Educate us: what is that agenda if it is not the "proclaimed" agenda?
___I do not know about a conspiracy but what about low cost Urea injected SCR-CAT’s and DPF’s that will allow a late model Diesel to achieve ULEV levels of NOx and PM emissions on California’s already LSD of < 30 ppm? You have to fill a tank after 50,000 miles or have a PF cleaned/replaced but that isn’t good enough to meet the new CARB/EPA 120,000 mile mandatory non-consumer action limits. The Tanks and DPF’s can throw a CEL when they reach their respective limits and all cars (except Hybrid’s from my understanding?) run through a smog check in California so what is the problem? The latest Hybrid, the AH is only ULEV-II rated if that helps.
___With the above, you can’t have a diesel based car or truck that is as clean as most cars and trucks in the US and one that receives far better fuel economy then the average as well as most Hybrid’s! This is a huge problem and one that smells of an agenda imho.
wayne quote-"I do not know about a conspiracy but what about low cost Urea injected SCR-CAT’s and DPF’s that will allow a late model Diesel to achieve ULEV levels of NOx and PM emissions on California’s already LSD of < 30 ppm?"-end quote
I see your words but all I hear is "wah wah wah wah" like the Charlie Brown cartoon adults.......?
Can you kindly for the ignorant among us (me) explain what all your acronyms mean?
you were saying that you don't know why CARB and the EPA are disallowing diesel cars running low sulfur diesel fuel which also have SCR-CATs and DP filters which enable them to be rated as California ULEVs in regard to their lowered levels of PM and NOx emissions?
Is that what you were wondering?
(and I did know what most of the acronyms were, just putting them all together in one sentence made it somewhat difficult to follow)
You may be getting the numbers somehow, but what about the 9.0 million-plus light trucks getting on the road every year?
___As far as receiving those types of FE numbers in what ever you drive today; this has been explained more then once in tens of different forums and even here at Edmund’s. I believe Larsb posted some of them in one of the Edmunds Hybrid forums just the other day in fact? You know where to find that information if you were really interested.
___Those 9.0 million trucks I believe I explained how with off-the-shelf European based Diesel technology.
Will the 2006 Camry Hybrid have a CVT (conmtinuously variable transmisson? I note that the current Honda Accord 6 cylinder hybrid does not. If the Camry will, will it be coupled with a 6 cylinder, circa 3 liter engine>
"The European Experience" isn't here yet. It will be interesting how America receives compact cars as family transport and falls in love with diesel engines.
Bottomline: The requirements of European (and most Asian) markets is very different from the US market. 40 mpg isn't going to happen any time soon in light trucks. At least not without redefining the market itself.
It will be interesting how America receives compact cars as family transport and falls in love with diesel engines.
___The Accord Saloon (TSX here) and Focus C-MAX (larger then the NA Ford Focus) are what most NA’s have been researching here in this very forum. These are not small by any means unless the Camry/Accord/Focus are small cars that America loves as well?
The requirements of European (and most Asian) markets is very different from the US market. 40 mpg isn't going to happen any time soon in light trucks.
___In the Ford Ranger and Chevrolet S-10/Colorado’s, it is happening all around the world except in NA. As stated above, place the more powerful 2.0 L TDCi in a Ranger and you instantly receive > 40 mpg. When US regulation gets in the way, you are stuck with sub 30 mpg small trucks and sub 20 mpg large ones. Of course the oil companies, EPA, and CARB are having there say about this unfortunately :-(
EPA, and CARB are having there say about this unfortunately :-(
I noticed on the EPA site for 1985 Ford escort they had a diesel version. It was rated at 43/52 mpg. The CARB version was rated 37/44 mpg. By the time CARB got their grungy mits on it the mileage dropped by 8 mpg and the GHG went up a ton per yr. Yeah they know what they are doing alright. They have to be sleeping with the oil companies.
___Sleeping with the oil companies is over the top but with today’s diesel technology, I have no clue as to why CARB and the EPA won’t let these high tech and much cheaper wonders roam the states nor why they (the EPA) didn’t force the refiners to give the entire US LSD/ULSD or Low Sulfur regular unleaded years ago when California mandated it for themselves. There were refinery upgrades that needed to be accomplished of course but LS regular unleaded costs just .01 - .02 more per gallon then high sulfur regular unleaded and has the ability to decrease emissions in most cars by one rating! Instead, the EPA mandated garbage winter blend RFG for much of the country (Chicago and Milwaukee area included) which actually decreased FE by 1 - 3% for a decrease in emissions by 2 - 3%. My understanding is somewhat limited as it has been a while since I have read the details in this regard
___I do not want to see 1985 diesels running all over our cities and towns because much of the European continent’s major cities have a fuel oil smell. The reason it does is not because of the newer Diesels (Euro IV and V +) but because of the older ones (pre Euro III spec). Here in the US, Euro IV’s will be the minimum with actual ULEV and better based Diesels being the norm if the EPA and CARB will just sign off on DCC and Ford’s 30 - 50,000 mile Urea injection solution for removing NOx. It is a $100.00 technology vs. god only knows what but because those tanks have to be refilled before the new EPA 120,000 mile spec, the EPA and CARB won’t let the diesels in after LSD/ULSD arrives in 2006/2007. This costs the US 25 - 35% more fuel consumed per mile for the average driver of a car that could be fitted with either the SI-ICE or the CI-ICE?
___And another little tidbit that raises the hair on the back of my neck With the above, we only have the option of purchasing Hybrid’s at a cost that should make some think twice considering what a std I4 based Camry or Corolla when detuned to the performance level of a Prius II would receive in terms of real world FE or a Civic LX/EX detuned to the level of the HCH would achieve in the real world with a savings of ~ $3 - $5,000 per automobile in initial expense on top of it all.
With half the trip under our belt, some opinions are beginning to crystallize. First, the Civic EX might get better fuel economy if it had a deeper overdrive gear. At 80 mph, and 4000 rpm, the 1.7-liter Four is buzzing like a swarm of killer bees. The Hybrid's tach shows just under 3000 rpm at the same speed. And its engine is much happier. However, acceleration up to and beyond that speed is a bit better in the EX.
___The key is right there. If the EX was geared to the same 3,000 RPM at 80 mph as that of the HCH, would it not achieve higher FE then it did by one hell of a large margin out on the highway? The EX uses a 127 HP ICE and received an overall 33.8 mpg vs. the vs. the non-assisted HCH’s 85 HP at 42 mpg. Why can’t the 127 HP ICE in the Civic EX push a taller gear then the 85 HP HCH? It can and in fact, it quite easily can with far higher FE. Do you think Honda themselves are covering something up here possibly?
I do not want to see 1985 diesels running all over our cities and towns because much of the European continent’s major cities have a fuel oil smell.
