Hybrids in the News

1323335373897

Comments

  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    "In a rare agreement on a sweeping and costly initiative, automakers and clean-air advocates yesterday rolled out a plan to add 2,000 experimental vehicles to the modest fleet and open dozens of refueling stations from Sacramento to San Diego by the end of the decade."

    http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20050527-9999-1n27hydrogen.html
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    But challenges lie ahead. Hydrogen cars now cost $1 million each. Refueling stations are generally not accessible to the public. The range between fill-ups is about 100 miles. And disputes persist over hydrogen sources, mostly coal vs. renewable fuels such as wind power.

    There you have it in a nutshell. Your new million dollar car can go 100 miles out into the desert, and AAA can tow you back. What a "Pie in the SKY" waste of our tax dollars. Unless we go to nuclear power there is no way hydrogen fuel cells are even close to feasible. They are a bigger waste of time, money and energy than the hybrids. The automobile industry is out of control and out of touch with reality.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    That's why the research is necessary. That's why the proponents are saying 10-20 more years. It's going to take time and technology advances to make this work.

    Be patient mi amigo !!! :D
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    With 150 mile range an EV is a much simpler safer solution. It would be no problem to build an EV with today's batteries that would go 200 miles plus. I guarantee it would not cost a million dollars of our taxes to do it. You still have the electrical generation problem, just not the conversion to hydrogen. We go further backward every day in the auto industry. The auto makers don't want to give up the ICE and hybrids play into that strategy very well. The more complex the car the more they can charge. A straight EV is WAY too simple and inexpensive to build.

    EV-1 owner writes:
    With the Gen 2 EV1 with Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH) batteries at the same ocean residence, my Wakeup range is 150 to 160 miles, with an actual range 120 to 150 miles. Including hills, I have been getting mostly between 130 and 140 miles. For me, charging has become unnecessary, although I charge when there is a public charger to 'Show the Flag'.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Mitsubishi is building a small two seater EV they plan on selling by 2010. Other than that, all the other car makers have seen the failure of EVs already (Ford Ranger, the $40,000 Rav4 EV, EV1) and are not anxious to repeat that fiasco.

    Tell me why you and Mitsubishi are the only ones who think EV is viable, after the marketplace failures of their predecessors? :D

    Seems to me like a "plug in Hybrid" is the best idea for today.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Gary, looks like much to your dismay, the VW Touran HyMotion is under way:

    "[RenewableEnergyAccess.com] Modine Manufacturing Company announced it is now supplying humidification and water management components to Volkswagen for their fuel cell hybrid vehicle - the Touran HyMotion."

    http://renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=31259
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Purolator adding HEVs to fleet, moving up to 400 HEVs per year in coming years:

    Dateline: TORONTO, Ontario, May 27

    "Purolator Courier Ltd., Canada's largest overnight courier company, today introduced ten hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) and one hydrogen fuel-cell hybrid electric vehicle (FC-HEV) into its Toronto curb-side delivery fleet at a news conference at the company's Metro West facility. An additional 20 HEVs will also be integrated into Purolator's fleet in other major metropolitan areas in Canada.

    After analyzing the environmental impacts of its operations and services, Purolator identified fleet fuel usage and vehicle air emissions as the best way to reduce its environmental footprint. The HEVs are expected to eliminate up to 50%, and the FC-HEVs up to 100%, of greenhouse gasses currently emitted with conventional gasoline/diesel delivery vehicles. If the experience of these vehicles lives up to expectations, then as Purolator replenishes its fleet each year - the company intends to add up to 400 HEVs to its fleet annually. "

    http://www.prdirect.ca/en/view_release.aspx?TrafficID=2837
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Tell me why you and Mitsubishi are the only ones who think EV is viable.

    You must not have read your own article. $1,000,000 per car is outrageous. I know the government and GM spent a couple billion developing the EV-1. That is old pork and now the new pork is hydrogen fuel cells. What a way to spend our tax dollars. Mitsubishi sees a market for all electric vehicles. It would be the best solution for my around town car and most anyone that only drives 3-6 miles a day. Hybrids don't get good mileage the first few miles just like most cars, so why spend the extra cash for them.

