Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Not sure which tranny the 2010 Fusion Hybrid will use. But the issue was that Ford found similarities between their software and patents that Toyota held in that area so to avoid a potential lawsuit later they worked out an exchange of patent licenses (Ford got 20 or so and Toyota got some related to diesel truck engines). Many people incorrectly took this to mean that Ford simply bought Toyota's hybrid technology which is absolutely false - they developed it on their own.
Nissan did apparently buy Toyota's hybrid technology. Totally different scenario.
I heard the Fusion availability will be pretty limited though. I guess lower gas prices have also killed off some hybrid demand. Too bad because Ford has something big here.
From wikipedia:
The Escape Hybrid uses technology similar to that used in Toyota's Prius. Ford engineers realized their technology may conflict with patents held by Toyota, which led to a 2004 patent-sharing accord between the companies, licensing Ford's use of some of Toyota's hybrid technology in exchange for Toyota's use of some of Ford's diesel and direct-injection engine technology.[9] Both Ford and Toyota state that Ford received no technical assistance from Toyota in developing the hybrid powertrain, but that some hybrid engine technologies developed by Ford independently were found to be similar to technologies previously patented by Toyota.
From Businessweek.com:
Ford Motor Company was THE FIRST auto manufacturer in the world to put a full hybrid SUV on the road.
The Ford Escape Hybrid (and now the Mercury Mariner Hybrid) was engineered, validated and is manufactured in the United States. There is NO Toyota technology or parts in our vehicle. We received NO technical support from Toyota when designing our hybrid system.
We entered into a business arrangement with Toyota where we EXCHANGED patent licences. We licensed 21 patents from Toyota because our hybrid system design was close enough in design to what Toyota did that we wanted to ensure there were no accusations of infringement. At the same time, Toyota licensed several patents from Ford for emissions technology. This was a financial transaction — one which goes on in our industry every day.
This is a common business practice in today's copyright-gone-mad litigious economy. Nothing underhanded there.
We licensed 21 patents from Toyota because our hybrid system design was close enough in design to what Toyota did that we wanted to ensure there were no accusations of infringement.
How did these two designs become so similar? Pure coincidence?
None of the Ford guys knew anything about Toyota's hybrid system, or how it worked? And didn't use that knowledge, to help them along? Please
Actually, why would the consumer care where the hybrid technology came from? As long as the system works. The fact that Ford people are so defensive about it, says to me, they have their own doubts, as to how original Ford's system is.
1. How dare some silly American manufacturer develop a better hybrid system than Toyota?
2. Toyota has the cash to sue, Ford can't afford to get into litigation right now
3. Toyota is jealous of the F150, and might want to reskin it and sell it as the next Tundra
Luckily the other Fusion models look extremely wonderful and candidates for Car of the Year from someone. I want one, and I'll take an I4 SEL if I can't get the Hybrid (I drive 90% highway anyway, paying the hybrid premium is a questionable move despite how well the Fusion Hybrid does on the highway).
Yes, it was PURE COINCIDENCE. When two people write software that does similar functions it often turns out the same. There are only so many ways to do something. It happens ALL THE TIME - you just don't normally hear about it.
You (and others) just can't bear the thought that Ford did something good - on their own - and you just have to find something to detract from that.
Can we stop with all the conspiracy theories now?
Nope, because like you said, some just can't bear the thought of Ford doing something good. Many of them work for Toyota. :shades:
A proper hybrid uses a high efficiency on-board generator(pick your poison) to make electricity to charge the batteries and electric motors. There is no transmission as the car is basically an electric vehicle with a greatly extended range.
No, production car currently uses such a system, though they should, since it would cost a lot less and easily get 100mpg.
***(from wiki)***
In 1901, while employed at Lohner Coach Factory, Ferdinand Porsche designed the "Mixte", a series-hybrid vehicle based on his earlier "System Lohner-Porsche" electric carriage. The Mixte broke several Austrian speed records, and also won the Exelberg Rally in 1901 with Porsche himself driving. The Mixte used a gasoline engine powering a generator, which in turn powered electric hub motors, with a small battery pack for reliability. It had a range of 50 km, a top speed of 50 km/h and a power of 5.22 kW during 20 minutes.
The first such vehicle was exactly as I described, so by definition, such a design IS a hybrid vehicle as well. The Prius and Honda methods are needlessly cumbersome and complicated.
If that design was so superior - why hasn't it already been built?
