Hybrid owners, is this true?

[Airman]

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.

Several years ago me and the wife took a mini vacation up to Victoria BC. I was very surprised to see the majority of cabs were Prius. And I was really surprised by the amount of space in the back seat when we finally rode in one. It struck me as a perfect use of that type of vehicle.

 

[CarlMc]

^ 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

I hate to burst your bubble, but hydrogen has a number of problems:
1. One of the lowest energy densities of any fuel
2. Due to the above, high pressure containers (as well as heavy) are needed to store a reasonable amount.
3. Due to the above, the risk of explosion is high due to the fact that materials are near their limits in containing this pressure.
4. Hydrogen, being the smallest molecule, goes right through most metals and materials. Therefore leakage is a known issue, and a severe risk in closed environments where your vehicle could be stored, such as a garage. Assuming nothing blows up, we haven't even mentioned you're clueless that you're about to die from hydrogen asphixiation should you be in said garage (or in the spaces above it) when said leak occurs.
5. Based on the above leakage problem, connections for hydrogen (that aren't made of unobtanium and extremely expensive) are almost nonexistant. Each connector is made for a very specific type of application and aren't made to be connected or disconnected very often or easily.
6. Based on many of the above, hydrogen is sometimes stored as a liquid. In order to get hydrogen in liquid, you need to be either at extremely high pressure or at absolute zero. The solution is somewhere in the middle, but since at very low temperatures where hydrogen likes to liquify, just about all materials are extremely brittle. Did I mention that brittle things shouldn't be in a kinetic event like a car accident?
7. Hydrogen is currently acquired one of two ways. Electrolysis is reasonably safe, but the amount of energy you have to put in to get any out is astronomical. Hydrogen is also obtained from natural gas, which is the most common source for industrial grade hydrogen (reasonably pure but not perfect.) Since natural gas is already easier to use as transportation fuel, why take the path of most resistance? (Oh, I forgot...)

The real problem here is that too many people think that hydrogen is a good fuel but can't fully grasp the physics and reality of the real world problems associated with it. Hydrogen is suited for _very_ specialized applications, but for general purpose applications, it just won't cut it. You can only argue with physics and chemistry so long before you realize that most of hydrogen's proponents aren't interested in the facts, but rather the hype and subsidies that come with it.

That said, you don't have to take my word for it. Just look up risks of hydrogen yourself.

 

[armedredneck]

A friend had a Prius that averaged 39 mph.

A few years ago, Consumer Reports did a mpg test using "real-word" situations. These included more stop-and-go, use of air conditioning, cd player and other options. CR's conclusions were, in general, hybrid cars' mpg was below the USEPA figures, gasoline cars were on par with the USEPA, and diesel cars did a little better than the USEPA figures. The USEPA admitted that its measuring methods were dated and that the figures are for comparative uses only...but has not changed their testing methods. I warned a close friend about it; he bought a new Prius anyway, averaged about 41 mpg, and was disappointed (YMMV).

I tell people to look at diesels. When people tell me "but diesel costs more", I tell them to do the math. I sold a gas VW Golf and got a diesel Golf. My recorded mpgs were 27 for the gasser and 45 for the diesel. That's over a 60% mpg increase. If gas is $3.90, I would have to pay over $6.50 per gallon before I see no savings. (diesel rant)

I too am rocking a VW Diesel. Bought an 85 Rabbit with a blown motor last year off Craigslist for $500. Put another $1500 into it. Now I have a decent runner (paid for) that gives me a steady 45 mpg. It's a beater, but I'm smiling all the way down the road knowing that I can get 450 miles out of a 10 gallon tank. I love it. One nice thing about it, my uncle was driving and ran out of gas. He and my cousin dumped Tiki Torch fuel in it and made it several miles to the next gas station. Not necessarily economic, but nice to know there's other options if needed.

 

[CarlMc]

I too am rocking a VW Diesel. Bought an 85 Rabbit with a blown motor last year off Craigslist for $500. Put another $1500 into it. Now I have a decent runner (paid for) that gives me a steady 45 mpg. It's a beater, but I'm smiling all the way down the road knowing that I can get 450 miles out of a 10 gallon tank. I love it.

I'd be all over diesels for the number of miles I do, but my wife's not fond... That said, I encourage folks to make sure they know where all the sources of fuel are, as you can't always hit up any old gas station to get diesel. As it is, I fill up my 11 gallon tank every three days, but diesel would be the way to go for me if my wife would approve, and maintenance would be as reliable as it is with my daily driver.