I agree with that wholeheartedly. My question, did the 8 mpg the Escort lost on the CA version of the diesel make it clean. Or was that just wasted fuel to satisfy CARB? You are also on the money with the ULSD. It should have been mandated 10 years ago. I think we were flying too high on the Dot.com bubble to worry about Fuel economy. Then the Ethanol lobby gets in there and forces us to use that crap. It is not a viable alternative fuel. It is no way as usable as bio-diesel.
Good article:
All said and done, if you were driving the same route, at the same speeds, in the same conditions, it would take roughly 144,000 miles before the Hybrid paid back its $1440 premium over the Civic EX.
How much closer would the mileage have been if they had put better handling tires on the hybrid?
___To save the poster from having to type an extra 10,000 characters per day or so when said poster doesn’t know how to type, that is why. Read any thesis or national lab report and you will find a similar acronym laden report/article/post.
I started to compile an acronym chart for the telephone and computer industry about 12 years ago. I gave up. Too many people use the same acronym for different applications.
___I wouldn’t mind owning an HCH myself given the real world possibility of a 60 + mpg average w/ low to mid 70’s as a best but most won’t go there unfortunately :-( In any case, besides the tires (good point by the way), I wonder if the Civic EX is using either 5W-20 or 5W-30 vs. the HCH’s 0W-20? Along with that, the HCH has a Cd of .28 and the Civic EX has a Cd of .30. Now how would that be except for the $75.00 worth of plastic paneling sealing up the underbody of the HCH? Keep adding it up and I bet the Civic EX can come within a mile or two of the HCH but do so for thousands of dollars less money and you would still have a 127 HP - 0-60 car in 10 seconds all the time vs. a 95 HP one at 12.0 seconds to 60 some of the time.
"If the EX was geared to the same 3,000 RPM at 80 mph as that of the HCH, would it not achieve higher FE then it did by one hell of a large margin out on the highway? The EX uses a 127 HP ICE and received an overall 33.8 mpg vs. the vs. the non-assisted HCH’s 85 HP at 42 mpg. Why can’t the 127 HP ICE in the Civic EX push a taller gear then the 85 HP HCH? It can and in fact, it quite easily can with far higher FE."
The HCH has the capability of augmenting the ICE with additional power, allowing the engine to run slower under normal (not hill climbing, etc) conditions. The EX has no such backup power, and has to plan for maximum torque. It is Honda design to run the engines high (though my CR-V runs at 2950 at 80 MPH). But perhaps a deeper torque with a more aggressive kick in of 3rd gear would be possible.
The HCH has the capability of augmenting the ICE with additional power, allowing the engine to run slower under normal (not hill climbing, etc) conditions.
___The maximum torque available at Full Assist in an IMA equipped HCH is just about equal to that available to the Civic EX. Believe me, Full Assist is not where you want to drive a Hybrid for any length of time There is no reason for short gearing in the EX other then Honda wants the EX to perform similarly to the Focus and Corolla for performance reasons alone, not FE ones. The HCH (0-60 in 12.5 seconds) on the other hand doesn’t have to meet the more stringent 0 - 60 in 8 to 10 seconds thus its fuel saving tall gearing. My Insight is one of the tallest geared SOB’s on the road and thank god that it is but I also know its limitations in terms of the performance capabilities when compared to the Corolla LE w/ Auto, Ranger XLT w/ 5-speed manual, and MDX w/ Auto that I also drive. In this case, the EX could have been geared much taller (40 - 50% by the sounds of it) and achieved far better FE out on the highway but it would have lost some time in the 0 to 60 sprint in doing so. The automotive press would eat the Honda Civic EX alive if it too had a 0-60 time of 12.5 seconds no matter that it could also achieve 48 - 52 mpg out on the highway. Can you say 6-speed manuals geared extra tall while in 6th?
Does anyone come to Edmunds to read theses or national lab reports?
Why would any human being want to ever read theses or national lab reports?
Are you guys this interesting in real life?
This is driving newcomers away and limiting the audience for these forums.
And where are the female voices here? We know that women use computers and the internet. Look at "The Sims." But read over the last few posts. It's two sweaty guys arm wrestling over arcane matters. Over minutiae.
Over arcane minutiae!
What does oil weight have to do with hybrids in the news? What do smelly Euro cities have to do with news?
Why would any human being want to ever read theses or national lab reports?
It kills time until the next article about hybrid vehicles is published. Your a writer, put your articles on here and we will rip them apart for you.... have a good day, Gary
"It's two sweaty guys arm wrestling over arcane matters. Over minutiae. "
Don't know about you, but I just checked, and I'm not sweaty...
Re:minutiae. The entire hybrid system is one big "minutae"; the devil is always in the details. Guess we're just a bunch of hybrid geeks. And proud of it.
Plus, of course, proud to live in a country with free speach...
Please note that we HAVE created a special topic for technical discussion. It's Advanced Course in Hybrid Engineering, and that's where highly technical talk belongs. Most of our members aren't engineers or interested in engineering, so let's keep the tech talk and jargon (i.e., acronyms) to a minimum!
"free speech" only means you can't be told by your government what to say and where... doesn't apply to private entities! We love to see opinions expressed, but let's be respectful of all of our members.
kirstie_h
Roving Host & Future Vehicles Host
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
SANYO, BOSCH TO JOINTLY DEVELOP HYBRID CAR BATTERIES
TOKYO - Eyeing a forecasted 340 billion yen (US$3.3 billion) market for hybrid car batteries in 2010, Japanese giant Sanyo Electric Co. (TSE:6764 - News) will join forces with German autoparts maker Robert Bosch GmbH to develop rechargeable batteries for hybrid vehicles. By partnering with a parts manufacturer that deals with a wide range of firms, Sanyo Electric hopes to expand sales in the growing European market. To meet increased demand, Sanyo has more than tripled output capacity for hybrid car batteries at its Hyogo Prefecture plant from 300,000 to 1 million units per month. Sanyo has a 55% global market share in nickel metal hydride batteries, which are used by most hybrid cars."
"So why are the two giants suddenly rushing to get into the race? On Dec. 13, the pair announced they would team up to build hybrid systems that will help both companies develop fuel-efficient vehicles faster and more cheaply. Fact is, GM and Daimler have little choice: Hybrids are fast becoming America's fuel-saver of choice, and the longer these two wait, the further behind technology leader Toyota Motor Corp. they risk falling. "Neither company was sold on hybrids two years ago," says Brett Smith, analyst at the Center for Automotive Research (CAR) in Ann Arbor, Mich. "But they've realized there's a market."
Forget IMA for a moment. Do your comparisons suggest that the 85 HP 1.3-liter I-DSI in Hybrid is no more fuel efficient than the 127 HP 1.7-liter VTEC in EX?
