I would not buy either vehicle for the volume of room. I would just keep my Suburban. I would be looking at the economy of a new vehicle. In that case the advantage is all Passat TDI. There is no way the Escape or Escape hybrid will get into the 40 mpg range on the highway. The Escape hybrid may be competitive around town, that is yet to be proven.
"I would not buy either vehicle for the volume of room."
I'm with you here, I've got an Expedition...that's paid for...so why get rid of it. The main reason for comparing Volume was that I was looking for a viable Hybrid competitor to the Passat. I have to agree that the Escape (pick a flavor) will never touch the mid 30's on the highway, let alone the 40's. I believe the initial numbers FORD/EPA (whichever) was estimating somewhere around 30-31 around town in the Escape Hybrid, the Passat will probably be somewhere in that mix 30-31 I'd think. We'll just see, but I think average MPG in mixed driving will see the Passat a minimum of 10mpg higher than the Escape Hybrid.
This is, though, just my opinion and specualtion at that...
I have a friend who is a sales manager at a large Ford store in Arizona. He told me that they lose 5 to 10 Expedition sales a week because the Expedition does not have a diesel option. He said customers walk in with checkbook in hand ready to buy an Expedition diesel but leave mad and dejected. He said not one of those customers would buy the gas version nor do they want an Excursion. He also said that they are not alone as a number of other Ford stores have the same complaint. You would think that Ford would offer a diesel option.
On another note, my friend told me that up to about two months ago it was like a feeding frenzy with people who were willing to buy the Escape hybrid site unseen. Now the interest has dropped to almost zero and a number of customers have come in, canceled and got their deposit back.
That is interesting. Maybe the automakers will get the picture. We want good mileage not promises of things to come. My Ford manager friend is in a panic here in San Diego. She has nearly 100 deposits on the Escape hybrid. Ford told her 1 per month per dealer. It would be so much easier to offer the diesels that are already being sold in Europe. The biggest roadblock is CARB here in CA. They have blocked small diesel engines for cars. Of course you can buy a huge truck with diesel or an Excursion diesel. It makes no sense.
Honda’s new Accord 2.2 i-CTDi Sport has this week set no fewer than 19 world speed records and achieved 3.07 litres / 100 km (92 mpg) fuel economy to boot. British racing driver Robin Liddell and freelance journalist Iain Robertson were part of the European record-setting team. Amongst the speed records set, which were all achieved in Production Car Class B (2000 – 2500 cc), were 133.04 mph (1 mile flying start), 84.25 mph (1 mile standing start) and an average speed of 130.38 mph over a 24-hour endurance period. These records were all set at Papenburg high-speed oval test track in north-west Germany on 1 and 2 May, and are all subject to FIA ratification.
Here in Minnesota, one of the brands of gas doesn't meet the "low" requirement maximum of 80ppm. It has 102ppm of sulfur. In other areas of the country, some gas is as dirty as 500ppm.
I'm curiuos, if the new low levels of sulfur that will be required in 2006 for unleaded gas is less than 80 PPM. Why is ULSD required to be less than 15 PPM. If there is this disparity wouldn't that make cars that run on ULSD much cleaner than cars using Unleaded gas? Is this the requirement that will assist many engines to pass the SULEV II? With the added efficiency of the diesel engines I would think they should be both cleaner and less wasteful of our oil supply when ULSD is used.
There is/was a lot of sulphur in the regulargas in some areas of the US--the most known issue with this was BMW's nikasil engine block that degraded with had that was over 300PPM os something. Pretty bad oversight, even though gas in europe is never close to that dirty.
All engines will make more NoX with high-sulphur gas, though because diesel comustion is much higher pressure it will make more of it.
The biggest impact of the ULSD fuels is that the diesel vehicles already on the road will start putting out quite a lot less pollution.
Driving to wisconsin over the weekend, i saw 5 priuses on the road. Pretty cool. Would have gladly traded my friend's corolla that i was driving for one of them.
Here is an interesting article on the BMW issue with our lousy gas. So not only do we have poor diesel, we have poor gas in many areas of the USA. I wondered why cars smelled bad in some parts of the US. It looks like CARB has done some good here in CA. Thanks, Dave
Yeah--i was tempted to buy a 540i awhile ago, but it had the issue, as well has having an automatic ( eck ). Additionally, it got pretty poor mileage even in good circumstances. I passed.
The gas where i used to live ( new mexico ) was very high sulphur. It's a good locale for the cheap south american oil, and the population density is so low ( 10 people per square mile ) that smog is not much of an issue.
All vehicles incur a R&D expenses. And since the HSD cost will be spread among several vehicles, it looks like Toyota actually got off rather cheap. Instead of having to build entirely new bodies for each, all they have to do is make modifications to existing ones to accomodate HSD.
Is that why they designed a whole new body for the Prius? Or was it just too ugly to sell in it's original Echo body? You are trying to convince people that all that is needed is to pull out the old ICE and slap in HSD. I say that is totally inaccurate and very misleading to people that think you know what is happening.
