Hybrid owners, is this true?

[CharonPDX]

But I will tell you that a battery capable of keeping that motor running, at even 50% capacity, over the same range as your average IC powered vehicle, would be so huge, that the vehicle would have trouble moving under it's own power.

Tesla S and Tesla X. They aren't going to be huge, just insanely expensive.

 

[Jamie6.5]

But my gasoline SUV will always burn gasoline. I could change the 'source' of my EVs electricity by picking my utility's "green" package. Or my utility could gradually convert to cleaner sources with no input from me whatsoever.

The first part of your claim isn't true.
I can take a gasoline powered IC engine and run it on alcohol, Natural Gas, or LPG. Furthermore, I can change a few aspects of that same engine, and run it on diesel, kerosine or a multitude of other liquid or gaseous fuels.

Currently, the biggest drawback to ICE efficiency is heat and heat loss. Most engines, even the ones that get 40-50 MPG are only <35% efficient due to heat loss. Doubling the efficiency to just 70% would effectively cut our fuel use by half.

Abandoning the quest for an adiabatic engine is foolish IMO. Smokey Yunick built a working prototype of one in the days of carburetors.

The demonizing of oil has to be toned down however, if progress is going to be made.
Shifting the research to electricity is a fools errand that only takes away from real solutions.

 

[sadiesassy]

Can't wait for the government to realize they are missing tax dollars - from lack of gas sales- so that means they will convert them to mileage fees.. Then they will realize that we need to jack up electricity cost.

But then when it takes 26 years to get a return on investment even with the government paying for part of it - Some where people just do not seem to understand the math.

 

[CharonPDX]

Can't wait for the government to realize they are missing tax dollars - from lack of gas sales- so that means they will convert them to mileage fees.. Then they will realize that we need to jack up electricity cost.

But then when it takes 26 years to get a return on investment even with the government paying for part of it - Some where people just do not seem to understand the math.

I kept very detailed records since buying my Prius in 2004. I hit "break even" vs. my second choice car in 2008-09.

 

[FourTeeFive]

I don't like the idea of having to change a major component (battery packs) after 100,000 miles.

The concept of a plug-in hybrid makes a lot of sense, especially for people in urban areas. Why there isn't a plug-in turbodiesel hybrid like VW had developed is beyond me. THAT makes a lot of sense, and gets much better mileage than a Prius.

I don't get the Prius. If you want that type of mileage get a VW TDI Jetta, Golf, or Passat. And you don't have to buy a new battery pack after 100,000 miles.

 

[CharonPDX]

I don't like the idea of having to change a major component (battery packs) after 100,000 miles.

The battery pack is $2500. Yes, it's a major cost, but you save on other replacement costs. (The brakes and transmission should last effectively "forever" without replacement.) And 100,000 miles is a severe under guess. There are Prius taxi cabs at over 300,000 miles on their original battery pack, and the standard stop-and-go of a taxi is much harder on the battery pack than lots of freeway driving would be. The behavior when the battery pack starts to degrade is just decreased mileage, to the point that when the battery pack is basically dead you'll get about the same mileage as a Toyota Corolla since you're using gas 100% of the time.

My Prius is at 120,000 miles, and on a recent road trip, I got the best mileage I have ever gotten on this car. I've also noticed a general up-tick in mileage over the past few months from my long-term average. I have no idea what's causing it, but it's happening. Long-term average had been 43 MPG. I've been consistently getting 45 MPG per tank since late Summer, with multiple recent >50 MPG tanks. In the entire history of the car, I have gotten six >50 MPG tanks. Three of them in the last two months. (Two on the long Spring Break road trip.)

But, yeah, I would *LOVE* to see a diesel plug-in hybrid. Apparently Volvo is doing one, but it won't be sold in the US. :-(

 

[Airman]

Look, if you want to power tiny cars around a city, with people making 20 mile round trips per day, then fine. Go for it.

Absolutely correct. But if you lived in that city, you probably wouldn't need the car at all. A cab, along with BART in SF, or the EL in Chicago, Red/Blue line in LA etc....would save you a bundle.

That said, I'd love to give a Fisker or a Tesla a tumble. But that's just because I'm an exotic car junkie.

 

[bikejunkie]

What I don't get is why nobody offers a diesel/electric like a locomotive uses. Small diesel generator running at a constant load to charge batteries as efficiently as possible, and power to the wheels via electric motors like a hybrid or electric car. The electric motors could easily handle the power demand fluctuations required by a street car. There must be some reason nobodies done it yet, I just haven't heard what it is yet...

 

[salmonriverjohn]

My hybrid is a 70 AAR Cuda, it burns both rubber and gas

 

[Jamie6.5]

My hybrid is a 70 AAR Cuda, it burns both rubber and gas

A dream car of mine since late '70,...
Nothing better that opening cans of whoopass a "six-pack" at a time!

 

[CarlMc]

Exxon had an article that, while I admit the obvious bias, sums up the energy density issue very well.
How many gallons of gasoline would it take to charge an iPhone? | ExxonMobil's Perspectives Blog
On the topic of electric cars, batteries have efficiency losses in charging (~30%) right off the bat, not to mention the additional power required just to push themselves around, and they haven't even gotten you there yet.
Some interesting points made that I like is for folks who oppose coal but chatter on about their electric and/or hybrid is the fact that, as previously noted, coal provides the bulk of the power used in the grid, specifically the east coast, which is more densely populated with that class of folks. It turns out that while they poo-poo nuclear's radiation risks, coal actually dumps lots of radiation into the atmosphere, which is real, unlike a remote risk as with nuclear. Once you start adding in the losses in each conversion method (coal heat to steam, steam to electricity, electricity grid losses, battery charging losses, batteries carrying themselves around, aerodynamic drag, and so on) electric starts looking more and more like a loser. In the small scale, electricity may look attractive, but in the large scale, gas and diesel will always trump.