    Hybrid advocates are not much different than the EV soldiers. Just as you would lay in front of the bulldozers when they decide to crush all the hybrids. There were people willing to pay to keep their leased EV-1 vehicles. Instead GM said no way and took them all to the graveyard for wasted tax dollars. The only reason the hybrids are doing as well as they are is no additional infrastructure is needed to power them. I am still waiting to hear how Toyota is going to totally recycle the Prius. I guess you give it to them or pay them to take it when it quits and is no longer cost effective to repair.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Gary, looks like much to your dismay, the VW Touran HyMotion is under way:

    Why not? VW wants some of the government "PORK" that is being thrown around the World. Next will come the vehicles with a windmill on top for the cloudy windy days and solar panels for the hot clear days. A real steal at $5 million bucks a pop, of our tax dollars.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    What I said was "no one says Hydrogen cars are ready for Prime Time." That's why they say 10-20 years before it is practical. So that elminates any "$1 million sticker shock" issues, OK? Can we leave that alone? OK. Next point.

    We are all better off that GM and the Govt (we taxpayers) spent the money on the EV1 project. What it proved is that "EV technology and EV vehicles are A) not really that viable an option, and B) the buying public will not buy these vehicles in sufficient numbers to make it a profitable car.

    That second point is the most salient and the most true: just because the SMALL NUMBER of drivers and owners of these EVs "swear by them and would not sell them for any amount of money" does not mean that millions of people could use these vehicles and suffer with the limitations (mileage, etc) that the vehicles inherently come with.

    And your point that EV drivers and Hybrid advocates are the same is not correct. What's different? Hybrid cars are marketable, are selling, and have no limitations which limit their every day usage.

    And hybrid cars are not the first cars which have been declared "80%+ recyclable" either - many have had that statement by the car builder before now. Once again, that is not a Hybrid deficiency or blemish - they may or may not get recycled completely, but AT LEAST the POTENTIAL to do so is there. Just like the POTENTIAL to achieve 55+ MPG is there. It's not the technology at fault - it's what people DO with the technology that matters. Blaming the hybrids because they may not get recycled completely is like blaming trees because all paper does not get recycled.

    See? :D
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    This is the first generation GM/Ovonic NiMH car and is the technology that could change the world. As Bob Purcell (in charge of ATVs for GM) once told us, "the best technology for URBAN, SUBURBAN, COMMUTER, and REGIONAL TRIPS is the PURE BATTERY electric vehicle. Better than Hybrids and Fuel Cell EVs." Purcell also said he took his hat off "to the guys at OVONIC for the fantastic job they had done in developing, and now with GM, manufacturing the incredible NiMH EV battery."
    Don't let the Pure Electric Vehicle be killed, now that the right technology is available.


    OVONIC=company that invented the NiMH battery

    NO Pork left there, onto hybrids and fuel cells....
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    buying public will not buy these vehicles in sufficient numbers to make it a profitable car.

    How do you know? They were never given a fair chance. How many electric RAV4s did Toyota build? Were they all sold? Remember our tax dollars paid to develop the NiMH battery. Where is my royalty check? Oh I guess it is in the pockets of Toyota and Matshushita who tried to steal the technology from OVONIC. I would buy a small car with a 150 mile range that could be plugged into the household current long before I would buy into the complexity & high cost of hybrids The bottom line is what I said before. They are too simple and cheap to build and repair. The biggest worry is the battery and you have always said that is the least likely part to go bad.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    We "all" know because of the super low demand on the cars when they WERE available....these programs were killed because of solid business reasons - components and cars cost more to build than they could profitably sell for in sufficient volume.

    Remember: The RAV4 EVs were $40,000 !! You think people whine about the Hybrid Premium !!??!! The EV premium is WAY WAY worse !!! :D:D:(:)
  • biker4biker4 Member Posts: 746
    No real alternative to the internal combustion engine using fossil fuels will be profitably marketed until the world runs out of fossil fuels or reaches above $10/gal. Crude oil based fuels are just too darn cheap compared to alternative sources of power. I mean when beer, soda and even bottled water costs more than the stuff you stick into your tank things are not going to change much.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    In 10 to 20 years(maybe even before) when gas prices do hit $10 it will be nice to know that there may be options other than the internal combustion engine.