CARB will not "open up" diesel for general sales. The EPA (for the rest of the country) won't either.
Hide and watch you may get the surprise of your life. Read it and weep!
Allan Lloyd, the chairman of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) -- whose rulings have had profound effects on national environmental policy -- has reversed himself and declared that clean diesel may have a viable future in California and the rest of the nation.
Mercedes is confident that, when low-sulfur fuel becomes widely available around 2007, its new-generation, turbocharged diesel will meet toughened emissions standards in all 50 states.
Michigan Rep. John Dingell, the powerful Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, is pushing for tax breaks for buyers of diesels that run on low-sulfur fuel.
Michigan Rep. John Dingell, the powerful Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, is pushing for tax breaks for buyers of diesels that run on low-sulfur fuel.
There is a Democrat even I could like. I could use the write-off and would happily pay extra to run ULSD. It beats that Ethanol they are trying to jam down our lungs.
First, Prius was the original (1997). Echo followed it (1999).
Second, the fact that Prius is a new vehicle has absolutely nothing to do with how HSD is deployed afterward. Also, you seem to gloss over the fact that Toyota has been planning this for years. The bodies of some existing vehicles already have accommodations for supporting the hybrid system.
> Read it and weep!
How does the possibility of approval make it competitive... or as you claimed "It will kill the hybrid market in 2006". That would mean diesel would have to somehow instantly overcome all the misconceptions about it and sell so many that it made Toyota, Lexus, Ford, Honda, Nissan, and GM hybrids sales look tiny in comparison.
This is a handicap, true, but i think hybrid has much the same image to overcome. Most people think of a tiny two-seater that takes 20 seconds to get to 60 when they think hybrid, much as they think of noisy soot-belcher when they think diesel.
Tax credits for diesel would be awesome. If that passat diesel had more power, i'd be *sorely* tempted to get one.
Some hybrids vehicles, such as insight and prius, get part of their MPG from low-rolling-resistance tires and low drag coefficient. Of course, the drivetrain benefits are still there, and most of the "penalty" comes on the highway.
I don't think ULDS will kill the hybrid market, i see the two coexisting, but hopefully not competing for the same customers.
> get part of their MPG from low-rolling-resistance tires
Not true.
Prius comes standard run-of-the-mill (Goodyear Integrity) tires.
My Prius has high-traction (Michelin Hydroedge) tires. And with them, I was able to average 53 MPG for the month of July... despite the 1.7 MPG penalty from using E10 instead of gas and the harsh break-in penalty from the course rubber.
"Prius comes standard with LRR (Low Rolling Resistance) tires. This type maximizes MPG. Switching to Non-LRR tires means you can expect a drop in fuel efficiency by approximately 3 MPG. Owners have found this an acceptable trade-off for getting better handling and significantly increased tread life."
The facts are that Toyota, GM, Ford, DCC, Nissan, Honda, BMW, VW, and many others, all currently have fine new design Diesel cars, small PU trucks, Mini-vans etc in production. If CA openned up on diesel the other 4 states would follow suit. Then all 50 states would have access to many more fine vehicles that get great mileage are great handling road cars. We would not be held hostage to a couple hybrids that get good mileage and are a rip-off to buy, if you can find them.
Who said anything about a 2006 rip-off. Toyota dealers are doing it as we post. Just yesterday a gentleman turned down one dealer for asking $5000 over MSRP. He did buy a Prius at $1500 over MSRP. If that is not a rip-off I'll eat your OEM tires you took off your Prius because they did not handle well. I have never wanted a car enough to pay MSRP so maybe it's just me that considers it poor judgment to even pay MSRP.
As you agree, the move to better tires involves a slight fuel economy loss, and air drag is also a significant issue. I hereby apoligize for not keeping up with every last change for 2004 for a car i'm not thinking of buying, although i note that "hybrids" doesn't only refer to the 2004 prius. And, weather they are officially labeled LRR or not, you and others have replaced them at low mileage for better handling. Great for the environment, that is.
Carsdirect.com says $25.8K for a prius. That seems wrong. There are some pretty nifty cars gettable for 25.8K. Should be more like 22K, just a little over sticker.
I RAN OVER A TOOL AND THE BLADE PUNCHED A HOLE TOO LARGE TO REPAIR.
SO RATHER THAN REPLACE THAT STANDARD TIRE WITH ANOTHER STANDARD TIRE, I CHOSE TO DO A SERVICE FOR MY PRIUS FRIENDS BY PURCHASING PREMIUM-GRADE TIRES INSTEAD.
THEY HAD BEEN REQUESTING INFORMATION ON HIGH-TRACTION TIRES. I COULDN'T ABLIGDE, SINCE I DIDN'T HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE WITH THEM. NOW I DO.
STOP TRYING TO CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT I SWITCHED TIRES FOR ANY OTHER REASON, BECAUSE I DIDN'T.
