle, but I doubt that many buyers will settle for that.
>> he obviously demands very little of his vehicle
Every day I climb out of the Mississippi river valley in St. Paul. There's a slow/truck lane for the traffic that can't handle it. That lane always has someone going slow in it. So the grade is above average, especially for Minnesota.
My Prius doesn't draw from the battery-pack. I cruise along with all the other traffic at 60 MPH. On the Multi-Display, I can clearly see that all the thrust and electricity comes directly from the engine.
Hybrids are quite capable without full battery capacity. The penalty is simply lost efficiency.
that your car is adequate for YOU, you've said so repeatedly. But the fact that the performance delivered by the present hybrids when running with ALL of their faculties is at the low end of contemporary cars is NOT subject to question. You may find it adequate, for me it would be marginal, at best and certainly not adequate without the electric "boost".
> ...the fact that the performance delivered by > ...the present hybrids when running with ALL > ...of their faculties is at the low end of > ...contemporary cars is NOT subject to question
The problem is the contemporary DRIVER's definition of "performance."
Thanks to some truly remarkable marketing strategies and the combination of gullibility, greed and the need to show off our wealth, the American consumer has become convinced that a high-performance car is one that comes fully loaded with heavy, useless, power-consuming luxuries and yet can blast its way up Mt. Washington on a muggy summer day at 85 mph without strain while maintaining the interior at a "comfortable" 60 degrees.
By this definition, the performance of ANY contemporary well-made, reasonably efficient car priced within the range of a middle-income family (Civic, Corolla, Golf, Jetta, Protege would be examples) would have to be considered "marginal at best."
A better definition of performance would have to include efficiency. How about this: the performance delivered by any contemporary vehicle rated below 30 MPG (combined city/highway) is unacceptable!
It's absurd that fleet MPG continues to decrease despite the enormous explosion of technological advances we've seen in other areas. And high time to adjust our definition of "performance," not to mention "luxury."
I just convinced my mother to sell her 99 Cadillac Catera (garbage but, lots of amenities in this garbage) for a 2002 Civic EX. Who the heck needs a cooled glove box?!?!? What the hell is that all about? Heated seats? Dress for winter ya freak! Heated mirrors? Comon!
She wasn't excited. For the first time in 20 years she has to (gasp) turn her headlights on and off! And there is no exterior temperature gauge (scoff) how will I know how cold it is? Oh my!
She got over it an enjoys her 30+mpg Civic. No need for Premium gas. Lower insurance rates. Lower car payment (even after rolling the balance from the Craptera in to her new loan).
People just need to take a step back and weigh the benefits of so called luxury.
and the the frame of reference has shifted significantly over time as manufacturers have improved emission control strategies and power output accross the board. But the reality is that a driver must operate in the environment that exists and move in concert with vehicles that are endowed with the power du jour. It doesn't matter whether the motivations that establish that reality are distasteful, it is nonetheless reality and we must operate within it.
The performance of the present hybrids might have been closer to average in some bygone periods, but today they have among the lowest power/mass of contemporary cars, with commensurate performance.
A dramatic and extreme increase in fuel prices might change the automotive demographic and return us to the days of 36hp VWs and their ilk, but I don't expect it to happen. As interesting and efficient as hybrids are, they must offer competitive performance at a competitive value before one will grace my garage
>> ALL of the vehicles that you list offer performance >> that is substantially greater than the hybrids (except >> for fuel mileage).
We've been through this already and the hybrids won that debate.
It started with a comment about hybrids not being able to handle the extremely short highway ramps unique to the LA area. It ended when it was pointed out that merging with no ramp whatsoever was completely realistic with a hybrid. People do it everyday without any problem on country highways that require point-blank merging, just a perpendicular turn directly onto the highway itself with heavy acceleration to 60 MPH.
That proved that the "substantially greater" performance was actually a *WANT* not *NEED*.
And there's nothing wrong with having a *WANT* for more. But stating that's a requirement to be a competitive is just plain not true. After all, hybrids have "substantially greater" performance in reference to emissions & efficiency. Greater MPG is a *WANT* not a *NEED* ...for now, once gas climbs above $2 per gallon and stays there it's a whole new ballgame.
Clean emissions, on the other hand, is an unconditional *NEED*. The SMOG problems we have won't be solved if we remain status quo. In fact, they'll get worse as the population grows causing road congestion slowdowns to increase.
"If Honda sedans were substituted for every SUV, the old earth wouldn't know the difference."
