Hybrid Hatred (Volt related)

[moshe_levy]

But I was pretty disappointed that the real Volt doesn't do what they've been saying it will do for all of these years. If they're willing to lie about something really basic like that, what else are they being dishonest about?

 

Russ, I think that's harsh. History proves you right - GM has traditionally been dishonest, cheap, and short sighted. I have hated them all of my life. However, I don't think I'd characterize the drivetrain as it exists in the Volt production vs. concept as a "lie." They had been VERY vague leading up to launch about several aspects of the car's design, in my opinion rightly so, to thwart the competition from having a heads up for one reason, and because it was a work in progress with a very tight deadline for another. I WANT to believe GM didn't "lie" and I hope I'm right. I don't care either way, because the undeniable fact is, there is nothing out on the market right now which comes close to balancing the tradeoffs, including the upcoming plug-in Prius which will not have 1/3 of the Volt's range. Looks like GM may have, at last, for once, leapfrogged the competition.

 

Like your friend, I've talked my dad into getting a Volt, as soon as they're available here (within 2 weeks I'm told). It will work for him because the only place he drives is work, 18 miles round trip each day. For him, the Volt means never buying gas again unless a longer trip is involved, and thus doing what is within his power as a citizen to stop supporting Middle Eastern regimes, in addition to supporting American industry as we sputter towards recovery.

 

I would get one too, but it only seats 4, and my family is (soon to be) 5.

 

-MKL

[ragtoplvr]

Here is an interesting thought. The alcohol laced crap they sell for gasoline is not stable for long times. We fill moms van once a month or so, and have had bad gas problems.

 

How is a Volt or other plug in hybrid going to deal with some of the owners only needing the gas engine once or twice a year. How will they get the jellied stinking mass in the fuel tank to burn, or will you be stranded. Maybe there will be more alcohol free stations? Or will the alcohol lobby kill that. Will the repair of the fuel system make a battery replacement seem cheap?

 

Rod

[moshe_levy]

Rod-

 

They thought of that as well. There is a function for the engine to run through a tank at least once every year (could be 6 months - I forgot) and that's covered in every magazine's road tests over the past few months.

 

They've thought of alot, not just the obvious. It's been a long time since I was able to think that about an American car. Hope it lives up to the hype.

 

-MKL

[Twisties]

I know that most Prius owners I've talked to don't get anywhere near the mpg that Toyota was saying they'd get. For example: I don't know a single one that is averaging 50mpg as you claimed.) but it's still pretty much the same thing.

 

Edmunds says a solid 47-48 mpg. The EPA combined rating is 50.

 

Edmunds - Fuel Sippers Review.

 

Edmunds also says that it beats out the alternatives for 2010... 2011 may be a whole new ball game.

 

 

 

[CoarsegoldKid]

Now that we have really gone off on a tangent there was an episode of Top Gear where I believe the Stig drove a Prius as fast as he could and Jeremy drove a BMW M something. Jeremy didn't have any difficulty following closely behind. Fuel was measured. The BMW got better fuel mileage. Okay so the Prius wasn't meant to be flogged. Jeremy hates Prius' except for when beautiful actresses drive them. That's all for now. Back to your regularly scheduled program.

[markgoodrich]

I like the Prius, drove one for week. Quiet, comfortable, plenty of storage room. My wife couldn't get comfortable with the seat, though. So I still have my 4 1/2 year old Camry HYBRID. I like it too, and it gets great mileage for a large car. I bought it to save money on gas, but also, and I'm sure this will generate catcalls, because I think those of us who can afford to should step up and be beta testers for the various technologies which we've seen and will be seeing, as we as a nation, and world, begin to wean ourselves from oil. The Camry has been flawless from day one, it's just bigger than I now need, (I bought it before I retired).

 

The animosity towards owners of abstemious vehicles is a total mystery to me; if I say I'm driving a Fit, there's no disgust, no comments about me being "holier than thou." Yet I'd buy the Fit for the same reason I'd buy a hybrid, to save money on gas...but, as I said, I see an obligation to beta test, to get the vehicles out there, see how they work, let others see they work...and look, here we are 4 1/2 years later and there are hybrids out the wazoo, not at all looking like a 1958 Popular Science cover drawing for the "Car of the Future." The technology is proving worthy. So is the new cleaner diesel technology...any Jetta haters out there?