I DROVE THROUGH ALL LAST WINTER IN MINNESOTA WITHOUT A LICK OF TRACTION TROUBLE. AND WOULD HAVE CONTINUED THROUGH THAT WAY THIS YEAR TOO. THAT ACCIDENT SIMPLY ACCELERATED REGULAR REPLACEMENT TO A YEAR SOONER.
I RAN OVER A TOOL AND THE BLADE PUNCHED A HOLE TOO LARGE TO REPAIR.
Every tire I have ever bought was covered by a road hazard warranty. They should have replaced the tire for free. Another reason not to buy a Prius. I just changed the Firestone OEM tires on my Suburban after 6 years and 45k miles. They were not worn out just badly weather checked from the sun. Yours lasted a winter not good. Prius loses points on OEM tires.
STOP TRYING TO CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT I SWITCHED TIRES FOR ANY OTHER REASON, BECAUSE I DIDN'T.
You can mislead some of the people all of the time but not all of the people all of the time. Every article written says the Prius has a horrible cross wind handling problem. Many of them kindly attribute it to the tires. Others that are better informed say it is an inherent problem with "low drag coefficient vehicles" Part of the good mileage is attributed to the low wind resistance. for some reason, that I don't know, it also causes problems in cross winds. With mostly city commuting you would never know you have an issue. Get out on a North Dakota highway in a high wind and snowy conditions and you will be lucky to stay out of the ditch. Those are the facts and YOU know it. Reference material: The Prius, despite rolling on some pretty spectacular Toyo snow tires, isn't at its best in these conditions. It's exceptionally sensitive to cross winds, jumping half a lane over at every strong gust of wind. The steering, throttle and brakes have no feel at all - a by-product of all of them being in some way electronically controlled - making quick corrections, changes of directions, and sudden stops for when you've missed your turn, are all pretty harrowing experiences. The overactive, and non-defeat able, vehicle dynamics control system doesn't help either, its early and brutal interventions punctuated by incessant, nagging beeping from somewhere deep in the dash.
> They should have replaced the tire for free. Another reason not to buy a Prius.
The tire is covered under Goodyear's road-hazard warranty, just like any other one would be. A check will be cut for whatever replacement you end up getting.
> You can mislead some
The Goodyear Integrity tires can be found on several other vehicles, which provides proof that they are just a generic tires, nothing special for Prius.
Anyway, who cares? The 85,000 mile tires sell for a totally reasonable price and deliver remarkable traction.
> Get out on a North Dakota highway in a high wind and snowy conditions and you will be lucky to stay out of the ditch. Those are the facts and YOU know it.
The snow belt of Minnesota is between Cannon Falls and Rochester. That is very open country, nothing but farmer's fields. My 2004 Prius did not have a lick of trouble, none at all in those driving conditions last winter through there.
Those "facts" claimed are total nonsense. Show me a single report of that happening to an actual owner. It didn't!
Also, provide proof that the test-drive vehicle had properly inflated tires. I bet they didn't. 35 PSI front & 35 PSI back will cause handling problems. Most people are totally unaware of that. Prius requires a 2 PSI bias in front. So the back should only be 33, not 35.
That was very intentional. Now I won't ever have to repeat the same information. I can just refer back to that one and only ALL CAPS post. It should enable us to move on to more constructive discussions.
I think you make it clear, on your own site, that the tires are a significant upgrade--otherwise, why would you pay to replace 4 tires when one was punctured at under 16,000 miles??? That's quite a step to take for someone who is very concerned for the environment.
I really find it really hard to believe that a 2 PSI difference in back accounts for the handling noted on several tests. Sensitivity to crosswinds has a lot to do with a car's structure--i know some cars you have to fight to stay in a lane for gusts you won't notice in another vehicle.
I think this is a silly thing to be arguing about. Lots of cars come with poor tires designed to get an extra MPG on EPA tests. The tires on the saturn i bought way back when were atrocious. 3MPG down from 60/51 is not that big of a deal. It's simply worth remembering when we're arguing about small MPG differences between the cars in this topic, is all.
"The gas where i used to live ( new mexico ) was very high sulphur. It's a good locale for the cheap south american oil, and the population density is so low ( 10 people per square mile ) that smog is not much of an issue. "
Except in Albuquerque, where people need permission to run their fireplaces due to smog problems...
"35 PSI front & 35 PSI back will cause handling problems. Most people are totally unaware of that. Prius requires a 2 PSI bias in front. So the back should only be 33, not 35."
Is the 2 PSI difference requirement in the Prius Owner's manual?
"My Prius has high-traction (Michelin Hydroedge) tires."