Really? Let's see some concrete numbers that support your argument. How about something more than an old man's unsubstantiated theory. Or do you figure you have one foot in the grave (as your picture would suggest) so forget about everyone else and their future?
GM ALONE sold approximately 55,652 SUV's in January. Using EPA tests, GM's best vehicle (Saturn VUE) will spew 12.9 pounds of smog forming pollution per 15,000 miles. So we'll give them the benefit of the doubt and say all of their vehicles are as clean as the VUE (that's a joke). So, that's 717,910.8 pounds of crap in the air from ONE month of sales alone! If we insert Honda's cleanest (practical) car the Civic Hybrid, (it spews 1 pound per 15,000 miles) that's a difference of 662,258.8 pounds.
That's only GM. That's only one month. That's their CLEANEST SUV.
And you don't think that'll add up?
In case someone failed to mention, (or more likely, your mind is failing) there is a limited supply of fossil fuel. I'd think you'd be able to figure out that using less fuel per vehicle would make that limited resource last longer. And how about this, larger vehicles require more materials (plastics).
Given your stance on conservation, you probably don't recycle. After all, how much space does one pop bottle really take up in a landfill?
Nice attitude. Sad. Very sad.
P.S. Nice ascot.
His responses
ium in ny. of course i recycle. i even drive my 16 mpg pickup to the recling station, as everybody in the country does. jf
Response #2
say we are going to run out of wil in 50 years. then say we improve mileage 10%. so when do we run out of oil? six months later? what's the difference.
also remember that most suvs have normal range mileage, about the same as bigger cars, mercedes, lexus, bmw. it is only the very big boys--hummer, suburban, toyota sequoia, nissan armada, ford lincoln navigator, that are in the 12-16 mpg range. they are a small part of the suv picture. the sell more saturn vues than hummers. jf
Comments
Honda's website (www.hondacars.com) invites folks to compare the gas mileage and savings of the Civic Hybrid to other gasoline-powered cars. The thing is, the comparison is based on what may be very unrealistic numbers. Having a huge difference between theoretical gas mileage (EPA estimates) and actual gas mileage could be a big problem for Honda. I for one will be very disappointed if my Civic Hybrid doesn't get much better gas mileage than a regular Civic LX. How are other folks doing with respect to mileage? Does anyone have any practical tips for getting the most mileage out of their vehicle? I shudder to think what the gas mileage will be this summer with the AC on regularly.
Bill
Greenhouse gas emissions in tons per year (best to worst variation within a model is due to choice of transmission or engine. Note that Prius is not available with manual transmission).
Honda FCX: 0?
Honda Insight: 3.1 - 3.5
Toyota Prius: 4.0
Honda Civic Hybrid: 4.0 - 4.1
VW Golf TDI: 4.7 - 5.5
Honda Civic HX: 4.9 - 5.2
Honda Civic GX: 5.1
Nissan Sentra: 6.1 - 7.7
2) 45.5
3) 70/30
2. 46.6
3. 80/20
Note: I have found that if I really baby it, draft a few trucks, get favorable winds occasionally, I can sneak the mileage up to the 50 mark. But it's a lot of work.
>> it is NOT a "young" technology!
Ahh... Fuel-Cells are over 140 years old now! What do you have to say about that?
It's the fact that neither fuel-cells nor electric motors have ever been used this way before. The way they were first used really doesn't mean much for this different type of implementation.
The goal now is to reduce cost, decrease size, decrease weight, increase power, and increase efficiency to propel a 5-passenger car or larger. All those in a single design really weren't priorities until now.
And yes, the electronic rather than mechanical control increases the differences too.
JOHN http://john1701a.com
Winter is just awful on MPG.
*ALL* vehicles suffer significant drops during cold weather. (I have proof too. There's spreadsheets from my 2 previous vehicles on my website in addition to my hybrid.) If you have a tachometer, just watch the RPM speed during warmup. It's much higher in the winter than in the summer. And in a hybrid, the auto-stop doesn't shut off as soon (or at all in the coldest conditions), especially if you run the heater on "hot" rather than "warm". All that consumes more gas.
Tire pressure drops significantly in the cold too. So if you haven't checked recently, that is also what's impairing MPG.
In the summer, even with the A/C running, you should still get better MPG than in the dead of winter (now).
JOHN http://john1701a.com
> city/51 highway for the 5-speed manual, and 48
> city/47 highway for the CVT (which I own)....