    Both EV and hydrogen will exist when we demand such alternatives. Currently we dont demand such alternatives because nothing beats petroleum based fuels in terms of value(even if the prices doubled).

    There are very few candidates for a EV or hydrogen today! Except maybe a very small minority of eccentrics who drive their Priuses without shoes in order to maximize fuel !

    BUT having said that do not write-off Mitsubishi EV for 2010. I read this will be an electrical Colt not a two seater. An electrical Colt at 15k sounds like a potential marketing success to me(reasonable price, a back seat, no gas, hatchback provides decent interior space---what more do you want???)
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Remember: The RAV4 EVs were $40,000 !!

    According to Toyota the 2000 Prius cost $35k to build so they should have sold for $40k. They subsidized them why not the EV? I'll tell you why. They have figured out how to scam the public with the hybrid and go around CARB by never letting the battery become an issue. It is used so little as to almost be worthless. So it lasts longer and Toyota is off the hook. You call it smart I call it automotive "Smoke & Mirrors". I am glad for Edmund's as it has brought to light much of the problems surrounding the hybrid technology. Common sense says steer clear. Just most people don't want to be blasted by the hybrid hype. I don't care I call them as I see them. If the battery in the EV is more than the value of the vehicle what is the cost of the hybrid battery? More side stepping on that one I am sure. And I would bet that Toyota will not let out the figures if they do have batteries to replace.

    The California Air Resources Board published a guidance statement regarding EV battery life. The guideline stated that when the battery capacity decreases to less than 80% of the original capacity, the battery needs to be replaced. A battery's capacity is the amount of charge that it holds, and is commonly measured by the range of the vehicle. It is cost-prohibitive to replace an EV battery. The cost to replace the battery is more than the value of the vehicle.

    http://www.toyota.com/html/shop/vehicles/ravev/rav4ev_0_home/index.html
  • chidorochidoro Member Posts: 125
    "I mean when beer, soda and even bottled water costs more than the stuff you stick into your tank things are not going to change much. "

    Until gas can be purchased in little bottles or cans like the afformentioned fluids, that comparison is moot.
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    As weight and aerodynamic frontal area go up, the advantages of hybridization go down. That is why the Prius is small and carefully designed for aerodynamics. Ditto for the Accord Hybrid, which actually uses lighter metals in the construction process.

    We will not see huge (absolute) gains in MPG for Explorers, Expeditions, Tahoes, etc., or full sized pickup trucks. They will get somewhat better (relative) MPG compared to non Hybrid, but talking 40 MPG for a Ford Expedition is just nonsense. The thing weighs over 6000 lbs.

    The Chevy is meant for construction jobs where the crew needs the 110 volt power outlets.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    As weight and aerodynamic frontal area go up, the advantages of hybridization go down.

    Then why do hybrids like the Prius and Escape get better fuel economy at low speeds, in city driving? Aerodynamics have little impact at 30 mph. However, it does help a car as big as the Prius get good fuel economy on the highway (a higher EPA rating than the smaller HCH), even when it's running on only its gas engine.
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    "Then why do hybrids like the Prius and Escape get better fuel economy at low speeds, in city driving? "

    In the case of the Escape, partially because the large frontal area has an impact on MPG based on the speed of the vehicle. In any case, the HSD allows either vehicle to run on electric only at low speeds, which increases mileage. And third, the heavy weight of the Escape requires a lot of gas to accelerate - the hybrid electric propulsion helps get the mass going when acclerating from a stop. All of these contribute to better mileage in town. As you may know, the hybrid (and all cars) will get better mileage at 60 MPH than 80 MPH; this is largely due to the aerodynamic forces increasing with the speed.

    "However, it does help a car as big as the Prius get good fuel economy on the highway (a higher EPA rating than the smaller HCH), even when it's running on only its gas engine."

    The Prius cannot run on it's gas engine alone. The electric motors are always on and running. Sometimes the engine supplies power directly to the motors, sometimes to both the motors and the battery.