The Hydro-Edge on your Prius is a watershedding tire...much like the GY Aquatred, but with a tire softness rating (or speed rating) of "T" is can hardly be considered a high-traction tire. The softer the tire, the higher the traction.....the less wear. The proper term for your tires is All-Season...not Performance All-Season (or any variation thereof, such as High-Performance, or Ultra Performance). The term High-Traction implies that it is a performance tire, when in reality it is an All-Season tire (also designated as a M+S tire, it should be printed on your sidewall) and will not have any noticable effect on your MPG. Don't get me wrong, they are very good tires...and I recommend them for all weather driving....
"...harsh break-in penalty from the course rubber"
And I'm not sure what you actually mean by this...."course" tires have less traction because there is less contact patch between the tires and the road due to the "courseness" (I'm not sure what you were trying to convey with that term). And break-in penatly on tires?
LRR is just marketing hype...the "LRR" tires that came on the "classic" Prius as you call it (I thought vehicles had to reach the 20year mark to be classic, so I'll call it the first generation Prius..or Prius MKI) came standard with Bridgestone Pontenza RE92s. A standard "S" rated tire. Was OEM on many cars (and in 14" too), can purchase them for almost any car you want, so why should it be called LRR when speaking of the Prius MKI and not other cars?
My TDI came standard with Michelin Energy MXV4 Plus Grand Touring All-Season Tires. Meaning...that they have an "H" softness rating...(they are softer than "T" rated tires..for better cornering)...my tires are also 10MM wider than your tires...meaning there is more contact patch (ie they are "stickier" because they are softer and wider) so what your tires (the Hydroedges) have that mine don't is the watershedding tred. I still average 44mpg with wider, softer tires....imagine if I did have narrower...harder tires....I might be able to squeeze and extra 1/2 MPG out of it.
So I'll reiterate (and rephrase a bit) what I stated earlier Tires will not have that much noticable effect on MPG unless there is a drastic change in width (10mm isn't drastic) and/or tire compound (going from S/T rating to H rating is a major change, but going from S/T to V OR H to Z rating is a drastic change).
Please stop referring to the 85k warranty as a pure indicator of treadwear. Warranties mean more about price than treadwear. Tire makers can either have a higher warranty and charge more or have a lower warranty and charge less. You must think Hyundais must last 100k miles while Toyotas only last 36k miles. There is no data available to show that Hydroedge tires will last any longer than Integritys. As presented to you earlier, treadwear ratings are not comparable between different tire manufacturers. Also given your insistence on the treadwear and warranty ratings being so objective, then you also must think the Michelins are harder thus have less rolling resistance. So you must have suspected all along the Michelins would actually "improve" your fuel economy. This could also invalidate your data when compared to the typical Prius vehicles on the road with stock tires.
The Hydroedge may be a great tire and the Integritys may not be, but please stop presenting statements without facts or data to back them up.
"....I might be able to squeeze and extra 1/2 MPG out of it."
After rereading this line...I want to make sure NOBODY gets confused (becasue 1 or 2 MPG is noticable)...I am saying I might be able to get a 1/2 MPG increase...0.5MPG...One Half MPG.....I just wanted to clarify.....
"And break-in penatly on tires?"
Are you speaking of the 3 or 4 heat cycles you need to put on the tires? This can be done in 3 or 4 trip to the supermarket (2 depedning on how long you stay in there). And don't forget that trip home from the "Tire Shop"..that's one heat cycle there.
Anyway...."Tires will not have that much noticable effect on MPG unless there is a drastic change in width and/or tire compound"
BTW...
"The tire is covered under Goodyear's road-hazard warranty, just like any other one would be. A check will be cut for whatever replacement you end up getting."
Goodyear doesn't offer "Manufacturer's Road Hazard Warranty" on the Integrity. AND when a MRHW is offered from a manufacturer...they usually replace with the same or like tire from their brand from one of their authorized dealers.....no money changes hands.
The tires have a very deep tread channel that is angled perfectly for cornering, allowing a perpendicular grip when the wheels are turned. The result is quite impressive. That angle just happens to provide a grabbing effect for straight driving, especially on snow.
The treadwear rating is 760. That is a very, very, very hard rubber... 60% harder than the standard tire. Plus, the depth is an extra 1/32th. So the tires should last twice as long. That fact alone completely covers the cost.
Break-In for tires is a very real factor. The initial layer of rubber is very rough and the edges of the tread are sharp. Until that wears off, MPG is lower. Whether you deem that or LRR or high-traction "noticable" is just a personal opinion. It is reduced, plain & simple.
I ride a road bicycle (with skinny high pressure tires) alot and fresh rubber slows you down, its good to have new tires but not brand new, when a tire (old or new) is down a few PSI on a motor vehicle ya just push the go pedal a little more no big deal, on a bicycle you've got two go pedals and they get pushed all the time so the more the tires help the better.
I have observed a significant (2-3MPG) difference going from 185's to slightly softer 205's. This is for a car mostly run 75+mph on the highway. Of course, the handling and demeanor of the car improved significantly. So, puster, i bet a tire change might get you an extra 3-4 MPG highway. Not that i suggest it. I think michelin energy is a great tire. My old saab turbo only got so-so mileage. A major culprit was the steamroller 'z' tires it wore.
let's get back on topic. If you want to discuss tires we have an excellent discussion Tire, tires, tires. If you want to talk tires and hybrids, create a new discussion.