> My experience with cars has been that I have
> NEVER gotten the EPA estimates...my wife is
> averaging about 34-35 city, which is about 27%
> lower than the EPA estimate.
In my 8 months of experience, the EPA estimates for this vehicle are surprisingly good. HOWEVER, winter mileage is *very* temperature dependent, which is what your wife is probably experiencing.
On my 10-mile, suburban commute (no highway but also no true stop-and-go), I had no trouble getting 51 mpg (on the gauge; actual calculated mpg runs 2-3 mpg lower) last summer and through the fall until the temperature fell below about 50. Now, I get about 45 if the temperature is in the 30s and 40s, 40 if it's in the 20's and 35 if it's in the teens and single digits as it has been in the Chicago area recently.
Other things to consider:
(1) There's a mechanical break-in period; many owners have reported better mileage after 5,000-6,000 miles
(2) There's an even more important "break-in" for the OWNER--the car trains you to drive it better over the first several months
(3) AutoStop doesn't work well in cold weather
(4) How you use the heat influences mileage; ditto the A/C in the summer
(5) Driving conditions matter a lot; this car performs best when it can do some "cruising," and its performance suffers greatly in true city gridlock (this of course is true for other cars, as well, but many of the sophisticated features of this engine are not designed for bumper-to-bumper or constant stop-and-go traffic).
A good place to look for more tips and info. is on the Yahoo! civic_hybrid discussion group.
--Jon
And hybrids can be (and are) diesel-electric as well. I find it surprising to see people apply hybrids with only gasoline engines.
We passed on a Civic Hybrid because of some of the issues that have surfaced on this board, including the fact that really big mpg numbers are hard to achieve consistently with the current technology, but drop-dead easy with any contemporary diesel. The only obstacle to getting on with real choices is the crap that is sold as diesel fuel in this country...
Bill
I'm open to suggestions. Will take the car in for routine maintence on Valentines day and hopefully get the creak fixed there.
2009 BMW 335i, 2003 Corvette cnv. (RIP 2001 Jaguar XK8 cnv and 1985 MB 380SE [the best of the lot])
> mileage?...I can't imagine that, once the
> engine is warmed up, it would have to run
> that much more just produce enough heat to
> keep the cabin warm.
That's true. The key is *once the engine is warmed up.* This small, efficient engine warms up slowly and cools down quickly, and it must be at full operating temperature to give the best mileage. If I turn on the heat right away on a cold morning, it takes 10-12 miles of surface-street commute to get all the way to operating temp. If I leave it off for the first 5-10 min., I get much faster engine warm-up and thus better mileage.
> Does the use of an engine-driven water pump
> require that the AutoStop be disabled in order
> to deliver heat?
No. As far as we can tell, the disabling of AutoStop at low temperature is strictly to keep the cabin from getting cold while you're stopped at a light (which I wish were optional). If the engine is warmed up, you can turn off the heat, AutoStop at a light and immediately turn the heat back on without starting the engine.
I am averaging 47 mpg combined city-highway real-world mpg on my Jetta TDI 5-speed over the last 10,000 miles.
I am considering a Hybrid Civic, since it seems that I would get similar mileage as the Jetta, with less immediate environmental impact ( soot from diesel ). However, I wonder how many toxins are released into the environment in the production of the battery pack/cells on the hybrid, and long-term, where are tens of thousands of old hybrid battery packs going to go, under a mountain in Nevada, leaching into ground water, etc? I wonder if by skipping the diesel I would be just trading one kind of pollution for another in the big picture...any ideas? Thanks!
JOHN
http://john1701a.com
>> trucks roaming the country spewing large amounts on soot
That's a *HORRIBLE* excuse! The upcoming new federal regulations will require those 18 wheelers to have their emissions systems upgraded. The owners will have no choice but to do that, since replacing a $100,000 vehicle is completely unrealistic.
Owners of diesel cars won't have to do that. They can continue to pollute until their vehicle finally dies. Then they'll replace it with a gasoline hybrid or a clean diesel.
The fact that there are cars like Prius and the 2003 1/2 Civic-Hybrid that meet the SULEV rating means "clean" will be the theme from this point on.
JOHN http://john1701a.com
thank you too all for your informative postings...
Thanks!
Matt
As for the diesels emissions, just go to the EPA website. Certain vehicles have restricted quotas because their emissions don't meet some regulations. It's really sad that low-sulfur diesel & biodiesel simply don't hold much interest here. That along with the cleaner diesel emission technologies the European countries will begin using would change the market. And a diesel-hybrid would really be impressive.