    Also, in my opinion, the Prius is not a "big car". It acheives mid size only because it is a hatchback. If it were offered in sedan it would be compact class.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    At highway speeds, the Prius is being propelled forward by its gas engine alone--is that precise enough for you?

    I don't think the Prius is a "big" car either, and I didn't say it was. But it's bigger than the HCH yet returns better highway mpg. That demonstrates the value of superior aerodynamics--but that's not just for hybrids. In any case, I don't agree with your earlier statement that "As weight and aerodynamic frontal area go up, the advantages of hybridization go down." There are still advantages such as fuel economy and lower emissons as both weight and frontal area increase. For example, compare the fuel economy and emissions of a V8-powered RX SUV with the like-performance RX400h.
  • larsblarsb Member Posts: 8,204
    Gary, Wait - you wring your hands over the demise of EV1s, but Hybrids are against "common sense"?????

    I might not be the sharpest tool in the kitchen, but I can't follow that logic at all - please elaborate......????? :confuse:
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    Backy-
    Please post your evidence that the statement is false:
    "As weight and aerodynamic frontal area go up, the advantages of hybridization go down."

    What I mean is that you won't see high MPG numbers on large SUVs. Even the smaller SUVs like the Highlander and RX400 are only seeing MPG in the late 20's. The fuel savings (which I consider the real advantage of hybridization) associated with Hybrids are less with larger, heavier vehicles.

    As to the Prius using gasoline engine alone: Even at highways speeds, the electric motors add propulsion. This is actually an advantage to the system. I highly recommend the Toyota website, which has a great animated demonstration of HSD:

    http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/2005/prius/key_features/pc/index.html

    At highway speeds, the ICE powers both the wheels and the generator, skipping charging the battery. But I don't want people being confused about the Prius getting it's propulsion only from the ICE, when in fact it gets propulsion from both the ICE and normal electric motors at all times. I do see your point - the generator for the electric motor is fed from the ICE - but I hope you see mine, which is that the actual propulsion going to the planetary gearset is being driven by electric means at all times. The ICE kicks in at higher speeds (resulting in dual power inputs to the planetary gearset), but the electric motors don't quit. So in the traditional sense, the Prius is never propelled like an ordinary ICE vehicle (by gasoline alone tied to a mechanical drive system). That is what I meant by my statement about the Prius never being run by gasoline alone. I suppose with such a complex system I shouldn't make such generalized statements, but then I was going for brevity. Guess that idea went out the window.

    The HCH does have the capability to run purely in gasoline/mechanical mode, but then it never runs only on electric motors...
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I can't follow that logic at all - please elaborate......?????

    SIMPLICITY! The EV-1 with the NiMH battery was very simple and had a range that was adequate for 99% of the people. It did not suffer from poor mileage on short trips to the store and it got the equivalent of over 200 MPG. Now that should be enough to tell you why they are loved by the owners/lessee and not by the corporate world. Jump forward to the Hybrid. VERY COMPLEX! Lots of stuff to break and parts to sell after the 36k miles has gone by. Good for corporations bad for the consumer. Notice how they manipulated US. They raise the price of fuel and then say hey have we got a deal for you. I'm not buying into their games. They also raise the price of diesel beyond what it is worth to discourage their acceptance as they are being accepted in the EU. I don't think you will find many people jumping on the hybrid bandwagon in Europe. They already have a better solution.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    If that's the way the Prius works, that's the way it works. That's a sidebar to the real discussion anyway.