Okay back on topic and I've asked this b4 how is ULSD sold (I know some of you have it available already) I mean it must cost more so how do they try to sell it to you. Sign on pump that says only 30 PPM sulfer so better for environment & engine ? No sign no choice ?
The SOCO station I use sells BP ECD-1 it is less than 15 PPM. My understanding is that it is only available in CA. The rest of the USA has BP ECD which is less than 30 PPM. The price is the same as #2 diesel $2.059 last time I checked.
"As for diesels, expect to see the current ‘d’ model diesels as well as the new 3.0 liter straight six twin-turbo with 272 horsepower and 413 lb-ft. "
"The Opel Vectra OPC study, which is on display in Switzerland for the first time in Geneva, is powered by a 1.9 liter, 156 kW (212 hp) CDTI twin-turbo engine, which produces maximum torque of 400 Nm from as low as 1400 rpm. With this engine the Vectra OPC needs no more than 6.5 seconds to sprint from zero to 100 km/h. Top speed is limited electronically to 250 km/h, while fuel consumption in the European test cycle is only six liters per 100 kilometers. In addition, the 1.9 CDTI twin-turbo already meets the Euro 4 emissions standard."
6L/100km = 1.58 gals / 62 miles ( 39.2MPG )
Not bad for a car with a 6.5/6.4 second 0-60 sprint.
400nm = 294lb-ft
This may be a moot point, as these may not reach the US market, but i am certianly curious to see cars like the 535d competing with the upcoming lexus hybrids. Been having a hard time finding solid specs on the latter.
Has BMW made any jestures of bringing the 320CD to the US? It looks like they are selling the X3 with diesel also. Britain gives tax incentives to buy the 320CD. It meets the latest Euro IV emisssion standards. I wonder how that translates to our EPA requirements? I'm sure if MB has success with the E320 CDI, BMW will load the 320CD & the 330CD on the next boat load coming to America. If they are not sold out in Britain first.
I've sent mail to BMWNA and they say there is no current plan to bring the diesles here. There are reasons ( gleaned from other sources ):
1) The EPA requires certification for teach car/enging combo sold here, which is expensive for a niche vehicle.
2) They are worried about diluting the sport luxury image ( less of an issue for mercedes, who has less of a sporty rep )
3) This would require dealers to buy more equipment and get specialized training.
I'd imagine #2 is key, otherwise they'd bring the 4-bangers here to offset the SUV/7-series mileage and negate the EPA fine they pay every year for fleet mileage. (is the mini doing this? I dunno)
Supposedly, this was a major motivation for toyota to make the hybrids, to raise fleet MPG so more profitable SUV's could be sold, especially of target fuel economy was raised, as may happen soon. It might be the 80's all over again, when the imports quietly prepared for the upccming EPA rules, and the big 3 fought them in court.
"So what's wrong with a profitable large vehicle that is both clean and efficient?"
John, I think he was saying that Toyota would sell lots of smaller Hybrid vehicles so that they could sell more non hybrid large SUVs, and still maintain the fleet MPG averages.
I'm not sure I see the point of such a statement, since SUVs and cars have different CAFE standards, but that's my interpretation...
Comments
Luggage Capacity Escape:27.6 cu.ft. Passat Wagon:39 cu.ft. Prius:16 cu.ft. Jetta:13 cu.ft.
What you are referring to is...
Maximum Cargo Capacity Escape:66 cu.ft. Passat Wagon:57 cu.ft. Prius:16 cu.ft. Jetta:13 cu.ft.
Which is seats folded down, and yes, advantage Escape.
I'm with you here, I've got an Expedition...that's paid for...so why get rid of it. The main reason for comparing Volume was that I was looking for a viable Hybrid competitor to the Passat. I have to agree that the Escape (pick a flavor) will never touch the mid 30's on the highway, let alone the 40's. I believe the initial numbers FORD/EPA (whichever) was estimating somewhere around 30-31 around town in the Escape Hybrid, the Passat will probably be somewhere in that mix 30-31 I'd think. We'll just see, but I think average MPG in mixed driving will see the Passat a minimum of 10mpg higher than the Escape Hybrid.
This is, though, just my opinion and specualtion at that...
On another note, my friend told me that up to about two months ago it was like a feeding frenzy with people who were willing to buy the Escape hybrid site unseen. Now the interest has dropped to almost zero and a number of customers have come in, canceled and got their deposit back.
Very interesting.
Discussing only the vehicles currently available intentionally skews the outcome... survey results for that matter too.
JOHN
Amongst the speed records set, which were all achieved in Production Car Class B (2000 – 2500 cc), were 133.04 mph (1 mile flying start), 84.25 mph (1 mile standing start) and an average speed of 130.38 mph over a 24-hour endurance period. These records were all set at Papenburg high-speed oval test track in north-west Germany on 1 and 2 May, and are all subject to FIA ratification.