You may encounter problems finding true diesel production pollution information, since each refinery can very tremendously. Where I live, we've witnessed the problem of ethanol production. In some cases, it's actually cleaner overall just using gasoline instead.
> I'm guessing we are trading less air pollution for
> more other types of pollution, with a net gain of
> virtually nil.
Virtually nil multipled by 60 million new vehicles per year worldwide amounts to quite a lot. Every little bit really does make a difference. For more info on that, research the upcoming "Tier 2" requirements.
JOHN http://john1701a.com
> are released into the environment during the
> production of thousands of battery packs...Is it
> theoretically possible that the pollution
> generated by the manufacture of battery packs
> and the eventual disposal of spent battery packs
> is equivalent to, or greater than, say, the
> emissions of a standard Civic, Echo, Corolla,
> or even a diesel Jetta?
These are good questions, because often we forget that the tailpipe is not the only source of emissions or energy use ("zero emissions" fuel-cell cars are a good example...how are we going to make that hydrogen?)
Unfortunately, I don't know enough about battery manufacturing to answer that question directly. Maybe the best place to look would be the "honda-hybrid" group at groups.yahoo.com; it's populated by many very hard-core Insight enthusiasts who seem to know an impossible amount about every aspect of their hybrids.
There are certainly many ways to look at the pollution problem. Someone in another group bought an SULEV Accord over the ULEV HCH, being very concerned about the difference in pollutant emissions and wanting to take advantage of low-sulfur gas (whenever it gets beyond CA...). Others feel that the reduction in greenhouse gasses based on burning less fuel is more important than a small difference in specific pollutants.
I looked seriously at the Golf diesel for its high mileage, but didn't like that the EPA rated it only 1 out of 10 for emissions (44-56 pounds of pollution per 15,000 miles; see www.epa.gov/emissweb). The HCH is rated 7 (8-12 pounds), which I thought was a very significant difference. (Of course, if room for children isn't a limitation--as it was for me--the Insight beats both on both gas use *and* emissions.) Any pollution cost in making/recycling the batteries (one set should last at least 100,000 miles) has to be balanced against the 200+ pounds of pollutants I wouldn't be putting out over those 100k miles.
I second that "at least". One Prius has already exceeded 200,000 miles with its original battery-pack.
JOHN http://john1701a.com
I know bashing posters is frowned upon but, that has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read here.
In Prius, you get notified of the impending failure long before before it actually happens. The "turtle" symbol with illuminate informing you there will be degraded performance, but you'll be able to drive that way just fine. Then later on down the line the car will fail to start (enough power won't be available to power the motor).
That's much better than when a traditional battery fails. In my Taurus, it gave me absolutely no warning whatsoever. I was just abruptly stranded at the mall one day.
A clue in the Honda hybrids would be charge-level indicator only showing a few bars and never charging above that anymore.
JOHN http://john1701a.com
I realize that you do not agree, but the hybrids' performance is marginal with a new, full capacity battery and that will decline as the battery ages. Under what condition will Honda or Toyota replace the battery under waranty? 80% capacity? 50%? 25%?
Failure to start may be an adequate failure criterion for a conventional starting battery, but hardly so for a hybrid which is dependent upon electric drive for adequate motive force.
> the battery under waranty? 80% capacity? 50%? 25%?
The battery-pack in Prius is designed to deliver between 150,000 to 200,000 miles of service. The odds of needing a replacement within the 100,000 mile warranty period is extremely low. The capacity wouldn't have diminished anywhere near enough to notice a capacity drop yet. So I doubt you'll find any measurement value listed in fine-print; they'll just be dealt with on a per case basis since there will be so few.
The question I ask of the engine-only vehicle owners is: how much compression-loss in their cylinders do they allow before considering replacement of the rings, head-gasket, pistons, or perhaps even the block itself?
The point is these decisions won't occur within the warranty period. The vehicle will be much older before major replacement is needed. And then of course in the case of a battery-pack, just a few modules may be needed, not the whole thing.
JOHN http://john1701a.com
I am happy to anounce that there is another satisfied Hybrid owner on the road (just 650 miles so far). I had a question about the nose mask. I have heard that if it gets wet that it can ruin the paint and that you have to remove it and let it dry when it gets wet. This seems to be an awfully big hassel. Could anyone give me some help on this since I am wanting to order one, but am worried that it will never be on the car.