I disagree with your assessments. Civic EX and Civic Hybrid, driven under identical conditions will give HCH an edge in fuel economy. My Civic EX gets me 29-30 mpg in city (my wife manages another mpg or so).
___I think you are missing the details of this particular discussion. It is the short gearing of the EX, not the EX’s ICE as manufactured that causes the much lower FE by comparison out on the highway.
___I would never consider IMA in the equation for this FE test as those of us that run hybrids to their limits know IMA does not help highway FE in the least. In fact it’s a drag given the small amount of hidden charging and the 100 - 200 #’s of IMA HW we have to carry around all the time. Even in the city, some of us use it very sparingly if at all and have far superior FE then those that do. IMA’s main advantage for hypermilers is the ability to spin up the ICE to ~ 1,000 RPM before the injectors go live after an autostop (forced or std.) and to pick up a small amount of regen under very unique circumstances (never riding it as hypermilers packs are usually full). For the average hybrid driver, IMA allows Honda to use the much smaller ICE for fuel economy and gives the car the feel as if it has a much larger ICE, thus the FE.
___Let me introduce the other side of the equation What I do know is that the Civic EX’s final drive is much shorter then the HCH’s. The PM article describes this in painful detail. The taller the final (up to a point of course), the lower the RPM’s, the lower the friction based losses (these are larger then you think) as well as fuel injected over a given distance. The Civic EX is geared to compete with the likes of the Corolla and Focus in the 0 - 60 dash. If it were instead competing with the HCH or Prius I/II in the 0 - 60 dash, it could have much taller gearing and would receive higher FE.
___All I am saying is that if the std. Civic EX were geared as tall as that of the HCH, had the same Bridgestone or Dunlop LRR tires as that of the HCH, had the $75.00 in plastic under-body panels to reduce the Cd to .28 as that of the HCH from its current .30, it would still have better performance in the 0 - 60 dash given its relatively strong 1.7 L ICE and it would have very near or possibly better FE then the HCH’s FE performance out on the highway. Add lean burn to the EX and it is almost a slam dunk just as the lowly geared Civic HX is today. I don’t know where the two would stand in an all-city environment as that is not my specialty nor was it where the PM article really compared the HCH to the EX given the cross country route taken.
___As a test for you, if you want to reduce the RR of your EX’s current treads, up the pressure in them. It won’t reduce their RR Rating but it will reduce their overall RR by having a smaller contact patch and the heat wasted from the tread blocks flexing to and fro as the patch comes into contact with the surface. Guess what you achieve? Higher FE. The gearing change is minimal and in fact, in the RE92’s of the Insight, we lose a small fraction of a mm (lower gearing actually) as pressure is upped. Do you think a LRR rated tire vs. the std. your EX is currently shod with does not help improve FE? Insighter’s that swap to different tires then the RE92’s usually lose 5 mpg and these are the guys receiving 60 - 65 mpg’s on average, not 90 +. This alone should help you see where the discussion is heading in terms of your own EX as it sits in your drive.
"Please note that we HAVE created a special topic for technical discussion. It's Advanced Course in Hybrid Engineering, and that's where highly technical talk belongs. Most of our members aren't engineers or interested in engineering, so let's keep the tech talk and jargon (i.e., acronyms) to a minimum!"
I am of the opinion that the thread was keeping it to the minimum required for discussion. Sometimes the news articles bring out technical issues...
EX needs short gearing because it lacks torque at the low end. Hybrid can use tall gearing because its torque curve is strongest at the low end. Try gearing EX like you would Civic Hybrid, and soon you will realize that EX won’t be as much fun to drive as it is today. It surprises me a bit that Honda opted to not gear Accord Hybrid any taller than Accord V6.
Drag:
Whenever there is a little charging going around, not enough will be lost to arrive at the claims you have made. The generator does trigger during cruising but not always. And speaking of IMA hardware, HCH is just 62 lb. heavier than Civic EX. Give and take a few pounds for non-comparable options, and you couldn’t arrive at 100-200 lb. Even in Accord, it is not just IMA that is adding weight, I suspect some contribution comes from VCM, larger wheels, and other potential changes to the chassis (besides using, now, a first generation hybrid a/c system).
Yes, but unfortunately the news discussion sometimes runs off into techno-land and new news postings get ignored. This should be a quick-stop place for people to find links to news items.
___About all I can add is you really have to go test drive an HCH. The performance of the HCH w/ CVT in comparison to the Insight 5-speed in all modes is lower. My Insight in comparison to your EX or my Corolla LE w/ Auto is another step down again. The EX simply has plenty of torque to overcome any disadvantage a tall gear would bestow upon it given the 2.5 + second advantage it has over and above the HCH as they are offered.
___If you were talking of fun, the HCH would not be much fun for you to drive because of its performance yet it will achieve low 40/mid 50 type numbers out on the highway. Tall gear the EX and you not only have a faster automobile then the HCH, you have almost the same FE out on the highway. It just wouldn’t be fast enough for you and the multitude of car mag writers that would flog it to its grave for not achieving 0-60 in < 8.8 seconds for the 5-speed manual and 10.x seconds for the Auto. The HCH is a 12.5 + second car w/ CVT in case you didn’t know?
Drag: Whenever there is a little charging going around, not enough will be lost to arrive at the claims you have made. The generator does trigger during cruising but not always. And speaking of IMA hardware, HCH is just 62 lb. heavier than Civic EX. Give and take a few pounds for non-comparable options, and you couldn’t arrive at 100-200 lb. Even in Accord, it is not just IMA that is adding weight, I suspect some contribution comes from VCM, larger wheels, and other potential changes to the chassis (besides using, now, a first generation hybrid a/c system).
___You can run all the numbers you want. Maybe the following will help you understand what higher RPM drag does in terms of energy needed to maintain a higher RPM in a hybrid?
___Another real world test for you. Place your EX’s auto tranny in 2 and drive it to work at the same speeds you normally do. Aerodynamic and tread drag is canceled because you are traveling the same speed both days. It is Gearing and RPM friction that will kill you at 4,000 + rpm vs. 3,000 + RPM or whatever the exact difference is at a given speed.
___Weight. The loss of sunroof alone is probably 30 - 50 + #’s or more. The HCH’s pack weighs 63 #’s all by itself. The EX’s auto is far more complex and weighs more then HCH’s CVT so go manual to manual. There is a difference of 129 #’s between the 03 HCH 5-speed manual and the 03 EX 5-speed manual w/ the sunroof. Yep, total of ~ 100 - 200 #’s for the Hybrid HW and you cannot avoid carrying it around with you where ever you go :-(
The Accord Hybrid is capable yet characterless, just like a regular Accord. It's not cool, like a Toyota Prius. It makes you wonder why Honda bothered. The answer is that for Honda, the point of the Accord Hybrid isn't the technology of fuel efficiency; the point is to make a better Honda.