Check http://www.carpages.co.uk/honda/honda_diesel_sets_new_world_recor- ds_12_05_04.asp?switched=on&echo=641436857
I'm curiuos, if the new low levels of sulfur that will be required in 2006 for unleaded gas is less than 80 PPM. Why is ULSD required to be less than 15 PPM. If there is this disparity wouldn't that make cars that run on ULSD much cleaner than cars using Unleaded gas? Is this the requirement that will assist many engines to pass the SULEV II? With the added efficiency of the diesel engines I would think they should be both cleaner and less wasteful of our oil supply when ULSD is used.
JOHN
All engines will make more NoX with high-sulphur gas, though because diesel comustion is much higher pressure it will make more of it.
The biggest impact of the ULSD fuels is that the diesel vehicles already on the road will start putting out quite a lot less pollution.
Driving to wisconsin over the weekend, i saw 5 priuses on the road. Pretty cool. Would have gladly traded my friend's corolla that i was driving for one of them.
dave
Thanks, Dave
http://www.lestac.co.uk/bmw/nikasil.htm#what_is
The gas where i used to live ( new mexico ) was very high sulphur. It's a good locale for the cheap south american oil, and the population density is so low ( 10 people per square mile ) that smog is not much of an issue.
dave
Is that why they designed a whole new body for the Prius? Or was it just too ugly to sell in it's original Echo body? You are trying to convince people that all that is needed is to pull out the old ICE and slap in HSD. I say that is totally inaccurate and very misleading to people that think you know what is happening.
CARB will not "open up" diesel for general sales. The EPA (for the rest of the country) won't either.
Hide and watch you may get the surprise of your life. Read it and weep!
Allan Lloyd, the chairman of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) -- whose rulings have had profound effects on national environmental policy -- has reversed himself and declared that clean diesel may have a viable future in California and the rest of the nation.
Mercedes is confident that, when low-sulfur fuel becomes widely available around 2007, its new-generation, turbocharged diesel will meet toughened emissions standards in all 50 states.
Michigan Rep. John Dingell, the powerful Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, is pushing for tax breaks for buyers of diesels that run on low-sulfur fuel.
There is a Democrat even I could like. I could use the write-off and would happily pay extra to run ULSD. It beats that Ethanol they are trying to jam down our lungs.
Second, the fact that Prius is a new vehicle has absolutely nothing to do with how HSD is deployed afterward. Also, you seem to gloss over the fact that Toyota has been planning this for years. The bodies of some existing vehicles already have accommodations for supporting the hybrid system.
> Read it and weep!
How does the possibility of approval make it competitive... or as you claimed "It will kill the hybrid market in 2006". That would mean diesel would have to somehow instantly overcome all the misconceptions about it and sell so many that it made Toyota, Lexus, Ford, Honda, Nissan, and GM hybrids sales look tiny in comparison.
Let's see some facts!
JOHN
Tax credits for diesel would be awesome. If that passat diesel had more power, i'd be *sorely* tempted to get one.
Some hybrids vehicles, such as insight and prius, get part of their MPG from low-rolling-resistance tires and low drag coefficient. Of course, the drivetrain benefits are still there, and most of the "penalty" comes on the highway.
I don't think ULDS will kill the hybrid market, i see the two coexisting, but hopefully not competing for the same customers.
dave
Not true.
Prius comes standard run-of-the-mill (Goodyear Integrity) tires.
My Prius has high-traction (Michelin Hydroedge) tires. And with them, I was able to average 53 MPG for the month of July... despite the 1.7 MPG penalty from using E10 instead of gas and the harsh break-in penalty from the course rubber.
JOHN
"Prius comes standard with LRR (Low Rolling Resistance) tires. This type maximizes MPG. Switching to Non-LRR tires means you can expect a drop in fuel efficiency by approximately 3 MPG. Owners have found this an acceptable trade-off for getting better handling and significantly increased tread life."
I didn't think this was a point of contention.
dave
Look at the DATE of that entry.
It is for the classic Prius, not the 2004. That model (2001-2003) came with Bridgestone Potenzas, which were LRR.
The 2004 comes with Non-LRR tires.
JOHN
So... once again you are denying the fact that a diesel-hybrid would ever appeal to anyone.
> are a rip-off to buy
Based on what facts?
There is quite simply nothing you can provide that will prove a hybrid won't be a wise consumer purchase in 2006.
JOHN
Carsdirect.com says $25.8K for a prius. That seems wrong. There are some pretty nifty cars gettable for 25.8K. Should be more like 22K, just a little over sticker.
I RAN OVER A TOOL AND THE BLADE PUNCHED A HOLE TOO LARGE TO REPAIR.