As for the Volt... anyone who can actually afford one, and thinks it will pay off for them compared to a hybrid like the 2010 Fulan or Prius, go for it.
The Prius and Honda methods (both of which are different, by the way), as well as the Ford method, have one distinct advantage, as mentioned. They have been proven to be practical in the real world. That "series-hybrid" which you described, which for the sake of argument we'll call "series-hybrid," ok? Anyway, it hasn't proven practical in cars. Trains, yes. Trains are hideously expensive. Cars, no. They're trying with the Volt, but the fact is you have to have batteries in between, because below a certain size, an electric generator doesn't produce enough electricity to move itself and its fuel around.
5.22 kW isn't enough to move the lightest car around unless it doesn't meet crash standards. And that 1901 car could only go about 25 MPh...and in fact could only go about 25 miles, which means it was only carrying around an hour's worth of fuel, which isn't much. Fuel is heavy. To carry more around you need more power, which means you need a bigger generator, which means you need more power and more fuel, which means you need to pull more weight, which means you need more power, which means you need a bigger generator, etc.
The Volt comes close to your series-hybrid design, but still needs batteries to act as storage/capacitors. It's going to be $40,000 to start. You can get a Toyota/Ford/Honda style hybrid for half that.
You basically need a 40-50HP motorcycle engine that's designed to run at one optimal speed to generate power. But the car would have some batteries to handle passing and acceleration of course, since you don't usually NEED more than 40-50hp in a car at highway speeds except for brief periods of acceleration.
Toyota and Honda designed the cars that way so that they could run purely on gas if the batteries ran down to nothing. More of a fallback measure, when it's really not required. They would have done better with a half sized engine just generating power. Why did they do this? Because if the batteries go completely dead, then it would chug along like a VW Bug(say a really long mountain pass you're climbing up). Myself, I don't really care about going a bit slower for 3-4 miles if it means the rest of the time it gets 100mpg+.
maye enough to pull over to the side of the road, if you run out.
The Malibu, a "mild" hybrid, was ranked last by a large margin. It averaged only 29 mpg on a 300 mile test loop that combined rural, highway, and urban driving. Consider that some non-hybrid mid-sized sedans can get very close to that. C/D also had gripes on the interior comfort and quality, and how abruptly the engine engages from auto-stop.
Next was the Altima. It actually did a tad better than the Camry in FE overall, 32 to 31 mpg, and was the quickest of the four. But it was knocked for lack of refinement.
The Camry was second and was praised for its silky operation and interior quality. But as is typical for C/D reviews of Toyotas, it was knocked for being like an "old man's car".
The Fusion was their top choice by a significant margin, averaging 34 mpg on the test loop. It was also praised for combining Toyota smoothness with driving involvement.
I was wondering about the value proposition of these hybrids though. For example, the Fusion starts at $28k and was $32.5k as tested. Given that a I4 sedan can be had for about $10-12k less, and could probably average at least 25 mpg on a combined rural/highway/city loop, the savings in gas at 15k miles a year and $4/gallon is about $635 a year. Quite a payback time--and gas isn't at $4/gallon now. Also consider that the Camry did the best on the highway of the 4 cars yet got 34.8 mpg there. Some mid-sizers could get very close to that if not match it on the highway. In the city, though, the Fusion got 36.9 mpg. That is perhaps double what a non-hybrid mid-sizer would do. (But the Malibu got only 19.8 mpg city!) So it appears the value proposition for full hybrids like the Fusion is best when the car is mostly driven in the city.
Ah, and just think, if it stays cheap, we will be reading years from now about how stupid the managements of Ford and GM were for wasting all this money developing hybrids, instead of upgrading their profitable trucks and SUVs.
I assume there are more differences than just the hybridness if there is a $10-12K price difference. :confuse:
maybe enough to pull over to the side of the road, if you run out.
****
Maybe - but you're dead as well in a normal car if you run out. The differences are:
1 - The generator can use any number of fuels, and can be of any kind. I suggest a small turbine engine burning diesel fuel. Or that can run stuff other than petroleum based fuels. (say, already designed to run vegetable oils as well as diesel)
2 - vastly less weight and parts to fix. Said small engine could easily be air/heatsink cooled as well, meaning that you could eliminate 90% of the things that typically break and require fixing in a car. No coolant system(huge), plus not needing things like an alternator or transmission. Think VW Bug or Go-Kart simple. The vast majority of the vehicle is empty space as a result.