Tall gear the EX and you not only have a faster automobile then the HCH, you have almost the same FE out on the highway. It just wouldn’t be fast enough for you and the multitude of car mag writers that would flog it to its grave for not achieving 0-60 in < 8.8 seconds for the 5-speed manual and 10.x seconds for the Auto.
Wayne, you have mentioned several times a taller top gear would hurt 0-60 times.
It won't. No 0-60 test ever uses the top gear. Most cars would get to 60mph in 2nd gear.
I once had a motorbike that would easily touch 60 in 1st.
___Good Point! Then it would go down to passing times possibly?
___The key is that the EX’s 1.7 has enough torque at 3,000 RPM vs. 4,000 RPM to run down the highway at 60, 70, and even 80 mph and it would still have better performance then the HCH. So why would the HCH be geared so tall? It’s for the FE! Assist in a hybrid at highway speeds is not only a waste of fuel in the Insight and HCH, it isn’t worth much at 2,500 RPM on up in terms of torque addition.
The key is that the EX’s 1.7 has enough torque at 3,000 RPM vs. 4,000 RPM to run down the highway at 60, 70, and even 80 mph and it would still have better performance then the HCH. So why would the HCH be geared so tall? It’s for the FE! Assist in a hybrid at highway speeds is not only a waste of fuel in the Insight and HCH, it isn’t worth much at 2,500 RPM on up in terms of torque addition
If they tall gear the EX, or better still add a taller 6th gear, they wouldn't sell any more HCHs. This can be done to any car IMHO, especially manual tranny ones. There can be a higher top gear which is about 30% higher than the existing top gear meant to be used only at highway speeds. There is no downside to this, except to manufacturers and oil companies profits.
___I believe in what you said wholeheartedly other then the oil company stuff. I see the much more powerful and lean burned equipped 1.7 L in the < $14,000 Civic HX achieving 36/44 mpg vs. 46/51 of the HCH w/ a manual. What do the amenities cost to take the HX coupe up to an LX or EX sedans trim level? $6,000 or more? I doubt that. Why didn’t Honda? I think it was to help the Hybrid’s along at the expense of the HX, LX, and EX’s of the world myself but that is just me.
Gearing is not as simple as making the tall gear taller. In a transmission, the ratio of the top gear is often coupled to that of the lowest gear. Divide the two, and in a conventional transmission, you would see a 4-4.5:1 ratio (first gear ratio/top gear ratio).
CVT provides a wider spread, as do most new 6-speed automatic transmissions.
Civic EX doesn't have good torque down low to go taller in first. If it did, it will turn off buyers. HCH can afford taller gear because of the assist from electric motor.
The graph on the right shows comparison of torque output from HCH to LX (EX is not much different). Up until about 4000 rpm, HCH torque delivery is far superior before dropping down quickly (hence suffers from lower top end power).
Civic EX doesn't have good torque down low to go taller in first. If it did, it will turn off buyers. HCH can afford taller gear because of the assist from electric motor.
___I liked the “Turn off buyers” part. The HCH is already slow in every envelope you can postulate yet it doesn’t turn off Hybrid buyers? I bet it would turn you off however. If the EX was geared taller, it would receive superior economy to what it does today. Re-read the PM article and what they said about the EX’s RPM at speed. The EX’s ICE can quite easily drive the EX at those same speeds at much lower RPM’s. What are you missing here?
___In the real world, the HCH is slower then the EX to 30 mph and 60 mph by almost 25%. I drive a faster then HCH Insight 5-speed and it doesn’t have the performance compared to the lowly Corolla LE. The EX based Civic and Corolla are quite comparable if you didn’t know this. In the real world, the EX will walk all over the HCH. All you have to do is go test drive one to see for yourself.
The Prius took off thanks to the combination of rising petrol prices, celebrity endorsements and a futuristic redesign. (There is no petrol version of the Prius, so the car makes a statement in a way that the Honda Civic, which is available in both petrol and hybrid versions, does not.) It is the first hybrid to become a hit.
This to me is a more practical application of hybrid technology:
Andrew Frank and his team at the University of California Davis' Hybrid Electric Vehicle Centre are working exclusively on plug-in hybrids, which can operate as pure-electric vehicles over short distances (up to 60 miles, with a large enough battery pack) but can switch to a hybrid system when needed. Since the average American driver travels about 30 miles a day, plug-in hybrids could be recharged overnight, when electricity is cheaper to produce, and need never use petrol at all, except on longer trips.
That is the key. None of the Hollywood Set is actively selling Priuses - last I saw there have been no "official celebrity endorsements." And I haven't seen DiCaprio down at City Toyota sitting behind a sales desk either.
It was a new product, and GREEN, of COURSE the Hollywood lefties are going to buy one and drive one !!!
That doesn't make it less of a car !!!! All it did was get people's ATTENTION, like FREE MARKETING is supposed to do !!
Find or name me one person who bought a Prius "because Sandra Bullock" drove one?
(waiting waiting waiting)
You can't, because no one is that idiotic. It might have gotten someone into the dealership, but only because NOW THEY KNEW ABOUT THE CAR not because "Sandra" drove one.
Sure a plug-in Hybrid would be awesome, I posted that info last week.
But making a big deal of the "hollywood WOW factor" as being a major part of the Hybrid success story is just silly.
Find or name me one person who bought a Prius "because Sandra Bullock" drove one?
I had no idea Sandra Bullock even had one. She would be more apt to influence my purchase than DiCaprio or Maher..... I hope your not so foolish to think that driving up to the Oscars in a Prius was not an effective marketing tool. It worked for the Hummer when Arnold did the same thing a dozen years ago.
If you read my entire last post, I acknowledged that it was a "marketing tool" that famous people drove the Prius and MADE NEWS doing it in the early roll-out days.
But that about as much to do with the "overall sales" of Prius cars as a one page ad in Newsweek or Time magazine might have. It just put the car onto a potential buyer's radar screen.
The Oscars thing was an "accidental event" which was publicized in Toyota's favor. Toyota had nothing to do with it, and even if they DID, the "celebrity factor" is neither now nor ever driving actual sales any more than a magazine ad.
the "celebrity factor" is neither now nor ever driving actual sales any more than a magazine ad.
What makes you so sure of that? How come the Prius was on the market for 3 years before they sold a handful of them. Then when DiCaprio shows up at the 2003 Oscars they are swamped with interest. I say it had at least 75% to do with Hollywood pushing them. The writers in the mags all seem to think it was a big part of the sales.
If what you are saying was true the HCH with equal mileage, lower price and better performance would be out selling the Prius. It is not even close. It does not have the Celebrity Snob Appeal of the Prius. It just looks like a plain old Civic. What Hollywood Star would drive a Honda Civic? Tell me one, I'm waiting...