SO RATHER THAN REPLACE THAT STANDARD TIRE WITH ANOTHER STANDARD TIRE, I CHOSE TO DO A SERVICE FOR MY PRIUS FRIENDS BY PURCHASING PREMIUM-GRADE TIRES INSTEAD.
THEY HAD BEEN REQUESTING INFORMATION ON HIGH-TRACTION TIRES. I COULDN'T ABLIGDE, SINCE I DIDN'T HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE WITH THEM. NOW I DO.
STOP TRYING TO CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT I SWITCHED TIRES FOR ANY OTHER REASON, BECAUSE I DIDN'T.
I DROVE THROUGH ALL LAST WINTER IN MINNESOTA WITHOUT A LICK OF TRACTION TROUBLE. AND WOULD HAVE CONTINUED THROUGH THAT WAY THIS YEAR TOO. THAT ACCIDENT SIMPLY ACCELERATED REGULAR REPLACEMENT TO A YEAR SOONER.
JOHN
Every tire I have ever bought was covered by a road hazard warranty. They should have replaced the tire for free. Another reason not to buy a Prius. I just changed the Firestone OEM tires on my Suburban after 6 years and 45k miles. They were not worn out just badly weather checked from the sun. Yours lasted a winter not good. Prius loses points on OEM tires.
STOP TRYING TO CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT I SWITCHED TIRES FOR ANY OTHER REASON, BECAUSE I DIDN'T.
You can mislead some of the people all of the time but not all of the people all of the time. Every article written says the Prius has a horrible cross wind handling problem. Many of them kindly attribute it to the tires. Others that are better informed say it is an inherent problem with "low drag coefficient vehicles" Part of the good mileage is attributed to the low wind resistance. for some reason, that I don't know, it also causes problems in cross winds. With mostly city commuting you would never know you have an issue. Get out on a North Dakota highway in a high wind and snowy conditions and you will be lucky to stay out of the ditch. Those are the facts and YOU know it.
Reference material:
The Prius, despite rolling on some pretty spectacular Toyo snow tires, isn't at its best in these conditions. It's exceptionally sensitive to cross winds, jumping half a lane over at every strong gust of wind. The steering, throttle and brakes have no feel at all - a by-product of all of them being in some way electronically controlled - making quick corrections, changes of directions, and sudden stops for when you've missed your turn, are all pretty harrowing experiences. The overactive, and non-defeat able, vehicle dynamics control system doesn't help either, its early and brutal interventions punctuated by incessant, nagging beeping from somewhere deep in the dash.
http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/ly/jamesbay.htm
Thanks.
The tire is covered under Goodyear's road-hazard warranty, just like any other one would be. A check will be cut for whatever replacement you end up getting.
> You can mislead some
The Goodyear Integrity tires can be found on several other vehicles, which provides proof that they are just a generic tires, nothing special for Prius.
Anyway, who cares? The 85,000 mile tires sell for a totally reasonable price and deliver remarkable traction.
> Get out on a North Dakota highway in a high wind and snowy conditions and you will be lucky to stay out of the ditch. Those are the facts and YOU know it.
The snow belt of Minnesota is between Cannon Falls and Rochester. That is very open country, nothing but farmer's fields. My 2004 Prius did not have a lick of trouble, none at all in those driving conditions last winter through there.
Those "facts" claimed are total nonsense. Show me a single report of that happening to an actual owner. It didn't!
Also, provide proof that the test-drive vehicle had properly inflated tires. I bet they didn't. 35 PSI front & 35 PSI back will cause handling problems. Most people are totally unaware of that. Prius requires a 2 PSI bias in front. So the back should only be 33, not 35.
JOHN
JOHN
I really find it really hard to believe that a 2 PSI difference in back accounts for the handling noted on several tests. Sensitivity to crosswinds has a lot to do with a car's structure--i know some cars you have to fight to stay in a lane for gusts you won't notice in another vehicle.
I think this is a silly thing to be arguing about. Lots of cars come with poor tires designed to get an extra MPG on EPA tests. The tires on the saturn i bought way back when were atrocious. 3MPG down from 60/51 is not that big of a deal. It's simply worth remembering when we're arguing about small MPG differences between the cars in this topic, is all.
Except in Albuquerque, where people need permission to run their fireplaces due to smog problems...
Is the 2 PSI difference requirement in the Prius Owner's manual?
"My Prius has high-traction (Michelin Hydroedge) tires."
The Hydro-Edge on your Prius is a watershedding tire...much like the GY Aquatred, but with a tire softness rating (or speed rating) of "T" is can hardly be considered a high-traction tire. The softer the tire, the higher the traction.....the less wear. The proper term for your tires is All-Season...not Performance All-Season (or any variation thereof, such as High-Performance, or Ultra Performance). The term High-Traction implies that it is a performance tire, when in reality it is an All-Season tire (also designated as a M+S tire, it should be printed on your sidewall) and will not have any noticable effect on your MPG. Don't get me wrong, they are very good tires...and I recommend them for all weather driving....