    Here's the proof you asked regarding the fact that hybridization is advantageous even as weight and frontal area increase:

    The RX 400h's EPA combined fuel economy rating of 29 mpg exceeds the average for new compact sedans and marks a 38 percent improvement over RX 330 AWD. At 31 mpg in the city, it also gains a 72 percent edge over RX 330 and exceeds most V8 and many V6-equipped luxury SUVs by over 100 percent.

    http://www.autointell.com/asian_companies/toyota_motor/lexus-cars/lexus-rx400h/lexus-rx400- - h-04.htm

    Fuel economy improvements of about 100% compared to vehicle of the same size and performance--very heavy vehicles with large frontal areas--seems advantageous to me. Also, I am not aware of any other SUV in the same class as the RX400h (or similar Highlander Hybrid) that achieve SULEV emissions. I think that's advantageous, also.
  • biker4biker4 Member Posts: 746
    Only slight problem with that evaluation - real world MPG numbers show only 30% improvement between RX330 and 400H.
    All vehicles under 6500 lbs will be SULEV in a couple of years so that's not an issue.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    30% is in line with the difference in highway EPA ratings. BTW, where are you getting the real-world numbers? greenhybrid.com shows a median real-world mpg of 27 for the RX400h, but based on only 4 samples - about 10% off the EPA's 30 overall rating. So these are all pretty new cars. Fuel economy typically improves after break-in.

    Also, the RX330 and RX400h do not have similar performance. Compare the fuel economy of SUVs--typically V8s--with the same performance as the RX400h and you see a much bigger difference in fuel economy than 30%--more like the 100% mentioned in the article.

    As for the future... yes, emissions should improve in the future. I was commenting on vehicles available now.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    First GM now Toyota refusing to sell the last of the leased RAV4 EVs. My question is WHY? Will the cost to warrant the hybrids put them in the crusher also? Makes me wonder. I realize the hybrid is not the threat to corporate greed that the EV's were. We gave GM, Toyota & Ford Billions of dollars to develop super clean electric vehicles. The people that got them did not want to give them back. Think about a RAV4 that is EPA rated for 125 MPG City. Who has the most to lose and the most to gain with that vehicle? If it was scrapped because of the battery life that says something about the hybrid life cycle also. I doubt it has anything to do with the electric motors, they are pretty solid. IF Toyota was concerned about the environment as some here believe, they would not be trying to crush & bury the cleanest car they ever built. Toyota claims it is the battery that costs too much. In the next breath they say the same batteries are good for 10 years. Which of their stories do you believe?

    http://dontcrush.com/

    100 MPG alternative to the factory Prius.
    http://www.calcars.org/
  • blaneblane Member Posts: 2,017
    Gary:

    Please point me to a link that authoritatively proves that, as you said above, "We gave GM, Toyota & Ford Billions of dollars to develop super clean electric vehicles." I'm particularly interested in your claim about Toyota (receiving US tax dollars for that purpose).
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Member Posts: 1,289
    "First GM now Toyota refusing to sell the last of the leased RAV4 EVs. My question is WHY?"

    As usual your questions can be easily answered.

    Did you bother to think that Toyota and GM would have to continue to make parts for the electric vehicles if they sold them to the public? To make parts for future repairs for a very small production run worth of vehicles is pretty ridiculously expensive! You know, a little thing called *economies of scale* comes into the picture.
  • railroadjamesrailroadjames Member Posts: 560
    I'm totally convinced that my '04 Prius does just that . Much to some exaggeration, mine cost much less than nay sayers keep spouting ($21,233.00) out the door. The tranny (CVT) is great and the roominess is without a doubt one car that delivers. Clean runner (low emissions) are simply as green as you get. The electric mode in rush-hour traffic jams is supurb (58mpgs). That I get 450 miles to a tank of gas means I see filling stations rarely. The warrantee means Toyota stands by their hybrid (* yrs -100K). Whats not to like in a car that delivers in so many ways. As for the other hybrids.....they're selling too...I wonder why. Could it be because they too deliver?
    Railroadjames (Free-Us Prius)
    P.S. Every time I see A (9mpg) Hummer I Smile!!
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    This was all part of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles PNGV. As close as I can tell the best thing to come out of the 2 billion was NiMH batteries.

    The annual government share of budget is expected to include $29 million or more for vehicle technology, $40 million for advanced ICE, $20 million for materials, $5 million or more for manufacturing, and $57 million for electric and hybrid vehicles. An infrastructure project is underway at nine major sites located close to industry and covering a wide range of climates. Industry manufacturers gearing up for the 1998 California zero emission vehicle (ZEV) program include Honda, Mazda, Nissan, and Toyota. Other Japanese manufacturers participating in the cooperative activity include Daihatsu, Mitsubishi, Isuzu, and Suzuki.

    http://www.ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/energy/eng-9.cfm?&CFID=2337432&CFTOKEN=26989749
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    As usual your questions can be easily answered.