3 - tons cheaper to buy. Instead of a battery pack that can run 20-30 miles on its own, you have a smaller set of 2-4 batteries and some capacitors. BAttery replacement every 5-10 years is closer to $500.
4 - less weight (1000+ lbs lighter than a Prius) also means much quicker acceleration and less power needed to move it around. Less expensive components as well. This should save 10-20mpg right here.
The problem is that nobody is making one because they all worship speed instead of efficiency. I'd happily deal with a 1980s era Civic CRX sized small car with 100mpg and 0-60 times in the 10-15 second range.(same as most older cars, so traffic isn't going any quicker anyways).
The only reason to buy a Prius is to show people that you have a hybrid, since it doesn't look like any normal midsize sedan.
You forgot the most important part. The Prius cost about $10k less. That's one heck of an incentive to be greener. :surprise:
Usually, there is.
Hybrid models from most automakers include some of the more popular features, optional on lower models, as standard equipment. It helps to soften the price difference.
The only reason to buy a Prius is to show people that you have a hybrid, since it doesn't look like any normal midsize sedan.
Quoted for truth!
Having been behind the wheel of a Prius, I can agree with everything here, especially the driving experience. To me, Toyotas are a close second to Buick in terms of putting me in a coma when behind the wheel, but the Prius is beyond pathetic. The low rolling-resistance tires squeal at every corner, WITHOUT being pushed hard, and they also contribute heavily to the numb steering, miserable braking, and the overall disconnected feeling you get.
I can see why tree-huggers love it, and why anyone with a soul doesn't.
You forgot the most important part. The Prius cost about $10k less. That's one heck of an incentive to be greener.
It may be $10K less on paper, but you're going to have a hard time finding ANY Prius at that base price, since they were (and in some cases, still are) going at a premium over MSRP. I've seen listing of USED examples going for higher than that.
That's not the most important part to me. Styling, features and driving are more important to me than the price.
Quoted for agreement.
Kudos to Ford for the excellent press and praise they've been getting for the Fusion Hybrid, which seems well-deserved.
You mean the Mazda6, right?
We are forgetting one thing though comparing the Prius to the Fusion hybrid. The 2010 Prius is coming very shortly (will be unveiled officially in Detroit in a week or so). It should be an evolutionary improvement over the current Prius, and is expected to offer more power and also better fuel economy than the current Prius. As for interior room and handling improvements, we'll have to see about that. But I personally consider the Prius, and even the Insight, to be competitors to the likes of the Fusion and Camry hybrids. I don't need as much interior room as those sedans provide, I prefer a hatch configuration, and the 2010 Prius at least (don't know about the Insight) should easily exceed the FE for the hybrid mid-sized sedans--as it should as it's smaller, lighter, and lower-powered. I also like the swoopy looks of the 2010 Prius and Insight better than the mid-sized hybrid sedans. And the payback proposition is better with a lower-priced hybrid like the Prius or Insight. Especially for people like me who don't drive a lot, maybe 10k max per year for my wife's vehicle, which is what I am looking at a hybrid to be a few years out, once we are done with minivans.
Now, if gas stays around $2 a gallon and Ford et. al. are forced to offer discounts on the mid-sized hybrid sedans to move them, e.g. a base Fusion hybrid for the low $20s, then that could be compelling. But at $28k and up? I'd probably pass. Or maybe buy a 2010 Fusion hybrid in 2012 or 2013.
this simply is not true, other than maybe a short distance.
obviously, a gas engine won't run without fuel. i think everyone already knows that.
there aren't even any hybrid escapes for sale anywhere near me.
i prefer having a trunk for security reasons. the back of the prius is open, although a tonneau cover is available.
Yes, that is one way to keep prices up, by limiting supply. There was a tongue-in-cheek comment in the C/D review about Chevy saying that the Malibu hybrid is "very limited availability." C/D remarked something to the effect of that won't be a problem as not many people will buy it. :P
Hyundai Assurance program
What do you think? Will this help spur sales? Would this or maybe something similar from another manufacturer make a buying decision easier for you if you were on the fence? Just curious.
Two ad spots:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVAWviuVmK4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4c_nAmJbjvw
That's what I am curious about. If Hyundai were to see a significant sales bump from this in the next month or so compared to other manufacturers, will the others offer something like this? I would think that they would at least have to consider it.
Also, I wonder if this will have any effect on the dreaded new car depreciation. Any thoughts on that aspect?
it is part of packages 2 and up.