 

[eganx]

forget a hybrid........Top Gear drives Honda FCX Clarity - YouTube

 

[sadiesassy]

There were 3 cars that did it under 5 years. Not sure if Prius was oneof them and I can't find the article to confirm right now - but will continue looking.

A break even is done over the life of the car. So you need to factor in items like battery replacement, maintenance, etc. Cost of disposables - fuel and oil. interest cost assuming you had a loan, etc. In todays world that is closer to 10 -12 years on average and rising. On hybrids they did a cost factor of % time it is electric vs gas.

 

[Airman]

A break even is done over the life of the car.

An honest assessment should include actual cost to produce. Some of these have been sold at a "loss", but because of government 'assistance' are still profitable for the manufacturer. From that perspective, it'd probably take in the neighborhood of 100 years.

 

[Jamie6.5]

The battery pack is $2500.

So, did you factor that cost into your "break even" point? Or are you calculating "break even" on fuel costs alone?
Even at $4.00/gal, that equates to 625 gallons, or another 25,000 miles @ 40mpg, or in terms of the average urban use, about two years.

Then there is the ($1,000?) tax break Kulongoski offered to hybrid buyers. Did you take advantage of that?
Did that factor in to the "break even" point?
In the real world of cost/value, taxpayers subsidies need to be abandoned.

Yes, it's a major cost, but you save on other replacement costs. (The brakes and transmission should last effectively "forever" without replacement.)

In the world of mechanical devices, that scenario really doesn't exist. Nothing mechanical lasts forever. The "life of the car" maybe, but that is obvious/ridiculous in the extreme. The life of the car is completely dependent on the life of it's components. The cost of repairs vs the replacement value of the vehicle is paramount.
Just ask any insurance adjuster.
Then there is cost of those parts, and Toyota's parts are notoriously expensive.

I'm curious, does that $2,500.00 cost include the cost of recycling/disposal of the old battery?

 

[rufus]

Exxon had an article that, while I admit the obvious bias, sums up the energy density issue very well.
How many gallons of gasoline would it take to charge an iPhone? | ExxonMobil's Perspectives Blog
On the topic of electric cars, batteries have efficiency losses in charging (~30%) right off the bat, not to mention the additional power required just to push themselves around, and they haven't even gotten you there yet.
Some interesting points made that I like is for folks who oppose coal but chatter on about their electric and/or hybrid is the fact that, as previously noted, coal provides the bulk of the power used in the grid, specifically the east coast, which is more densely populated with that class of folks. It turns out that while they poo-poo nuclear's radiation risks, coal actually dumps lots of radiation into the atmosphere, which is real, unlike a remote risk as with nuclear. Once you start adding in the losses in each conversion method (coal heat to steam, steam to electricity, electricity grid losses, battery charging losses, batteries carrying themselves around, aerodynamic drag, and so on) electric starts looking more and more like a loser. In the small scale, electricity may look attractive, but in the large scale, gas and diesel will always trump.

Conversion losses, the ugly truth about hybrid inefficiency. They really are horribly inefficient and always will be. They use much more energy to roll around town that traditional cars, but people think they are being green by driving them.

 

[rufus]

forget a hybrid........Top Gear drives Honda FCX Clarity - YouTube

Now that I could drive. I hope somebody builds a pickup truck version...

 

[bikejunkie]

^ Like I've been saying- fuel cell cars are the future, once we have plentiful access to cheap hydrogen gas to fuel them. Also- hybrid battery packs do not necessarily have to be replaced- we actually just had a customer with a Prius and a failed battery pack, and we were able to have it refurbished for a bit over $1000

 

[jbett98]

A geologist recently made a statement about the world's oil reserves, " We left the stone age, and we still have plenty of stones, and we will leave the oil age with plenty of oil"

In 1967 the Middle East reserves were stated at about 250 billion barrels of crude, by the 1990s the new estimates were over 500 billion in reserves.

 

[safooma]

Several factors should be considered when considering purchasing a hybrid:

Commute/drive type. If you live in the city and your daily drive consists mostly of city driving, then a hybrid is worth considering. However, if your daily drive consists of mostly highway, they the benefit of a hybrid is greatly reduced since the gas engine will be running 100% of the time at highway speeds.

Another consideration is climate. If you live in a predominately cold climate, then again, the benefit of a hybrid is greatly reduced as the gas motor needs to be running to to heat the water for the heater.

Real world example; I have a 2009 Pontiac Vibe with a 1.8 and a 5 spd manual. This car is actually a toyota(matrix/corolla) under the sheet metal and therefore has the same motor as the newer 1.8 based prius. I was daily driving this car on a 54 mile round trip to work and getting 36-38 mpg. In december my vibe was smashed by an idiot in a truck and had to be repaired at the body shop. While the car was being repaired, I chose a prius as my rental and proceeded to drive it the same route for about a month with a resulting average mpg of 40-42 mpg per tank. For the price difference(almost $10k new), it would take quite some time to realize any savings.

However, I imagine that if I lived in Phoenix or San Diego, for example and had a mostly city daily commute, the prius would make more sense.