 

And, I have photographic evidence of Whip actually riding in a hybrid. He refused to put on his seat belt, though.

 

 

[cali_beemer]

I like the Prius, drove one for week. Quiet, comfortable, plenty of storage room.

 

I have been in a Prius and I came away with just the oppisite, lots of road noise, uncomfortable and all around a very cheap vehicle. It was a second gen and I understand that they have tried to address this on the 3rd gen. I know I am not the only person to make that claim and the other guy in the prius with me made the same comments. Removing the whole hybrid, like or dislike factor, I felt it was one of the cheapest build quality vehicles I had been it. It reminded me of a basic work fleet vehicle. Although I find Toyotas quality to be poor at best, and before I get flamed for that statement, I am on my second new Toyota with the current one being the worst. Overpriced and underbuilt! My current Toyota is my last.

[russell_bynum]

But I was pretty disappointed that the real Volt doesn't do what they've been saying it will do for all of these years. If they're willing to lie about something really basic like that, what else are they being dishonest about?

 

Russ, I think that's harsh.

 

Probably. I call it the way I see it.

 

I will say that, even with the lies, the Volt is probably the most interesting car that GM has made in a very long time. I'm very interested to see how the technology plays out. I commute 120 miles/day so fuel efficiency is an important thing to me (as long as the car isn't so boring that it makes me want to kill myself every time I drive it.)

 

 

They had been VERY vague leading up to launch about several aspects of the car's design, in my opinion rightly so, to thwart the competition from having a heads up for one reason, and because it was a work in progress with a very tight deadline for another.

 

Yes and no. The details have been vague. But they've been saying all along that the gas motor is just for charging the batteries and that simply isn't true.

 

 

I WANT to believe GM didn't "lie" and I hope I'm right.

 

I don't have a dog in the fight, so I don't "want" to believe one thing or another. I just call it like I see it.

 

 

For him, the Volt means never buying gas again unless a longer trip is involved, and thus doing what is within his power as a citizen to stop supporting Middle Eastern regimes, in addition to supporting American industry as we sputter towards recovery.

 

I can get behind that.

 

I would get one too, but it only seats 4, and my family is (soon to be) 5.

 

-MKL

 

Yup...damn batteries.

[IT_Mike]

Quick thoughts....

 

• Chevy Volt gets 37mpg after the first 25-50 miles (http://gm-volt.com/chevy-volt-faqs/)
  
• Prius, at best, gets 51mpg
  
• Volvo S40 Turbo Diesel with DRIVe system gets just over 67mpg with no additional (read batteries and electricity generation) environmental impact.
  

 

Greenies are forcing us down the battery-driven road (through government restrictions and subsidies) rather than letting the best solutions rise to the top.

 

Besides which, they're ugly, uncomfortable, poorly performing vehicles generally driven by 'holier than thou' elitists.

 

That's why I hate hybrids.

[moshe_levy]

Mike-

 

Here's a softball - is the Volvo S40 even available here in the US? Because all I see is a gas version rated 21MPG city - less than half of a Prius, less than 1/6 of a Volt. That's not a solution. The rest about being ugly, uncomfortable, and poorly performing is opinion, which you're certainly entitled to.

 

Jeremy's flip-flop on the Prius to impress Cameron Diaz was one of the greatest moments of the show, and truly shows that the Prius can be made to appeal to nearly anyone, even if the reasons aren't directly related to the car!

 

-MKL

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

...I think those of us who can afford to should step up and be beta testers for the various technologies which we've seen and will be seeing...

...but, as I said, I see an obligation to beta test, to get the vehicles out there, see how they work, let others see they work...

 

I suspect you would have felt very differently if your Camry or Prius had turned out to be a total POS.

 

Around thirty years ago, American manufacturers and drivers were beta testing diesel engines for passenger cars. Did you happen to beta-test one of those?

[tallman]

Have they redesigned the Prius for the driver?

I tried to get behind the wheel a couple of years ago and could not, literally, get behind the wheel without crawling on seats laying down bending legs and being pulled behind the wheel.

I'm lucky I didn't actually go there because I might still be stuck.

 

Small, clean, turbo diesels.

I am concerned about the batteries and the whole life cycle disposal issue.

 

Sort of like the ubiquitous CFL's now that traditional light bulbs are heading towards the ban date.

They have mercury issues wrt disposal.

On a thread years ago I linked the EPA's page about the clean up involved for a broken CFL.