 

[bikejunkie]

@ CarlMc- feel free to educate yourself on what a true functioning fuel cell vehicle is. We haven't seen hoards of compressed natural gas Honda Civics turning into Zippos in a crash and there's no reason to believe a hydrogen fuel cell would behave any differently. The vehicle runs on compressed hydrogen gas- and if they were unsafe or so near the limits of our engineering prowess as you claim- they wouldn't currently be in the hands of hundreds of retail customers. The problem with burning natural gas is that you still have emissions byproducts as you do with burning any fossil fuel- with a hydrogen fuel cell you get water. You're right you can't argue with physics and chemistry and hydrogen fuel cells work and you're wrong. Also, I'm not sure, but I don't think people leasing fuel cell cars get the subsidies hybrid purchasers do- that's the only part of your argument I'm not sure of. Your concept that Hydrogen can't be used or stored safely is absurd. The Hindenburg was a long time ago...Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it wrong. I don't understand how organ transplants work, but I don't question their effectiveness for those that need them...

Honda FCX Clarity Overview - Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle - Site

Honda FCX Clarity - Fuel Cell Safety - Official Web Site

Honda's FCX Clarity can power a home for 6 days | The Car Tech blog - CNET Reviews

<broken link removed>

 

[Rich7944]

I used to work with a girl that is majoring in enviornmental crap and she drives an old Toyota truck. I asked her one day why she doesn't drive a Prius or some other hybrid and she tells her class did a study and found the prodution process of the "hybrids" polluted worse than any car we currently drive. They couldn't believe the results so they had 2 other clases from 2 other schools do the same study and found the same information.

There is more to life than fuel economy.
Still feel "warm and fuzzy"?

 

[CharonPDX]

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.

I have not, as it is a cost I have not yet had to pay. I stopped doing the math after 100K miles, because after that point, costs between cars become too variable (and both vehicles I had been looking at had 100K warranties, so costs beyond that wouldn't have been covered.) Although since hitting break even, I likely would have saved another $2500 in gas.

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.

Mine was a pure "cost to me" breakdown. Although when I bought it, I paid more in "hot new car dealer markup" than I got in tax break. (I could have gotten it for exactly MSRP had I been willing to wait 4-6 months. But with a baby due 2 months after we needed a new car, we decided to pay the extra. You know, supply/demand capitalism.)

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.

True. I was exaggerating, Toyota uses the phrase "service life of vehicle". Again, there are Prius taxis at over 300K miles, and the ones that blog about it haven't mentioned needing to get brakes replaced. (The Prius only uses the physical brakes when braking VERY HARD, or below 7 MPH. At 7 MPH or above, under normal braking pressure, it uses regenerative braking, where it essentially runs the electric motor in reverse to generate electricity to charge the battery. I thought the transition would be clunky, but it's nearly impossible to tell.)

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

Yes, it does. Toyota even pays dealers a "bounty" to make sure they (Toyota) gets the battery pack back. But as bikejunkie says, it is extremely unlikely that the entire pack will ever need to be replaced - much more likely that a few individual cells will need it - which costs a lot less.

 

[CharonPDX]

I used to work with a girl that is majoring in enviornmental crap and she drives an old Toyota truck. I asked her one day why she doesn't drive a Prius or some other hybrid and she tells her class did a study and found the prodution process of the "hybrids" polluted worse than any car we currently drive. They couldn't believe the results so they had 2 other clases from 2 other schools do the same study and found the same information.

There is more to life than fuel economy.
Still feel "warm and fuzzy"?

Obviously, keeping an old vehicle in good running condition will nearly ALWAYS be better environmentally than getting a new car, no matter how environmentally friendly. The lady who made the news with her 1964 Mercury with 576,000 miles on it has obviously done a lot better, even as (relatively) polluting as it is, than if she had scrapped her car and bought a new car every 100,000 miles.

For example, the car our Prius replaced is still on the road with the person we sold it to. Had we kept it instead of the Prius, we would have saved money (it got decent gas mileage, so the Prius' mileage savings alone would not have paid it off vs. a "free" existing car,) and likely environmental impact.

But when comparing a new hybrid or electric vehicle to another new vehicle, the hybrid or electric wins on "environmental score", hands down. Even including production "environmental cost". Toyota did a study that said that the Prius compared to the Corolla - the Prius broke even in "environmental cost" at 100,000 km (Kilometers, not miles.)

 

[MrNiceGuy]

I had an Accord hybrid. I finally sold it with 2,000 miles left on the warranty.

My friend just traded in his paid for Hybrid Tahoe and got an older silverado.

Neither of us will own another.
We were both on our second battery packs. He was on his second motor.

Too many problems, not enough warranty.
When I was trying to sell my accord I had a young lady take it to her boyfriend who is a master tech at the honda dealership. She didnt even make it to the dealership before he turned her around. He told her on the phone that the cars are about as reliable as "a paper-mache bicycle in a rain storm".

Selling that car was a nightmare. Nobody wanted to take the risk of a ~$5k+ repair bill when the warranty ended. Honestly, I couldnt blame them.

I really wish that the US had the deisel selection that the UK has.
I'd love to be getting 75mpg in one of these:

 

[Airman]

Toyota did a study that said that the Prius compared to the Corolla - the Prius broke even in "environmental cost" at 100,000 km (Kilometers, not miles.)

I notice they don't continue that "environmental cost" after the car has been sent off to the scrapyard. There were articles out a few years back showing the Jeep Wrangler was one of the smallest overall offenders environmentally speaking.