I'm actually surprised that any star would be driving a Prius. But then, companies can always use some advertisement so they can push for it. What makes you think Honda couldn't do it, if they wanted to?
What makes you think Honda couldn't do it, if they wanted to?
Honda has the same opportunity as Toyota. Why has Toyota kicked Honda's tail the last few years? You tell me. Then maybe Honda has too much class to align themselves with Hollywood types. I don't think it is because Toyota has a better product.
That's verging on ridiculous. The Prius is selling to certain very small group of people who "want" a "different looking car" to advertise to people that they are green and are saving the Earth.
All the celeb factor did was PUT THE CAR ON THE MAP, like I said a few posts ago. It is not an ongoing reason why the Prius is selling.
Here's a social experiment that will prove my point: Go to a Prius forum and take a poll of how many bought a Prius BECAUSE OF the celebs driving them, and take another poll asking who "heard of a Prius because of a celeb" and which one do you think is going to finish with more votes?
And as far as "famous owners of Civic Hybrids - there are some. See this page:
"Politically correct and at the conservation end of the oil-burning spectrum, a host of stars putt-putt around Hollywood, Vail and Miami's South Beach in hybrid gas and electric-powered vehicles from Honda and Toyota."
The reason the Prius did not sell in huge numbers in its first few years had nothing to do with star endorsements or lack thereof. It was because Toyota was trying to sell a compact sedan for $20k+ that didn't have substantially better fuel economy than a ECHO, Corolla, or Honda Civic. Prius sales started taking off because the '04 model was substantially roomier than its predecessor (moving it into midsized territory), had hatchback versatility, better performance, and better fuel economy all for the same price as the old Prius.
As for selling to a very small group of people... the Prius sold out in the '04 model year and is selling at a rate of about 100,000 per year just in the U.S. now. I don't see that as being a very small group of people--it's actually more people than buy all other hybrid cars combined (in the U.S.)
Comments
Sounds kinda conspiratorial to me.....
Educate us: what is that agenda if it is not the "proclaimed" agenda?
___I do not know about a conspiracy but what about low cost Urea injected SCR-CAT’s and DPF’s that will allow a late model Diesel to achieve ULEV levels of NOx and PM emissions on California’s already LSD of < 30 ppm? You have to fill a tank after 50,000 miles or have a PF cleaned/replaced but that isn’t good enough to meet the new CARB/EPA 120,000 mile mandatory non-consumer action limits. The Tanks and DPF’s can throw a CEL when they reach their respective limits and all cars (except Hybrid’s from my understanding?) run through a smog check in California so what is the problem? The latest Hybrid, the AH is only ULEV-II rated if that helps.
___With the above, you can’t have a diesel based car or truck that is as clean as most cars and trucks in the US and one that receives far better fuel economy then the average as well as most Hybrid’s! This is a huge problem and one that smells of an agenda imho.
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
I see your words but all I hear is "wah wah wah wah" like the Charlie Brown cartoon adults.......?
Can you kindly for the ignorant among us (me) explain what all your acronyms mean?
Thanks....
Is that what you were wondering?
(and I did know what most of the acronyms were, just putting them all together in one sentence made it somewhat difficult to follow)
___You own a Hybrid and should know at least half of the acronyms being posted. The other half can be found via www.google.com.
AH: Accord Hybrid
CARB: California Air Resources Board
CAT: Catalytic converter
CEL: Check Engine Light or MIL (Maintenance Indicator Light)
DPF: Diesel Particulate Filter
EPA: Environmental Protection Agency
LSD: Low Sulfur Diesel
NOx: Various Oxides of Nitrogen
PM: Particulate Matter
SCR: Selective Catalyst Reduction
ULEV: Ultra-Low Emissions Vehicle
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
You may be getting the numbers somehow, but what about the 9.0 million-plus light trucks getting on the road every year?
___As far as receiving those types of FE numbers in what ever you drive today; this has been explained more then once in tens of different forums and even here at Edmund’s. I believe Larsb posted some of them in one of the Edmunds Hybrid forums just the other day in fact? You know where to find that information if you were really interested.
___Those 9.0 million trucks I believe I explained how with off-the-shelf European based Diesel technology.
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
Oranu
Bottomline: The requirements of European (and most Asian) markets is very different from the US market. 40 mpg isn't going to happen any time soon in light trucks. At least not without redefining the market itself.
It will be interesting how America receives compact cars as family transport and falls in love with diesel engines.
___The Accord Saloon (TSX here) and Focus C-MAX (larger then the NA Ford Focus) are what most NA’s have been researching here in this very forum. These are not small by any means unless the Camry/Accord/Focus are small cars that America loves as well?
The requirements of European (and most Asian) markets is very different from the US market. 40 mpg isn't going to happen any time soon in light trucks.
___In the Ford Ranger and Chevrolet S-10/Colorado’s, it is happening all around the world except in NA. As stated above, place the more powerful 2.0 L TDCi in a Ranger and you instantly receive > 40 mpg. When US regulation gets in the way, you are stuck with sub 30 mpg small trucks and sub 20 mpg large ones. Of course the oil companies, EPA, and CARB are having there say about this unfortunately :-(
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
I noticed on the EPA site for 1985 Ford escort they had a diesel version. It was rated at 43/52 mpg. The CARB version was rated 37/44 mpg. By the time CARB got their grungy mits on it the mileage dropped by 8 mpg and the GHG went up a ton per yr. Yeah they know what they are doing alright. They have to be sleeping with the oil companies.
___Sleeping with the oil companies is over the top but with today’s diesel technology, I have no clue as to why CARB and the EPA won’t let these high tech and much cheaper wonders roam the states nor why they (the EPA) didn’t force the refiners to give the entire US LSD/ULSD or Low Sulfur regular unleaded years ago when California mandated it for themselves. There were refinery upgrades that needed to be accomplished of course but LS regular unleaded costs just .01 - .02 more per gallon then high sulfur regular unleaded and has the ability to decrease emissions in most cars by one rating! Instead, the EPA mandated garbage winter blend RFG for much of the country (Chicago and Milwaukee area included) which actually decreased FE by 1 - 3% for a decrease in emissions by 2 - 3%. My understanding is somewhat limited as it has been a while since I have read the details in this regard
___I do not want to see 1985 diesels running all over our cities and towns because much of the European continent’s major cities have a fuel oil smell. The reason it does is not because of the newer Diesels (Euro IV and V +) but because of the older ones (pre Euro III spec). Here in the US, Euro IV’s will be the minimum with actual ULEV and better based Diesels being the norm if the EPA and CARB will just sign off on DCC and Ford’s 30 - 50,000 mile Urea injection solution for removing NOx. It is a $100.00 technology vs. god only knows what but because those tanks have to be refilled before the new EPA 120,000 mile spec, the EPA and CARB won’t let the diesels in after LSD/ULSD arrives in 2006/2007. This costs the US 25 - 35% more fuel consumed per mile for the average driver of a car that could be fitted with either the SI-ICE or the CI-ICE?