It will boggle your mind, did mine.

So, those types of concerns related to batteries are my first objection.

Second, subsidies for a vehicle that discriminates against tall people, no way.

 

I think Greg has a very excellent point, and Ken's too.

I'd love to see high speed rail come to fruition.

LA to San Fran in 3 hours.

I don't know that as a Society we're ready for a dramatic shift just yet.

Gas is available, relatively inexpensive.

 

So, when I see a Prius, I think the driver is vertically challenged.

Looking forward to seeing how the Volt stacks up and what the next big thing in transportation mpg/cpm actually turns out to be...

 

[Twisties]

Anyone got the details of these subsidies? Are they for high mpg or do they target specific technologies. I know the last administration was big on hydrogen fuel cells, but I don't see them big in the market.

 

To what extent are the subsidies for fuel efficient vehicles offset by the reduced use of the subsidies for fuel?

[leikam]

Besides which, they're ugly, uncomfortable, poorly performing vehicles generally driven by 'holier than thou' elitists.

 

I tend to agree but talking about BMW motorcycles like that on this board isn't going to get a lot of sympathy.

[chrisolson]

Besides which, they're ugly, uncomfortable, poorly performing vehicles generally driven by 'holier than thou' elitists.

 

I tend to agree but talking about BMW motorcycles like that on this board isn't going to get a lot of sympathy.

 

:rofl:

[steve.foote]

I like Prius.

What I think to be a pathetic waste of 4 cylinders, is a v8.

Power? To race? Where, up to the next stoplight, then stomp on the brakes?

Here the Prius drive way too fast. It would be nice if any of them ever did just 55. I have never seen it here.

I think I would have to be an idiot to stereotype the "Prius driver".

They probably are as different as any other group. Just a little more intelligent.

And less wasteful.

What about all the monster pick ups, and suvs with lousy gas mileage, and one person in them, clogging up the roads, and polluting the air.

That's the smart way to go?

I disagree.

dc

 

 

:rofl: I have no idea why Jeremy Clarkson call's them 'smugmobiles.'

[yabadabapal]

Moshe I think its an admirable thing you did in buying the Prius if for no other reason than to make a statement in regard to our dependence on oil from the middle east. The significance of similarly designed vehicles is not and will not be a long term solution. The greater significance is that we and industry realize we have a problem to solve. I don't believe that the auto industry is going to be the big answer to this problem. I believe the answer is going to be public transportation of some sort.

[steve.foote]

Steve, you can't get the hall pass for what you want to say, but I bet I would have enjoyed reading it.

 

Chris, it would have been a masterpiece suitable for framing. But, alas, that work of art shall forever remain hidden from view.

[cali_beemer]

I like Prius.

What I think to be a pathetic waste of 4 cylinders, is a v8.

Power? To race? Where, up to the next stoplight, then stomp on the brakes?

 

I will make a deal with you. Let me hook my boat up to your Prius and we can see how far your prius gets. Then we will check your opinion on that statement again. My guess is when you realize the shocks have ruptured from their mounts and in turn shot through the body work and that the resistance of your frame sitting on the asphalt prohibits any movement, you may see the ignornorance in your previous comment. Even if that chassis were to handle the weight, you may start to see the benfits of a V-8 when the 4 cylinder cant get up a hill and in turn, rolls backward down the hill. And to think, people wonder why there is a stereotype of un-informed treehuggers that drive a prius.....

[AviP]

Not everybody has a boat. That's why you have vehicles with different specs.

 

I personally have a "monster" pickup. I use it for hauling the trash to the dump, clearing tree debris from my yard, DIY home maintenance and my home improvement business. I also use it as a grocery getter but I always combine as many tasks as possible into 1 trip.

 

I am also a treehugger. How many trees have you planted?

[moshe_levy]

And to think, people wonder why there is a stereotype of un-informed treehuggers that drive a prius.....

 

Judging by sales numbers, for every tree hugger who buys a Prius, there's about 20 housewives who buy 8 passenger SUVs. They have 1.2 kids on average, and the only thing they're hauling or towing is their own fat asses to the mall and back. King Abdullah, however, is hauling boatloads of cash into his bank accounts, thanks to them. That cash then funds people who shoot at young American troops, who come back maimed or killed from duty.