Thanks in advance
Jeremy
And since the performance of the hybrids is at the lower margin of acceptability for contemporary vehicles, they have little reserve to accommodate significant degradation of any component. What is your basis to expect that a hybrid battery will experience the insignificant decline that you suggest in such an extrapordinary lifetime? If you do not know what the acceptance criteria are, how can you profess to know whether one would "notice" the decline?
It is best to understand a technology before becoming its proponent (or apologist).
Overall, I think it doesn't do any more damage than bugs and stones.
The grit that get's under them is like sandpaper on your paint. also engine heat get's trapped to the point I've seen bubbled paint!
From personal experience, I can say I never had a major problem with sand/dirt getting under the mask. Then again, the car was silver and scratches aren't as easy to see in a lighter color. But, the Hybrid Civic's are also light so, I can't see it being a huge problem.
I guess it all comes down to how clean your car is originally and how much dirt driving you do. I drove my car on paved roads and never had a problem. I have heard horror stories about them though.
Who knows. There is always a dissenting opinion.
>> its useful life, which in many applications is considered
>> to be about 50% of its original capacity.
Those applications are battery-only in nature. Hybrids have more than one power source making your comparison apples to oranges. They also don't draw from the battery-pack as much as you imply.
>> What is your basis to expect that a hybrid battery
>> will experience the insignificant decline that you
>> suggest in such an extrapordinary lifetime?
It's based on the Prius design, factors not relevant to the Honda hybrids. Ask for details in a more appropriate forum.
JOHN http://john1701a.com
Secondly, There is no reason to believe that Toyota has a revolutionary, proprietary, Nimh battery design that eliminates any and all of its characteristic limitations and will deliver its full capacity undiminished for all eternity.
But most significant of all is that NONE of the present hybrids can provide even marginally adequate performance with EITHER drive ALONE and are therefore dependent on BOTH. A (present) hybrid with a significantly discharged battery is a crippled vehicle. In fact, the battery is even more crucial in the Prius, which relies on electric drive for a larger percentage of its total power output than does the Civic.
IC/electric hybrid technology may be the most significant increase in vehicular efficiency since the horse, but it is not without compromise and limitations, particulary as represented by the current examples. It is important that we UNDERSTAND those differences and rabid, naive enthusiasm does not help that cause.
The first rule remains inviolate: there is NO free lunch!
>> battery is a crippled vehicle.
When I accelerate onto a highway, I don't even draw from the battery-pack. The same is true for when I climb a hill. You really don't understand that fact, do you?
The reason I participate here is to stimulate discussions about the differences in design. The Honda hybrids are quite capable of holding their own too. An owner will chime in explaining why.
JOHN http://john1701a.com
Not true. The Civic hybrid is perfectly cabable of running on its engine alone. Having said that, a 50% depletion of battery capacity would render the hybrid advantage to just about nil. When (and not if) that occurs, depends on a number of factors, not just mileage. Cold weather, hard driving, hilly terrain and vehicle load all affect the life of the battery. When that heppens, no one really knows yet.
>>running on its engine alone.
If you define "running" as the ability to move without external assistance, perhaps. But the output of the IC engine alone is inadequate to deliver competitive performance for a vehicle as heavy as either the Civic or Prius. If John can operate his Prius on the less than 50hp/ton provided by the IC engine, he obviously demands very little of his vehicle, but I doubt that many buyers will settle for that.
Every day I climb out of the Mississippi river valley in St. Paul. There's a slow/truck lane for the traffic that can't handle it. That lane always has someone going slow in it. So the grade is above average, especially for Minnesota.
My Prius doesn't draw from the battery-pack. I cruise along with all the other traffic at 60 MPH. On the Multi-Display, I can clearly see that all the thrust and electricity comes directly from the engine.
Hybrids are quite capable without full battery capacity. The penalty is simply lost efficiency.
JOHN http://john1701a.com
> ...the present hybrids when running with ALL
> ...of their faculties is at the low end of
> ...contemporary cars is NOT subject to question
The problem is the contemporary DRIVER's definition of "performance."
Thanks to some truly remarkable marketing strategies and the combination of gullibility, greed and the need to show off our wealth, the American consumer has become convinced that a high-performance car is one that comes fully loaded with heavy, useless, power-consuming luxuries and yet can blast its way up Mt. Washington on a muggy summer day at 85 mph without strain while maintaining the interior at a "comfortable" 60 degrees.