 

[CarlMc]

@ CarlMc- feel free to educate yourself on what a true functioning fuel cell vehicle is. We haven't seen hoards of compressed natural gas Honda Civics turning into Zippos in a crash and there's no reason to believe a hydrogen fuel cell would behave any differently. The vehicle runs on compressed hydrogen gas- and if they were unsafe or so near the limits of our engineering prowess as you claim- they wouldn't currently be in the hands of hundreds of retail customers. The problem with burning natural gas is that you still have emissions byproducts as you do with burning any fossil fuel- with a hydrogen fuel cell you get water. You're right you can't argue with physics and chemistry and hydrogen fuel cells work and you're wrong. Also, I'm not sure, but I don't think people leasing fuel cell cars get the subsidies hybrid purchasers do- that's the only part of your argument I'm not sure of. Your concept that Hydrogen can't be used or stored safely is absurd. The Hindenburg was a long time ago...Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it wrong. I don't understand how organ transplants work, but I don't question their effectiveness for those that need them...

First off, I apologize for taking this thread off topic. Wasn't my intention, and I apologize.
Secondly, HFCV's haven't been going off like Zippos, but that's not to say it hasn't happened, nor that other ugly and deadly accidents with hydrogen haven't already happened on the highways (and they have.) If there were more of them, we'll start to see the real picture. The currently recorded events are so few, and I wasn't going to spend a lot of time studying the number or severity of accidents based on the incredibly small number of them on the road.
I also look at the entire energy picture when I consider the real value of energy. That real cost entails all the processes and their impacts all the way to propelling my vehicle forward. One of the absolute worst is the alcohol based fuel market. Converting food production resources to fuel production based on a narrow political view has had untold worldwide effects on the food chain, as well as other non-food products and markets that will take years to recover from even if the correction could be made today. This problem is driven by the usual short-sighted government meddling.
My real issue with many vehicles of this class (specifically DOE subsidized ones) is that if they were really worth a darn, they free market would be demanding them and automakers would be working on them independent of government funding. I applaud Honda for developing these without going after the government's money, and that approach will have a much higher chance of success. This year has racked up a large number of companies who used your tax money to burn brightly before disappearing with the money. I have an electrical engineer who once said to me: "Your job isn't to save the customer's money. Your job is to spend the customer's money." I have little respect for him now, and as much respect for the large number of companies who blew billions on technology that couldn't stand on its own rights or that any real company (whose purpose is to make a profit) wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole.
When the product designed and created by Research In Motion that's connected to my belt buzzes and shows me its ever increasing capabilities, I think about what how amazing the thinking that was that created and continues to refine it (and its competitor, the iPhone) and I can contrast it with the junk that my government funds created when Solyndra delivered their product. Solyndra's purpose was to spend their customer's (yours) money and little more, while Research In Motion's purpose is to satisfy your wants enough to make you want to trade your money for their products. When you like the product, you go back for more. That's the beauty of the free market. AT&T wasn't so good at delivering services that their customers wanted, and when their only popular product, the iPhone, went to the wider market, I was expecting AT&T to breath its last breath.

For the record, part of my paycheck sometimes contains government money spent on political directives, mostly energy related applications. I was especially annoyed to find out I would be a part of some stimulus funded contracts, but I'm not in the loop in that decision, and I satisfy myself knowing that my work on other projects is far more rewarding and productive.

Lastly, I would like to see all sorts of fuel options out there, hydrogen fuel cells included, be successful. I really would. I would like to see the most efficient fuel source out there, the nuclear reaction, get the respect its due, and return to a dominant place in the market. I would like to see us source our fuel from within our own borders before we totally slave ourselves to belligerent foreign powers. I'd like to see the free market determine what's best for the customer, and get rid of the ten year plan thinking of short-sighted governments trying to tell me what works best for everyone.

As you can tell, this isn't a personal complaint, and if you take it that way, it's not my intent. The political class has little to no real understanding of technology, and those with money in their eyes and just enough scientific knowledge to fool the politicians are raking in our tax dollars with no real expectation of creating something the market would sustain.

 

[coop44]

My $2000 1992 miata is still getting 25mpg (auto trans) rebuilt the engine at 178,000 (didn't really need it) for less than a grand. Between low insurance and no payments, I may still be doing better than owning a prius. Had this little critter 6 years now and I have nothing bad to say about it. Probably drive it until the wheels fall off, shooting for 350,000 miles.

The only drawback is it is getting harder to get out of it every year.

http://www.northwestfirearms.com/off-topic/55847-my-92-miata.html



Hydrogen fuel costs about 5 times what gasoline costs per mile, if you see it competivley priced that's because the taxpayer is buying down the cost. The cost of the cars, even if mass produced will be prohibitive. It will never be a viable option. Watch "Who killed the Electric car" it comes up on the cable channels now and then.

Hydrogen cars are nothing more than an interesting experiment.