 

My point is twofold: First, sterotypes have a way of boomeranging on you if you're not careful - the one I gave you above is no less simplistic and stupid than the one you offered, and in fact, can be proven quite easily. Second, they solve absolutely nothing. One of my original questions was why there is such venom directed at "uninformed" hybrid owners, but no such attack on clearly gluttonous automotive choices of others. Obviously you cannot tow a boat with a Prius, any more than you would buy an RT to race a Hayabusa.

 

Best for the sanctimonous hybrid owners to realize they are not saving the world. Best for the average driver of a gas swilling beast to ask herself, "Is this really necessary?"

 

Best for all of us, I think, to put our heads together and develop a momentum towards a solution instead of stereotyping each other, don't you think? Alot of talk and very little action in the 9+ years since we learned where our petro-dollars are going. Best not to stick our heads in the sand.

 

-MKL

[steve.foote]

Best for all of us, I think, to put our heads together and develop a momentum towards a solution instead of stereotyping each other, don't you think? Alot of talk and very little action in the 9+ years since we learned where our petro-dollars are going. Best not to stick our heads in the sand.

 

Are you open to ideas other than your own?

[moshe_levy]

Any and all, Steve, and I mean that literally. Personally, I don't just drive a hybrid, but I also engage in other "green" activities as part of an overall agenda for myself - some of these cost much more than a hybrid car and the payback is years long. I put my money where my mouth is on this issue.

 

I started this thread to find out why this specific idea has met with some resistance, and I've learned a good deal about that, such as the overall carbon footprint argument, which I think is valid to look into. That said, I like a good argument I can learn something from, and am less enthusiastic about stereotyping and shouting at each other. In this case I'm clearly playing devil's advocate for the pro hybrid position.

 

-MKL

[steve.foote]

Good, for a minute there, I thought you were simply promoting a one sided view.

 

Tell you what, I'll play devil's advocate for the free market, capitalist arguement, just for the sake of balance.

[moshe_levy]

Sounds good!

 

-MKL

[steve.foote]

Cool! Ok, I'll start this off. In order to accelerate the development of hybrid and electric vehicles, I'm going to advocate for a system which has produced more innovations which have improved the the lives of more people than any other development system ever conceived. The free market.

 

As demand for hybrid and electric vehicles ramps up, supply will automatically step in and fill the need. This system will not cost anyone money they don't want to invest in this technology and will ultimately produce the best product. That is, of course, if there is a demand for them. Naturally, if demand doesn't materialize, then the product will likely experience the same fate as Betamax and HD-DVD.

 

It sounds like a good plan to me. It's worked so well in so many other areas, we would be crazy not to try it in this case.

[moshe_levy]

Steve-

 

Before we start discussing economics, which I look forward to, I do need your agreement that this issue is most definitely not purely economic. That is, there are many considerations, chief among them political (which is where my stance is based,) environmental, and industrial, to name a few. So as we debate this, is it fair for us to agree that even if a free market argument trumps an interventionist one, that this is but one of many factors which are at play here?

 

I'm making an issue out of it because I am not a higher efficiency advocate for economic reasons, so I don't want my point to be lost amongst an purely economic argument.

 

-MKL

[steve.foote]

Oh, my bad, I see. I thought you were trying to figure out a way of getting the best product to the most people. Are you saying that this really isn't about the hatred of hybrids at all, but more about promoting a political agenda?

 

What exactly are you trying to accomplish?

[StuGotz]

but more about promoting a political agenda?

 

Knew we'd end up here. Always does. Can't have a discussion without it. It's the world we live in now.

 

Just can't take it as far as we want to HERE.

 

MB>

[markgoodrich]

Yeah, I knew we'd end up at politics too, this is one of those subjects which inflame passions, although Moshe doesn't seem to be too inflamed But so far we've seen "sanctimonious," "holier than thou," etc, all clear indicators that this going to end badly. The hybrid hater faction, if I may call it that, reminds me of the section of the motorcycling community which looks at BMW riders with disgust and derision, pigeonholing all of us with preconceptions, not having any idea why we bought the bikes we ride.

 

I admit to bias, and preconceptions, too, only instead of getting worked up when I see a Prius, I do when I see a Hummer or a jacked-up super-diesel pickup, although the words "sanctimonious" and "holier than thou" don't come to mind.

 

 

[moshe_levy]

Steve-

Yes, you are partially correct, my main thrust here is political, not economic. Essentially, I don’t think arguing this topic from a purely economic perspective is worthwhile for either of us. We can of course debate in the abstract, about a theoretical laissez-faire market whereby perfect competition results in the best possible product for the consumer at the lowest possible price.