By this definition, the performance of ANY contemporary well-made, reasonably efficient car priced within the range of a middle-income family (Civic, Corolla, Golf, Jetta, Protege would be examples) would have to be considered "marginal at best."
A better definition of performance would have to include efficiency. How about this: the performance delivered by any contemporary vehicle rated below 30 MPG (combined city/highway) is unacceptable!
It's absurd that fleet MPG continues to decrease despite the enormous explosion of technological advances we've seen in other areas. And high time to adjust our definition of "performance," not to mention "luxury."
She wasn't excited. For the first time in 20 years she has to (gasp) turn her headlights on and off! And there is no exterior temperature gauge (scoff) how will I know how cold it is? Oh my!
She got over it an enjoys her 30+mpg Civic. No need for Premium gas. Lower insurance rates. Lower car payment (even after rolling the balance from the Craptera in to her new loan).
People just need to take a step back and weigh the benefits of so called luxury.
The performance of the present hybrids might have been closer to average in some bygone periods, but today they have among the lowest power/mass of contemporary cars, with commensurate performance.
A dramatic and extreme increase in fuel prices might change the automotive demographic and return us to the days of 36hp VWs and their ilk, but I don't expect it to happen. As interesting and efficient as hybrids are, they must offer competitive performance at a competitive value before one will grace my garage
>> that is substantially greater than the hybrids (except
>> for fuel mileage).
We've been through this already and the hybrids won that debate.
It started with a comment about hybrids not being able to handle the extremely short highway ramps unique to the LA area. It ended when it was pointed out that merging with no ramp whatsoever was completely realistic with a hybrid. People do it everyday without any problem on country highways that require point-blank merging, just a perpendicular turn directly onto the highway itself with heavy acceleration to 60 MPH.
That proved that the "substantially greater" performance was actually a *WANT* not *NEED*.
And there's nothing wrong with having a *WANT* for more. But stating that's a requirement to be a competitive is just plain not true. After all, hybrids have "substantially greater" performance in reference to emissions & efficiency. Greater MPG is a *WANT* not a *NEED* ...for now, once gas climbs above $2 per gallon and stays there it's a whole new ballgame.
Clean emissions, on the other hand, is an unconditional *NEED*. The SMOG problems we have won't be solved if we remain status quo. In fact, they'll get worse as the population grows causing road congestion slowdowns to increase.
JOHN http://john1701a.com
So I emailed him. Below is our correspondence.
(I was a bit rude.)
Mr. Flint,
"If Honda sedans were substituted for every SUV, the old earth wouldn't know the difference."
Really? Let's see some concrete numbers that support your argument. How about something more than an old man's unsubstantiated theory. Or do you figure you have one foot in the grave (as your picture would suggest) so forget about everyone else and their future?
GM ALONE sold approximately 55,652 SUV's in January. Using EPA tests, GM's best vehicle (Saturn VUE) will spew 12.9 pounds of smog forming pollution per 15,000 miles. So we'll give them the benefit of the doubt and say all of their vehicles are as clean as the VUE (that's a joke). So, that's 717,910.8 pounds of crap in the air from ONE month of sales alone! If we insert Honda's cleanest (practical) car the Civic Hybrid, (it spews 1 pound per 15,000 miles) that's a difference of 662,258.8 pounds.
That's only GM. That's only one month. That's their CLEANEST SUV.
And you don't think that'll add up?
In case someone failed to mention, (or more likely, your mind is failing) there is a limited supply of fossil fuel. I'd think you'd be able to figure out that using less fuel per vehicle would make that limited resource last longer. And how about this, larger vehicles require more materials (plastics).
Given your stance on conservation, you probably don't recycle. After all, how much space does one pop bottle really take up in a landfill?
Nice attitude. Sad. Very sad.
P.S. Nice ascot.
His responses
ium in ny. of course i recycle. i even drive my 16 mpg pickup to the recling station, as everybody in the country does.
jf
Response #2
say we are going to run out of wil in 50 years. then say we improve mileage 10%. so when do we run out of oil? six months later? what's the
difference.
also remember that most suvs have normal range mileage, about the same as bigger cars, mercedes, lexus, bmw. it is only the very big boys--hummer,
suburban, toyota sequoia, nissan armada, ford lincoln navigator, that are in the 12-16 mpg range. they are a small part of the suv picture. the sell more saturn vues than hummers.
jf