    Maybe for you it is a no brainer. If what you say is true. Why would they sell some of the RAV4 electrics and not all of them. Maintaining parts for One costs as much as 300. In fact as has been pointed out the more they sell the easier it is to justify. 2nd, why did Toyota subsidize the first Prius to the tune of $15- $20k per car and they did not do the same for the RAV4 electric? The first Prius was not a big seller from 2000-2003. Japan gave Toyota $8,000 per car early on for the Prius sales. Not sure if that was a Japan only sales or not.
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Member Posts: 1,289
    "2nd, why did Toyota subsidize the first Prius to the tune of $15- $20k per car and they did not do the same for the RAV4 electric? "

    First, Toyota is still subsidizing the current Prius, but it's much less than the first generation. Second, the RAV4 electric vehicle was merely a testbed for technologies. I do not believe it was ever meant to be a mass production vehicle. Hence, it was basically only sold to fleet buyers. Third, EV vehicles are not exactly user friendly. Did you ever think about that?? Where is a customer going to charge a full electric vehicle? And how long does it take to charge? And how long does that charge last? And lastly, a full EV vehicle isn't exactly pollution free. Coal or some other natural resource is burned somewhere to power the car.
    The Prius was more of a sure bet because the infrastructure to keep it user friendly is already there-gas stations.

    My understanding is, Toyota bought back all of the EV RAV4s and GM took back all of the EV1s off of lease.

    "Maintaining parts for One costs as much as 300. "

    Sorry, keeping a parts manufacturing operation for one vehicle costs more than for 300 units, ideally. Building the parts to keep a few hundred Rav4s running well into the future is alot more expensive than building the parts to keep a few hundred thousand Prius' well into the future.
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Member Posts: 1,289
    "According to Toyota the 2000 Prius cost $35k to build so they should have sold for $40k. They subsidized them why not the EV?"

    Answered in previous post, EVs had no immediate future to begin with.

    "I'll tell you why. They have figured out how to scam the public with the hybrid and go around CARB by never letting the battery become an issue. It is used so little as to almost be worthless."

    Really? If it's a *Scam*, how does the Prius get great gas mileage? How does the Lexus RX400h get noticeably better gas mileage than the RX330 while still being faster and heavier? Doesn't seem like much of a scam.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    EV vehicles are not exactly user friendly

    How much friendlier do you want than plugging your car in when you go to bed and have it ready to go 150-200 miles the next morning? Or plug it into the charger at Costco while you shop for a quick charge. You are also mistaken about who bought the RAV4 vehicles. They were available to the public. some of those that leased them, were given the opportunity to purchase them and did. When Toyota decided to drop the vehicle in 2004 they were starting to see interest in the Prius and did not need the RAV4 electric to look green anymore. Ford was going the same route as GM & Toyota with the crushing of the electric Ranger PU trucks. They thought better of it and allowed them to be purchased by those that wanted them. The pollution from coal generated electricity is the same lame excuse that is repeated over and again. It was started by those in the Oil industry that could see their profits being eroded by these cars that did not use a drop of fossil fuel. Many owners have solar collectors on their homes to charge their EV's. The bottom line is this: are we interested in cutting back on our use of fossil fuel or just a little? As long as we don't give up anything and can still "FEEL GOOD" we will go for it, such as the RX400h & HAH. Some one driving an RX400h is polluting nearly twice the amount of a person driving a Corolla, and at least 10 times as much as the guy in the RAV4 electric. Yet the hybrid looks "Green" so it must be a good thing. Toyota is already stuck with maintaining parts for the few RAV4's that are sold. What is a few more to them? They could afford to keep them in their lineup just as Honda keeps the Insight. If they were subsidized & promoted with the high profile that surrounds the Prius, they would have sold much better. Did you ever see one on a Toyota lot? If I was given the choice of a 50 MPG Prius and a 125 MPG RAV4 or electric Ranger PU, it would be a no brainer. That would be perfect for my under 10 mile trips.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    how does the Prius get great gas mileage?