 

Yet in reality, we have a market where our domestic products are relatively lightly subsidized, as is the gas they use. The industry’s MPG average is regulated, many parts of the hardware content are regulated, and there are sliding incentives and loopholes not just for hybrids, but for light trucks (accelerated depreciation, a farm subsidy which anyone with a Hummer can take advantage of).

 

Complicating matters, we are competing with imported products which are relatively heavily subsidized – battery development and fuel cell development from Japan, cleaner diesel and hydrogen power from Europe, and so on. Economic policy as you know is enacted by politicians whose job it is to get reelected, and they are lobbied by companies such as GM, Ford, and Chrysler for money and favors to help them compete with companies that are far more heavily subsidized. All of this, then, throws the “invisible hand” and pure free market out the window as short term thinking and political considerations trump economics. That’s not going to change. Cars aren’t widgets from Economics 101 – the industry is the center of American manufacturing prowess and is drowning in politics - and as you know, will not be “allowed” to fail. So there IS no free market here, and there isn’t going to be one, so why debate it?

 

Rather, my argument here always has been almost purely political in nature, as in:

 

Problem: America’s addicition to petroleum directly funds nations which overwhelmingly are our political enemies, embroil us in wars, and cost us thousands of lives and trillions of dollars (all defecit spending) in the process.

 

Solution: Find ways to reduce this dependence as a matter of national economic policy and national security, and enact them.

 

Meaning, to me, that getting off oil is #1. Yes, burning our coal for electricity for plug-in recharging is dirty. "Clean coal" is an oxymoron. But I’d rather burn our coal than use oil – that’s my politics over my environment. Yes, a hybrid or a diesel costs more. But I’d rather pay more for the car and start saving MPGs immediately than use more oil (that an example of personal politics trumping personal economics). I don’t care about a “payoff period” within reason. And so on…

 

I’m not taking the stand that hybrids per se are the be-all-end-all and that I’m driving one to save the whales. I am saying they are one way to immediately reduce consumption of a commodity which funds our sworn enemies who are blowing up our kids, and should not be lambasted to the extent that they are. When you said "are you interested in other ideas," I most certainly am. Anything that gets me and my family - and my country - off of oil, I'm interested in, I'm willing to pay extra for, I'm willing to have my taxes raised to fund. I would rather see my disposable income shrink than see those kids come back in caskets and see King Abdullah has purchased one more golden toilet to sit on.

 

-MKL

[steve.foote]

Ok,I understand your feelings about foreign oil. So, let's stop buying theirs and use our own. After all, we have plenty right here in our own backyard. That way, we kill two birds with one stone. We stop subsidising our enemies and we can continue to enjoy the vehicles of our choice.

 

Sounds like a win-win situation to me.

[steve.foote]

but more about promoting a political agenda?

 

Knew we'd end up here. Always does. Can't have a discussion without it. It's the world we live in now.

 

Just can't take it as far as we want to HERE.

 

MB>

 

Have you been reading the thread?

[moshe_levy]

Steve-

 

It's better to use ours than theirs, for sure. However (and now we're veering off topic) I think it would be quite short sighted to consider that in and of itself as a long term solution. By all estimates we can supply nowhere near our current demand (at current prices, of course). Not even half, actually. And as the BP oil spill recently taught us - there's got to be a better way. Oil is in finite supply - how responsibile is it to keep the addicition going? We have to prioritize finding better ways, not prioritize ways to cling to the status quo.

 

The most frustrating core aspect of this particular argument, to me, is that some people view things solely as a function of supply, or solely of demand. Supply being, we'll find another place to keep our fix going, but the addicition stays intact. Demand being, we all need to eat granola bars and ride mopeds. Beyond blind devotion to whatever ideology, for the life of me I don't understand why it has to be one, or the other, but not both.

 

-MKL

[steve.foote]

Steve-

 

It's better to use ours than theirs, for sure. However (and now we're veering off topic) I think it would be quite short sighted to consider that in and of itself as a long term solution. By all estimates we can supply nowhere near our current demand (at current prices, of course). Not even half, actually. And as the BP oil spill recently taught us - there's got to be a better way. Oil is in finite supply - how responsibile is it to keep the addicition going? We have to prioritize finding better ways, not prioritize ways to cling to the status quo.