___And another little tidbit that raises the hair on the back of my neck With the above, we only have the option of purchasing Hybrid’s at a cost that should make some think twice considering what a std I4 based Camry or Corolla when detuned to the performance level of a Prius II would receive in terms of real world FE or a Civic LX/EX detuned to the level of the HCH would achieve in the real world with a savings of ~ $3 - $5,000 per automobile in initial expense on top of it all.
___Read the following review closely:
Hybrid vs. Gas Cross Country
http://popularmechanics.com/automotive/auto_technology/2003/7/hyb- rid_vs_gas/index.phtml
With half the trip under our belt, some opinions are beginning to crystallize. First, the Civic EX might get better fuel economy if it had a deeper overdrive gear. At 80 mph, and 4000 rpm, the 1.7-liter Four is buzzing like a swarm of killer bees. The Hybrid's tach shows just under 3000 rpm at the same speed. And its engine is much happier. However, acceleration up to and beyond that speed is a bit better in the EX.
___The key is right there. If the EX was geared to the same 3,000 RPM at 80 mph as that of the HCH, would it not achieve higher FE then it did by one hell of a large margin out on the highway? The EX uses a 127 HP ICE and received an overall 33.8 mpg vs. the vs. the non-assisted HCH’s 85 HP at 42 mpg. Why can’t the 127 HP ICE in the Civic EX push a taller gear then the 85 HP HCH? It can and in fact, it quite easily can with far higher FE. Do you think Honda themselves are covering something up here possibly?
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
When I run across news about hybrids in the media, there aren't many acronyms.
Disconnect brain. Drive. Enjoy.
Hybrids are a gas!
I agree with that wholeheartedly. My question, did the 8 mpg the Escort lost on the CA version of the diesel make it clean. Or was that just wasted fuel to satisfy CARB? You are also on the money with the ULSD. It should have been mandated 10 years ago. I think we were flying too high on the Dot.com bubble to worry about Fuel economy. Then the Ethanol lobby gets in there and forces us to use that crap. It is not a viable alternative fuel. It is no way as usable as bio-diesel.
Good article:
All said and done, if you were driving the same route, at the same speeds, in the same conditions, it would take roughly 144,000 miles before the Hybrid paid back its $1440 premium over the Civic EX.
How much closer would the mileage have been if they had put better handling tires on the hybrid?
___To save the poster from having to type an extra 10,000 characters per day or so when said poster doesn’t know how to type, that is why. Read any thesis or national lab report and you will find a similar acronym laden report/article/post.
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
___I wouldn’t mind owning an HCH myself given the real world possibility of a 60 + mpg average w/ low to mid 70’s as a best but most won’t go there unfortunately :-( In any case, besides the tires (good point by the way), I wonder if the Civic EX is using either 5W-20 or 5W-30 vs. the HCH’s 0W-20? Along with that, the HCH has a Cd of .28 and the Civic EX has a Cd of .30. Now how would that be except for the $75.00 worth of plastic paneling sealing up the underbody of the HCH? Keep adding it up and I bet the Civic EX can come within a mile or two of the HCH but do so for thousands of dollars less money and you would still have a 127 HP - 0-60 car in 10 seconds all the time vs. a 95 HP one at 12.0 seconds to 60 some of the time.
http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/Spec_Glance.aspx?modelid=10983&- amp;trimid=98224&src=VIP
EX manual: 8.8 seconds to 60
EX w/ Auto: ~ 10.0 seconds but I am guessing?
HCH w/ CVT: 12.85 seconds to 60
HCH manual: ?
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
The HCH has the capability of augmenting the ICE with additional power, allowing the engine to run slower under normal (not hill climbing, etc) conditions. The EX has no such backup power, and has to plan for maximum torque. It is Honda design to run the engines high (though my CR-V runs at 2950 at 80 MPH). But perhaps a deeper torque with a more aggressive kick in of 3rd gear would be possible.
The HCH has the capability of augmenting the ICE with additional power, allowing the engine to run slower under normal (not hill climbing, etc) conditions.
___The maximum torque available at Full Assist in an IMA equipped HCH is just about equal to that available to the Civic EX. Believe me, Full Assist is not where you want to drive a Hybrid for any length of time There is no reason for short gearing in the EX other then Honda wants the EX to perform similarly to the Focus and Corolla for performance reasons alone, not FE ones. The HCH (0-60 in 12.5 seconds) on the other hand doesn’t have to meet the more stringent 0 - 60 in 8 to 10 seconds thus its fuel saving tall gearing. My Insight is one of the tallest geared SOB’s on the road and thank god that it is but I also know its limitations in terms of the performance capabilities when compared to the Corolla LE w/ Auto, Ranger XLT w/ 5-speed manual, and MDX w/ Auto that I also drive. In this case, the EX could have been geared much taller (40 - 50% by the sounds of it) and achieved far better FE out on the highway but it would have lost some time in the 0 to 60 sprint in doing so. The automotive press would eat the Honda Civic EX alive if it too had a 0-60 time of 12.5 seconds no matter that it could also achieve 48 - 52 mpg out on the highway. Can you say 6-speed manuals geared extra tall while in 6th?
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
Why would any human being want to ever read theses or national lab reports?
Are you guys this interesting in real life?
This is driving newcomers away and limiting the audience for these forums.
And where are the female voices here? We know that women use computers and the internet. Look at "The Sims." But read over the last few posts. It's two sweaty guys arm wrestling over arcane matters. Over minutiae.
Over arcane minutiae!
What does oil weight have to do with hybrids in the news? What do smelly Euro cities have to do with news?
It kills time until the next article about hybrid vehicles is published. Your a writer, put your articles on here and we will rip them apart for you.... have a good day, Gary
Don't know about you, but I just checked, and I'm not sweaty...
Re:minutiae. The entire hybrid system is one big "minutae"; the devil is always in the details. Guess we're just a bunch of hybrid geeks. And proud of it.
Plus, of course, proud to live in a country with free speach...
Amen!
"free speech" only means you can't be told by your government what to say and where... doesn't apply to private entities! We love to see opinions expressed, but let's be respectful of all of our members.
kirstie_h
Roving Host & Future Vehicles Host
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
TOKYO - Eyeing a forecasted 340 billion yen (US$3.3 billion) market for hybrid car batteries in 2010, Japanese giant Sanyo Electric Co. (TSE:6764 - News) will join forces with German autoparts maker Robert Bosch GmbH to develop rechargeable batteries for hybrid vehicles. By partnering with a parts manufacturer that deals with a wide range of firms, Sanyo Electric hopes to expand sales in the growing European market. To meet increased demand, Sanyo has more than tripled output capacity for hybrid car batteries at its Hyogo Prefecture plant from 300,000 to 1 million units per month. Sanyo has a 55% global market share in nickel metal hydride batteries, which are used by most hybrid cars."