    The Prius gets decent mileage with it's little tiny engine generating electricity for the motor, and a slight kick from the batteries from a stop. If the battery is only used in the 20% to 80% range that is not a lot. It is filler at best. I would think you would be enthused about a vehicle that gets anywhere from 100 to 200 MPG equivalent. Or do you just fall in step behind the automaker's, thinking they know what is best for us? Then again maybe the BIG guys in the oil industry told Toyota & Honda to cool it with the high mileage cars.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Although a significant marketing effort was undertaken for the RAV4-EV, we only sold about 300 vehicles a year. Although Toyota's electric vehicle sales have proved disappointing, Toyota was able to leverage valuable technology from the development and sales of the RAV4-EV. For example, some of the technology involved in the Hybrid Synergy Drive system on the next generation Prius came from the RAV4-EV.

    So they used some of the EV technology to build a compromise vehicle, the Prius, to keep the oil barons happy. You buy a hybrid and you play into their hand.

    http://www.toyota.com/html/shop/vehicles/ravev/rav4ev_0_home/index.html

    http://www.evworld.com/archives/testdrives/rav4ev.html
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    You buy a hybrid and you get a vehicle that has up to double the fuel economy of a vehicle of comparable size and performance (examples: Prius, RX400h). How is that playing into the oil companies' hands? You also have a vehicle that, unlike electric vehicles, is suitable for any kind of task--anywhere from short trips around town to long-distance commutes or other trips. If a family can only afford one car, an electric car would be really impractical for most people. Maybe that's why they never caught on, as have hybrids.

    Question: are electric cars hybrids?
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    If a family can only afford one car

    If a family can only afford one car, it is unlikely to be a hybrid or an EV. Both are at a premium for the sake of being environmentally conscientious. There is still no way that a hybrid is an economical choice compared to other vehicles in the class. We don't need to argue that aspect as we probably disagree. Both the hybrids and the EV's are there for the upper middle class buyers to make a statement. We want to save the environment and conserve on fossil fuel. I don't understand how it can be argued that an EV is not practical as a commuter vehicle, in a multi car family. EV's at the very least get twice the mileage of the best hybrid. A few of the hybrids give an appreciable increase in fuel economy. Not the RX400 or HAH. If you drive the counter parts as we are finding you have to drive the hybrids you would get close to the same mileage. To get 4-6 MPG increase in the RX for a $10k premium is a joke. Same goes for the HAH to a lessor extent. I personally think the automaker's especially Toyota are making fools of the American buyer, taking advantage of our weakness, with concerns of the environment.

    EV's did not catch on because they were not advertised & subsidized by the automakers as the hybrids are.
  • john1701ajohn1701a Member Posts: 1,897
    Still afraid to discuss HSD itself, eh?

    Picking on specific current offerings has absolutely, positively nothing to do with what will be available a few years from now... when the R&D to create HSD will be paid for and a decent profit can be obtained.

    Remember, hybrid designs like HSD were intended to be used in the entire fleet of vehicles being offered. Analyzing just one or two configurations as if that's what all the vehicles using it will have is neither constructive nor objective.

    Wanna discuss a hybrid Camry with just HSD, none of the extra goodies that Prius comes with standard? That's an entirely different ballgame.

    JOHN
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    EVs did not catch on because they are impractical for all but a small number of households, from a utility and cost standpoint. I notice they are not practical for you, for example. Nor for me. New hybrids can be had for $20k, thousands under the average price of a car and well within the means of middle-class families. I don't disagree that EVs are practical commuting vehicles, if you can afford to buy a very expensive car that is dedicated to short-distance travel. But I do disagree that a 100% improvement in fuel economy, which is what hybrids like the RX400h and Prius achieve compared to vehicles in the same class (mid-sized V8 SUVs and mid-sized automatic cars, respectively), is not an "appreciable increase".