 

But, that is not at all true, on any account. If we wanted to, we could easily produce as much crude as we need. And, this notion that we have a finite supply is also not true. We're years past the point experts advised that we would run out. Yet we keep finding more of it. Oil is a natural product of the earth, is quite plentiful and economical. I'm sure something will eventually eclipse it's usefulness, but for now it's the bee's knee's.

 

The most frustrating core aspect of this particular argument, to me, is that some people view things solely as a function of supply, or solely of demand. Supply being, we'll find another place to keep our fix going, but the addicition stays intact. Demand being, we all need to eat granola bars and ride mopeds. Beyond blind devotion to whatever ideology, for the life of me I don't understand why it has to be one, or the other, but not both.

 

-MKL

 

So, again, what is your point? Was it all along to simply lament the hatred some people have for hybrid cars? If that is the case, you ought to get over it - some people are simply not going to warm up to them. It's a choice they make and there really isn't anything you can do to change it. People are going to drive the cars they want to, just like they ride the motorcycles they choose. Some will be big, some will be small.

[moshe_levy]

Steve-

 

Our domestic production supply vs. demand is, as you say, always varying. This is because when experts predict our remaining supply, it is almost always based on *current market pricing.* So when barrel pricing is low, so is expected remaining supply, since the expense of reaching the harder-to-find taps is not cost effective. The converse is also true.

 

I think this http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07283.pdf would make good reading for you. It was prepared by the non-partisan GAO under George W. Bush's white house, back in 2007. It's titled "Uncertainty about Future Oil Supply Makes It Important to Develop a Strategy for Addressing a Peak and Decline in Oil Production." That's about the closest I could come to finding any non-partisan government issue scientific report about this issue, and I made sure it was a Bush-era document so there aren't any charges of Obama's liberalism being at fault somehow.

 

I could not find any whatsoever that say anything remotely close to (paraphrased) "the US can produce as much oil as it currently consumes." And if it does, definitely not at current prices.

 

We currently import more than half to feed the need. Does it make sense to continue this? Can we at least agree on that?

 

-MKL

[steve.foote]

Steve-

 

Our domestic production supply vs. demand is, as you say, always varying. This is because when experts predict our remaining supply, it is almost always based on *current market pricing.* So when barrel pricing is low, so is expected remaining supply, since the expense of reaching the harder-to-find taps is not cost effective. The converse is also true.

 

I think this http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07283.pdf would make good reading for you. It was prepared by the non-partisan GAO under George W. Bush's white house, back in 2007. It's titled "Uncertainty about Future Oil Supply Makes It Important to Develop a Strategy for Addressing a Peak and Decline in Oil Production." That's about the closest I could come to finding any non-partisan government issue scientific report about this issue, and I made sure it was a Bush-era document so there aren't any charges of Obama's liberalism being at fault somehow.

 

I could not find any whatsoever that say anything remotely close to (paraphrased) "the US can produce as much oil as it currently consumes." And if it does, definitely not at current prices.

 

We currently import more than half to feed the need. Does it make sense to continue this? Can we at least agree on that?

 

-MKL

 

We can play the tit-for-tat game all night, but I'm running out of interest. So, let's cut to the chase. In your original post, you lamented the resistance of some people to hybrid/economicical vehicles. Many posted their reasons why, and many (including myself) carried the discussion on to how we can make hybrids more attractive for a larger audience of consumers.

 

I understand that you would like to see everyone get as excited about economical cars as you are, but that's just not going to happen. For example, I have a keen interest in a 4-wheel independant electric drive vehicle because I believe that it will outperform currently manufactured vehicles on a multitude of levels. In other words, I think they will be better cars then we have now and that turns me on. But, I have absolutely no interest in driving a small, poorly performing vehicle for the sake of economy.

 

This isn't a my-way-or-the-highway arguement. There a many viewpoints. Your point is no more or less valid than anyone elses and you should respect the opinions of others as much as you would like them to respect yours. It's OK to agree to disagree.

 

[IT_Mike]

moshe,

 

Let me lob that one back at you. Is your question one of honest query?

 

You asked why many people dislike hybrids (Prius/Volt). I answered that question. Is the S40 diesel available in the US? No. Curious how you never asked why? Why aren't we using the most economical, fuel efficient, and environmentally friendly form of internal combustion?

 

Internal combustion engines are still the most economical, reliable, and efficient method of portable power generation. Until you find an better way, we're going to continue to need them.