"...harsh break-in penalty from the course rubber"
And I'm not sure what you actually mean by this...."course" tires have less traction because there is less contact patch between the tires and the road due to the "courseness" (I'm not sure what you were trying to convey with that term). And break-in penatly on tires?
LRR is just marketing hype...the "LRR" tires that came on the "classic" Prius as you call it (I thought vehicles had to reach the 20year mark to be classic, so I'll call it the first generation Prius..or Prius MKI) came standard with Bridgestone Pontenza RE92s. A standard "S" rated tire. Was OEM on many cars (and in 14" too), can purchase them for almost any car you want, so why should it be called LRR when speaking of the Prius MKI and not other cars?
My TDI came standard with Michelin Energy MXV4 Plus Grand Touring All-Season Tires. Meaning...that they have an "H" softness rating...(they are softer than "T" rated tires..for better cornering)...my tires are also 10MM wider than your tires...meaning there is more contact patch (ie they are "stickier" because they are softer and wider) so what your tires (the Hydroedges) have that mine don't is the watershedding tred. I still average 44mpg with wider, softer tires....imagine if I did have narrower...harder tires....I might be able to squeeze and extra 1/2 MPG out of it.
So I'll reiterate (and rephrase a bit) what I stated earlier Tires will not have that much noticable effect on MPG unless there is a drastic change in width (10mm isn't drastic) and/or tire compound (going from S/T rating to H rating is a major change, but going from S/T to V OR H to Z rating is a drastic change).
The Hydroedge may be a great tire and the Integritys may not be, but please stop presenting statements without facts or data to back them up.
After rereading this line...I want to make sure NOBODY gets confused (becasue 1 or 2 MPG is noticable)...I am saying I might be able to get a 1/2 MPG increase...0.5MPG...One Half MPG.....I just wanted to clarify.....
"And break-in penatly on tires?"
Are you speaking of the 3 or 4 heat cycles you need to put on the tires? This can be done in 3 or 4 trip to the supermarket (2 depedning on how long you stay in there). And don't forget that trip home from the "Tire Shop"..that's one heat cycle there.
Anyway...."Tires will not have that much noticable effect on MPG unless there is a drastic change in width and/or tire compound"
BTW...
"The tire is covered under Goodyear's road-hazard warranty, just like any other one would be. A check will be cut for whatever replacement you end up getting."
Goodyear doesn't offer "Manufacturer's Road Hazard Warranty" on the Integrity. AND when a MRHW is offered from a manufacturer...they usually replace with the same or like tire from their brand from one of their authorized dealers.....no money changes hands.
Yup!
And it is clearly printed on the door-jam instructions too.
JOHN
The treadwear rating is 760. That is a very, very, very hard rubber... 60% harder than the standard tire. Plus, the depth is an extra 1/32th. So the tires should last twice as long. That fact alone completely covers the cost.
Break-In for tires is a very real factor. The initial layer of rubber is very rough and the edges of the tread are sharp. Until that wears off, MPG is lower. Whether you deem that or LRR or high-traction "noticable" is just a personal opinion. It is reduced, plain & simple.
JOHN
"As for diesels, expect to see the current ‘d’ model diesels as well as the new 3.0 liter straight six twin-turbo with 272 horsepower and 413 lb-ft. "
Official BMW 0-62kph is 6.6 in the 5-series.
6L/100km = 1.58 gals / 62 miles ( 39.2MPG )
Not bad for a car with a 6.5/6.4 second 0-60 sprint.
400nm = 294lb-ft
This may be a moot point, as these may not reach the US market, but i am certianly curious to see cars like the 535d competing with the upcoming lexus hybrids. Been having a hard time finding solid specs on the latter.
http://www.bmwworld.com/models/320cd.htm
1) The EPA requires certification for teach car/enging combo sold here, which is expensive for a niche vehicle.
2) They are worried about diluting the sport luxury image ( less of an issue for mercedes, who has less of a sporty rep )
3) This would require dealers to buy more equipment and get specialized training.
I'd imagine #2 is key, otherwise they'd bring the 4-bangers here to offset the SUV/7-series mileage and negate the EPA fine they pay every year for fleet mileage. (is the mini doing this? I dunno)
Supposedly, this was a major motivation for toyota to make the hybrids, to raise fleet MPG so more profitable SUV's could be sold, especially of target fuel economy was raised, as may happen soon. It might be the 80's all over again, when the imports quietly prepared for the upccming EPA rules, and the big 3 fought them in court.
So what's wrong with a profitable large vehicle that is both clean and efficient?
A minivan or pickup or SUV that uses HSD is the plan... which yes, will upset the competition.
JOHN
Nothing, never said there was.
John, I think he was saying that Toyota would sell lots of smaller Hybrid vehicles so that they could sell more non hybrid large SUVs, and still maintain the fleet MPG averages.
I'm not sure I see the point of such a statement, since SUVs and cars have different CAFE standards, but that's my interpretation...