    Since you won't answer my question, I will: EVs are not hybrids.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    which is what hybrids like the RX400h

    You keep saying there are big increases in mileage between the RX400h and comparable SUV's. Those that have owned the RX330 say the highway mileage is about the same. Plus the city mileage on short trips is not very good with the hybrid either. That is my point. 90% of my trips in town are under 3 miles. The EVs are not subject to those negatives. EVs are not hybrids. Hybrids are EVs. And I did try to buy an EV-1 in 2000. They were lease only. I only buy cars for cash. I am not going to fill the bankers pocket with interest money. That is when I came across the Prius which I test drove, and wanted to buy it.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    Which means the EV1 was impractical for you, from a financial standpoint. And wanting is not the same as buying, is it, as we both know wrt the Prius.

    The simple truth, which is often overlooked in these comparisons, is that the RX400h is NOT comparable to the RX330. To be comparable, you'd need to drop a V8 into the RX330, or compare the RX400h to other V8-powered SUVs to get comparable performance. That is where the 100% fuel economy improvement I mentioned comes from, and which the article I posted earlier pointed out.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    "Wanna discuss a hybrid Camry with just HSD, none of the extra goodies that Prius comes with standard? That's an entirely different ballgame."

    If that would happen I would clap my hands and cheer!

    But will a no-frill hybrid Camry exist?

    Unlikely, very unlikely!

    I have a strong hunch based on observing the pricing of Toyota hybrid SUVs and the HAHs that the upcoming Camry will be loaded like the HAH at a significantly premium price . And premium priced mainly to reflect all the frivolous gizmos (other than the costs of hybrid tech) that I certainly can live without!!!

    If I am wrong, I would be pleasantly surprised! :D

    If I am correct, I would be angry that I am correct! :mad:
  • john1701ajohn1701a Member Posts: 1,897
    > I have a strong hunch based on observing...

    What does that have to do with after the introduction of HSD into at least one model of each vehicle type is complete?

    Remember, there is no real competition yet and the R&D still needs to be paid for.

    JOHN
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Member Posts: 1,289
    "How much friendlier do you want than plugging your car in when you go to bed and have it ready to go 150-200 miles the next morning? Or plug it into the charger at Costco while you shop for a quick charge."

    You call plugging it in and waiting overnight for a full charge that will maybe get you 200 miles *user friendly*????? Excuse me, but who else sees that as user friendly???

    BTW, what happens when you need to drive more than 200 miles in a single day??

    You know, I don't see any Costco's, BJ's, or frankly any other places around here that have quick charge centers available just for Electric vehicles. How many do you have in your neighborhood?

    "Many owners have solar collectors on their homes to charge their EV's. "

    Well, this doesn't exactly say much, considering very few people are willing to spend the big bucks it costs to put solar panels on their house's. You make the claim hybrids don't make sense because they don't recoup the additional cost, well solar panels at this time pretty much don't make financial sense either. ANd you can blame the government for that!

    "Some one driving an RX400h is polluting nearly twice the amount of a person driving a Corolla"

    And your proof on this is where?
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Member Posts: 1,289
    "Those that have owned the RX330 say the highway mileage is about the same. Plus the city mileage on short trips is not very good with the hybrid either. That is my point."

    Do you think anybody buys your arguments here? do you think nobody reads the RX400h board to see what mileage people are reallly getting???

    The average RX330 owner gets under 20MPG in mixed driving. From the RX400h boards, people are posting over 25MPG on average. Some are posting below 25MPG, but most are posting numbers above 25MPG. Please give the B.S. a rest.
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    "Remember, there is no real competition yet and the R&D still needs to be paid for."

    I am willing to pay for the technology I want(hybrid), not for the gizmos I do not want(any distracting luxury that does not improve my driving experience).

    On behalf of all future hybrid buyers I want to thank you for subsidizing Toyota's R&D endeavors (assuming you purchased a hybrid). People like you will make it possible for future hybrids to be an economically justifiable purchase(maybe in a few years). Keep up the subsidies!!!;)
  • deweydewey Member Posts: 5,251
    Does anyone have a deposit on a Toyota hybrid? There is a profitable opportunity for anyone who does!

    http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story.asp?StoryId=CqPQpWeidDxmTAhLICMLKCW
This discussion has been closed.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.