[Mike]

Mike, I think you hit the proverbial nail . . . .

 

The fact is, that internal combustion technology is well advanced. Hybrids and electrics, while interesting, currently impose compromises that many are unwilling to accept. And, while direct costs to the owner, to varying extents subsidized the the government or the manufacturers, can be lower, there's at least an argument to be made that the overall environmental benefit hasn't been proven. If these technologies are to take hold, they will have to prove themselves in the marketplace, rather than on the fashion show runway.

 

It may happen, but most people are apparently not convinced.

[moshe_levy]

Mike-

 

Although I know why some of Europe's best diesels aren't allowed here (a complex patchwork of state regulations on the formulation of diesel fuel which makes it deathly expensive for manufacturers to comply) I definitely agree with you and Mike the Administrator in that we are shooting ourselves in the foot not allowing ourselves access to ALL the best technologies that exist to wean ourselves off oil.

 

Perhaps customers who do not like the idea of hybrids but would accept diesels are out there, unable to trade in a gas guzzler for something more efficient because no suitable small diesel exists for them. That's definitely a problem. If I find for example that such a tiny diesel has a higher MPG than another technology, I would favor it. Whatever works best wins.

 

Ultimately, though, my prediction is that at the rate things are going, overall MPGs of even the best diesels will be overtaken by concepts like hybrid, not to mention EV, fuel cell, or hydrogen - not to mention the pollution angle, which we didn't address yet. And obviously, a small 1.6L diesel powering a car we're used to seeing here with 220HP is going to introduce a lower level of performance - exactly what some lament in hybrids. (Don't forget mandatory pitstops at the dealer for all the extra diesel add-ons, like the urea injection solution, etc. that nobody else has to deal with). Everything's a compromise.

 

We'll see how it plays out. I do respect everyone's opinion and thank you for sharing it. If I argued with it, it's because I started this whole thing to see if what I thought could stand up to criticism, not to fight per se.

 

PS - An interesting fact: Did you know that Ford is the highest volume producer of diesel engines in the world? Makes you wonder why they don't offer any right here other than in the full size pickups. If VW can do it....

 

 

-MKL

[markgoodrich]

Mike, I think you hit the proverbial nail . . . .

 

The fact is, that internal combustion technology is well advanced. Hybrids and electrics, while interesting, currently impose compromises that many are unwilling to accept. And, while direct costs to the owner, to varying extents subsidized the the government or the manufacturers, can be lower, there's at least an argument to be made that the overall environmental benefit hasn't been proven. If these technologies are to take hold, they will have to prove themselves in the marketplace, rather than on the fashion show runway.

 

It may happen, but most people are apparently not convinced.

 

I agree. And disagree. I agree the technologies have to take hold in the marketplace [and as I said earlier, I was willing to be a beta tester for the technology]...and sales trends for most hybrids, from most manufacturers, are surprisingly steep upward curves...not to say they're taking over. My personal experience (sample of one) is that over 4.5 years and counting, the technology is flawless, indistinguishable from the conventional model of the same Camry, operating costs have been lower...about 25% better fuel economy, no repairs whatsoever. Power is more than adequate, equivalent to a V-6.

 

It appears, from a quick googie, that worldwide hybrid sales are about 3% of the total market. Sales as a percentage of vehicles sold are substantially higher in Japan...not surprising given fuel cost.

 

I am concerned about the total 'carbon footprint' issue with hybrids...meaning it should be taken into account when considering the advantages of hybrids, but the "compromises many are unwilling to accept" escape me. With gas currently at around $2.71 in my area, my better fuel economy is relatively insignificant, financially, but if it spikes to over $4, I'll be looking more intelligent.

 

I don't see myself as one of those sanctimonious hybridians which people seem to see everywhere; I bought the car out of enlightened self-interest...the market at work...to save fuel costs, to reduce emissions (yes, I think climate change is real, but perhaps that has something to do with my scientific education) which, climate change or no, is a good idea.

 

 

[Bob Palin]

I have a keen interest in a 4-wheel independant electric drive vehicle

I saw some numbers on a Cadillac like that - they were amazing. Not sure how public they were though obviously not very secret (FOAF), so I won't say more but they should be available online if they are public. (And anyway my memory of the actual numbers is not reliable)

[moshe_levy]

For example, I have a keen interest in a 4-wheel independant electric drive vehicle because I believe that it will outperform currently manufactured vehicles on a multitude of levels. In other words, I think they will be better cars then we have now and that turns me on. But, I have absolutely no interest in driving a small, poorly performing vehicle for the sake of economy.