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_52/b3914035_mz011- .htm
I disagree with your assessments. Civic EX and Civic Hybrid, driven under identical conditions will give HCH an edge in fuel economy. My Civic EX gets me 29-30 mpg in city (my wife manages another mpg or so).
___I think you are missing the details of this particular discussion. It is the short gearing of the EX, not the EX’s ICE as manufactured that causes the much lower FE by comparison out on the highway.
___I would never consider IMA in the equation for this FE test as those of us that run hybrids to their limits know IMA does not help highway FE in the least. In fact it’s a drag given the small amount of hidden charging and the 100 - 200 #’s of IMA HW we have to carry around all the time. Even in the city, some of us use it very sparingly if at all and have far superior FE then those that do. IMA’s main advantage for hypermilers is the ability to spin up the ICE to ~ 1,000 RPM before the injectors go live after an autostop (forced or std.) and to pick up a small amount of regen under very unique circumstances (never riding it as hypermilers packs are usually full). For the average hybrid driver, IMA allows Honda to use the much smaller ICE for fuel economy and gives the car the feel as if it has a much larger ICE, thus the FE.
___Let me introduce the other side of the equation What I do know is that the Civic EX’s final drive is much shorter then the HCH’s. The PM article describes this in painful detail. The taller the final (up to a point of course), the lower the RPM’s, the lower the friction based losses (these are larger then you think) as well as fuel injected over a given distance. The Civic EX is geared to compete with the likes of the Corolla and Focus in the 0 - 60 dash. If it were instead competing with the HCH or Prius I/II in the 0 - 60 dash, it could have much taller gearing and would receive higher FE.
___All I am saying is that if the std. Civic EX were geared as tall as that of the HCH, had the same Bridgestone or Dunlop LRR tires as that of the HCH, had the $75.00 in plastic under-body panels to reduce the Cd to .28 as that of the HCH from its current .30, it would still have better performance in the 0 - 60 dash given its relatively strong 1.7 L ICE and it would have very near or possibly better FE then the HCH’s FE performance out on the highway. Add lean burn to the EX and it is almost a slam dunk just as the lowly geared Civic HX is today. I don’t know where the two would stand in an all-city environment as that is not my specialty nor was it where the PM article really compared the HCH to the EX given the cross country route taken.
___As a test for you, if you want to reduce the RR of your EX’s current treads, up the pressure in them. It won’t reduce their RR Rating but it will reduce their overall RR by having a smaller contact patch and the heat wasted from the tread blocks flexing to and fro as the patch comes into contact with the surface. Guess what you achieve? Higher FE. The gearing change is minimal and in fact, in the RE92’s of the Insight, we lose a small fraction of a mm (lower gearing actually) as pressure is upped. Do you think a LRR rated tire vs. the std. your EX is currently shod with does not help improve FE? Insighter’s that swap to different tires then the RE92’s usually lose 5 mpg and these are the guys receiving 60 - 65 mpg’s on average, not 90 +. This alone should help you see where the discussion is heading in terms of your own EX as it sits in your drive.
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
I am of the opinion that the thread was keeping it to the minimum required for discussion. Sometimes the news articles bring out technical issues...
EX needs short gearing because it lacks torque at the low end. Hybrid can use tall gearing because its torque curve is strongest at the low end. Try gearing EX like you would Civic Hybrid, and soon you will realize that EX won’t be as much fun to drive as it is today. It surprises me a bit that Honda opted to not gear Accord Hybrid any taller than Accord V6.
Drag:
Whenever there is a little charging going around, not enough will be lost to arrive at the claims you have made. The generator does trigger during cruising but not always. And speaking of IMA hardware, HCH is just 62 lb. heavier than Civic EX. Give and take a few pounds for non-comparable options, and you couldn’t arrive at 100-200 lb. Even in Accord, it is not just IMA that is adding weight, I suspect some contribution comes from VCM, larger wheels, and other potential changes to the chassis (besides using, now, a first generation hybrid a/c system).
___About all I can add is you really have to go test drive an HCH. The performance of the HCH w/ CVT in comparison to the Insight 5-speed in all modes is lower. My Insight in comparison to your EX or my Corolla LE w/ Auto is another step down again. The EX simply has plenty of torque to overcome any disadvantage a tall gear would bestow upon it given the 2.5 + second advantage it has over and above the HCH as they are offered.
___If you were talking of fun, the HCH would not be much fun for you to drive because of its performance yet it will achieve low 40/mid 50 type numbers out on the highway. Tall gear the EX and you not only have a faster automobile then the HCH, you have almost the same FE out on the highway. It just wouldn’t be fast enough for you and the multitude of car mag writers that would flog it to its grave for not achieving 0-60 in < 8.8 seconds for the 5-speed manual and 10.x seconds for the Auto. The HCH is a 12.5 + second car w/ CVT in case you didn’t know?
Drag: Whenever there is a little charging going around, not enough will be lost to arrive at the claims you have made. The generator does trigger during cruising but not always. And speaking of IMA hardware, HCH is just 62 lb. heavier than Civic EX. Give and take a few pounds for non-comparable options, and you couldn’t arrive at 100-200 lb. Even in Accord, it is not just IMA that is adding weight, I suspect some contribution comes from VCM, larger wheels, and other potential changes to the chassis (besides using, now, a first generation hybrid a/c system).
___You can run all the numbers you want. Maybe the following will help you understand what higher RPM drag does in terms of energy needed to maintain a higher RPM in a hybrid?
http://www.ornl.gov/~webworks/cppr/y2001/rpt/121813.pdf
___Another real world test for you. Place your EX’s auto tranny in 2 and drive it to work at the same speeds you normally do. Aerodynamic and tread drag is canceled because you are traveling the same speed both days. It is Gearing and RPM friction that will kill you at 4,000 + rpm vs. 3,000 + RPM or whatever the exact difference is at a given speed.
___Weight. The loss of sunroof alone is probably 30 - 50 + #’s or more. The HCH’s pack weighs 63 #’s all by itself. The EX’s auto is far more complex and weighs more then HCH’s CVT so go manual to manual. There is a difference of 129 #’s between the 03 HCH 5-speed manual and the 03 EX 5-speed manual w/ the sunroof. Yep, total of ~ 100 - 200 #’s for the Hybrid HW and you cannot avoid carrying it around with you where ever you go :-(
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews/hybrid_diesel/0412_honda_acc- ord_hybrid/
Wayne, you have mentioned several times a taller top gear would hurt 0-60 times.