 

I was too tired to remember last night, but I've seen quite a few concepts like this over the years at the NYC auto show, including this Mini Cooper - check out the specs! How does 0-60 in 4.5s sound?

 

http://www.minicarparts.net/News/Archive/electricminiQED.cfm

 

-MKL

[Selden]

But, that is not at all true, on any account. If we wanted to, we could easily produce as much crude as we need. And, this notion that we have a finite supply is also not true. We're years past the point experts advised that we would run out. Yet we keep finding more of it.

 

World Crude Oil Production, 1960-2009

 

...Peak oil is often confused with oil depletion; peak oil is the point of maximum production while depletion refers to a period of falling reserves and supply.

 

M. King Hubbert created and first used the models behind peak oil in 1956 to accurately predict that United States oil production would peak between 1965 and 1970.

The actual U.S. peak was 1972, which is pretty close to Hubbert's prediction; Saudi Arabia peaked in 1980 (at a rate that was arguably damaging to their reservoirs). World oil production peaked in 2008 at 73.69 million bbl/day, although the decline in 2009 is more likely reflective of the economic slump, rather than a peak constrained by capacity, and I expect worldwide production to resume increasing for a a few more years, as new discoveries (e.g., Brazil) come on line, compensating for declining output from the super giant oil fields in the Middle East, but I will be amazed if production ever breaks 100 million bbl/day; a plateau between 75-85 million bbl/day for several years seems reasonable.

 

When demand starts exceeding supply, the price will start going up, and alternatives will become more attractive. The interesting question is whether they can come on line faster than worldwide production drops.

[moshe_levy]

The interesting question is whether they can come on line faster than worldwide production drops.

 

That just summarized my long-winded argument to Steve's purely free market proposition in one sentence....

 

-MKL

[Matts_12GS]

The interesting question is whether they can come on line faster than worldwide production drops.

 

That just summarized my long-winded argument to Steve's purely free market proposition in one sentence....

 

-MKL

 

It's all up to which special interest those who make the rules are beholden. I'll bet my bottom dollar that it is NOT "We the People" though.

 

Enjoy Utopia lads...

[steve.foote]

I have a keen interest in a 4-wheel independant electric drive vehicle

I saw some numbers on a Cadillac like that - they were amazing. Not sure how public they were though obviously not very secret (FOAF), so I won't say more but they should be available online if they are public. (And anyway my memory of the actual numbers is not reliable)

 

Some of the most promising technology I've seen so far is the work being done at Porsche. They are solving the weight issues associated with engineering the drive motors within the wheels themselves. Once this challenge is unlocked, it can spill over to virtually any kind of torque-driven drive mechanism. The ability to instantly and precisely control the amount of torque being supplied to each wheel will create a quantum leap in performance over today's technology. That, in turn, will automatically lead to better efficiency. Again, a win-win scenerio.

[Matts_12GS]

Seems to me that while putting it in a small platform like the Cooper is useful, it would be more practical to work it into larger vehicles to gain a toehold. City buses or gargage trucks aren't that necessarily concerned about excess weight or bulk and lots of reliability testing, proving, and data collection could be done with technology in early phases given the relative size of the vehicles and the opportunities to hide pieces of sub-optimally sized equipment.

[chrisolson]

In-wheel electric motors with pretty sophisticated software control has already been in use in these bad boys for quite a while

LINKY

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Seems to me that while putting it in a small platform like the Cooper is useful, it would be more practical to work it into larger vehicles to gain a toehold. City buses or gargage trucks aren't that necessarily concerned about excess weight or bulk and lots of reliability testing, proving, and data collection could be done with technology in early phases given the relative size of the vehicles and the opportunities to hide pieces of sub-optimally sized equipment.

 

Moreover, city vehicles (particularly buses, garbage trucks and delivery vehicles, all of which do lots of stopping, starting, and driving at low speeds) have a driving cycle ideally suited to the regenerative braking enabled by a hybrid drivetrain.

 

Lots of work being done on hybrid-hydraulic drivetrains for these vehicles. Hydraulic systems have good power density and reasonable cost, but it's not clear whether they'll scale down nicely to a passenger vehicle.