It won't. No 0-60 test ever uses the top gear. Most cars would get to 60mph in 2nd gear.
I once had a motorbike that would easily touch 60 in 1st.
___Good Point! Then it would go down to passing times possibly?
___The key is that the EX’s 1.7 has enough torque at 3,000 RPM vs. 4,000 RPM to run down the highway at 60, 70, and even 80 mph and it would still have better performance then the HCH. So why would the HCH be geared so tall? It’s for the FE! Assist in a hybrid at highway speeds is not only a waste of fuel in the Insight and HCH, it isn’t worth much at 2,500 RPM on up in terms of torque addition.
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
If they tall gear the EX, or better still add a taller 6th gear, they wouldn't sell any more HCHs. This can be done to any car IMHO, especially manual tranny ones. There can be a higher top gear which is about 30% higher than the existing top gear meant to be used only at highway speeds. There is no downside to this, except to manufacturers and oil companies profits.
___I believe in what you said wholeheartedly other then the oil company stuff. I see the much more powerful and lean burned equipped 1.7 L in the < $14,000 Civic HX achieving 36/44 mpg vs. 46/51 of the HCH w/ a manual. What do the amenities cost to take the HX coupe up to an LX or EX sedans trim level? $6,000 or more? I doubt that. Why didn’t Honda? I think it was to help the Hybrid’s along at the expense of the HX, LX, and EX’s of the world myself but that is just me.
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
CVT provides a wider spread, as do most new 6-speed automatic transmissions.
Civic EX doesn't have good torque down low to go taller in first. If it did, it will turn off buyers. HCH can afford taller gear because of the assist from electric motor.
The graph on the right shows comparison of torque output from HCH to LX (EX is not much different). Up until about 4000 rpm, HCH torque delivery is far superior before dropping down quickly (hence suffers from lower top end power).
Civic EX doesn't have good torque down low to go taller in first. If it did, it will turn off buyers. HCH can afford taller gear because of the assist from electric motor.
___I liked the “Turn off buyers” part. The HCH is already slow in every envelope you can postulate yet it doesn’t turn off Hybrid buyers? I bet it would turn you off however. If the EX was geared taller, it would receive superior economy to what it does today. Re-read the PM article and what they said about the EX’s RPM at speed. The EX’s ICE can quite easily drive the EX at those same speeds at much lower RPM’s. What are you missing here?
___In the real world, the HCH is slower then the EX to 30 mph and 60 mph by almost 25%. I drive a faster then HCH Insight 5-speed and it doesn’t have the performance compared to the lowly Corolla LE. The EX based Civic and Corolla are quite comparable if you didn’t know this. In the real world, the EX will walk all over the HCH. All you have to do is go test drive one to see for yourself.
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
http://www.mixedpower.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&- amp;sid=277
This to me is a more practical application of hybrid technology:
Andrew Frank and his team at the University of California Davis' Hybrid Electric Vehicle Centre are working exclusively on plug-in hybrids, which can operate as pure-electric vehicles over short distances (up to 60 miles, with a large enough battery pack) but can switch to a hybrid system when needed. Since the average American driver travels about 30 miles a day, plug-in hybrids could be recharged overnight, when electricity is cheaper to produce, and need never use petrol at all, except on longer trips.
That is the key. None of the Hollywood Set is actively selling Priuses - last I saw there have been no "official celebrity endorsements." And I haven't seen DiCaprio down at City Toyota sitting behind a sales desk either.
It was a new product, and GREEN, of COURSE the Hollywood lefties are going to buy one and drive one !!!
That doesn't make it less of a car !!!! All it did was get people's ATTENTION, like FREE MARKETING is supposed to do !!
Find or name me one person who bought a Prius "because Sandra Bullock" drove one?
(waiting waiting waiting)
You can't, because no one is that idiotic. It might have gotten someone into the dealership, but only because NOW THEY KNEW ABOUT THE CAR not because "Sandra" drove one.
Sure a plug-in Hybrid would be awesome, I posted that info last week.
But making a big deal of the "hollywood WOW factor" as being a major part of the Hybrid success story is just silly.
By gearing EX tall, you would end up having a less responsive car at slower speeds without the fuel economy of HCH.
I suggested earlier that this is an OT discussion. If you want to continue, let us take this to a more appropriate thread.
I had no idea Sandra Bullock even had one. She would be more apt to influence my purchase than DiCaprio or Maher..... I hope your not so foolish to think that driving up to the Oscars in a Prius was not an effective marketing tool. It worked for the Hummer when Arnold did the same thing a dozen years ago.
But that about as much to do with the "overall sales" of Prius cars as a one page ad in Newsweek or Time magazine might have. It just put the car onto a potential buyer's radar screen.
The Oscars thing was an "accidental event" which was publicized in Toyota's favor. Toyota had nothing to do with it, and even if they DID, the "celebrity factor" is neither now nor ever driving actual sales any more than a magazine ad.
What makes you so sure of that? How come the Prius was on the market for 3 years before they sold a handful of them. Then when DiCaprio shows up at the 2003 Oscars they are swamped with interest. I say it had at least 75% to do with Hollywood pushing them. The writers in the mags all seem to think it was a big part of the sales.
If what you are saying was true the HCH with equal mileage, lower price and better performance would be out selling the Prius. It is not even close. It does not have the Celebrity Snob Appeal of the Prius. It just looks like a plain old Civic. What Hollywood Star would drive a Honda Civic? Tell me one, I'm waiting...
Honda has the same opportunity as Toyota. Why has Toyota kicked Honda's tail the last few years? You tell me. Then maybe Honda has too much class to align themselves with Hollywood types. I don't think it is because Toyota has a better product.
That's verging on ridiculous. The Prius is selling to certain very small group of people who "want" a "different looking car" to advertise to people that they are green and are saving the Earth.
All the celeb factor did was PUT THE CAR ON THE MAP, like I said a few posts ago. It is not an ongoing reason why the Prius is selling.
Here's a social experiment that will prove my point: Go to a Prius forum and take a poll of how many bought a Prius BECAUSE OF the celebs driving them, and take another poll asking who "heard of a Prius because of a celeb" and which one do you think is going to finish with more votes?
And as far as "famous owners of Civic Hybrids - there are some. See this page:
"Politically correct and at the conservation end of the oil-burning spectrum, a host of stars putt-putt around Hollywood, Vail and Miami's South Beach in hybrid gas and electric-powered vehicles from Honda and Toyota."
http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/auto/car-guide-2004/hybrids.asp
As for selling to a very small group of people... the Prius sold out in the '04 model year and is selling at a rate of about 100,000 per year just in the U.S. now. I don't see that as being a very small group of people--it's actually more people than buy all other hybrid cars combined (in the U.S.)
http://pressroom.toyota.com/photo_library/display_release.html?id- =20040930