Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

Excerpts from
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...6/b3959057.htm


While the Toyota Prius sells in eight days, the Honda Accord hybrid
takes some two months to exit the lot. The Honda Civic hybrid is no
Prius either - it takes 36 days to move.

Clearly, the Prius's conspicuous display of uber-greenness is key to
its success. But it also features a radically new driving experience.
It's quite a thrill to hit the accelerator and slip along in near
silence.

Not so for Honda hybrids. Because the gasoline engine is working most
of the time - getting an electrical boost during acceleration - it
drives much like a regular car. Honda says its technology is fuel
efficient and cheaper, but that may not be enough to wow drivers.



************************************************** *

Drawing on my fine command of the English language, I said nothing.

....Robert Benchley

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

: Honda says its technology is fuel
: efficient and cheaper, but that may not be enough to wow drivers.

Honda missed the point.

Their hybrid just too ugly - and the blame falls partly on that funky
looking, fender-covered thing they tried to peddle (the Insight??).

Mack

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

"M. MacDonald" <mmacdon@bc.cc.ca.us> wrote in message
news:WUMaf.134$W4.30594@okeanos.csu.net...
>: Honda says its technology is fuel
> : efficient and cheaper, but that may not be enough to wow drivers.
>
> Honda missed the point.
>
> Their hybrid just too ugly - and the blame falls partly on that funky
> looking, fender-covered thing they tried to peddle (the Insight??).

That may be true for the Insight, but the Civic and Accord Hybrids look just
like regular Accords and Civics.

Persoanlly, I think the Toyota system is superior, although I remain
unconvinced that I really care that much about hybrids in general. However,
I think the size of the Prius, and the very positive press are major factors
contributing to it sales sucess. Also the distinctive, if unual styling
lets the world know that the driver really cares about the environment. The
enviromentalist driving a Civic Hybrid might not get noticed....

Insight (CVT) - 57 City / 56 Hwy / 56 combined
Insight (manual) - 60 City / 66 Hwy / 63 combined
Civic Hybrid - 49 City / 51 Hwy / 50 combined
Prius - 60 City / 51 Highway / 55 combined
Accord Hybrid (2005) - 29 City / 37 Hwy / 32 combined
Ford Escape (FWD) - 36 City / 31 Hwy / 33 combined
Toyota Highlander Hybrid (FWD) - 33 City / 28 Hwy / 30 combined
Toyota Camry (4 cylinder, 5 sp manual) - 24 City / 34 Hwy / 28 combined

Ed

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

Perhaps they don't want to stand out as not being a very astute buyer who
fell for the hybrid hype? ;)


mike hunt




"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:2kNaf.4128$2y.1107@newsread2.news.atl.earthli nk.net...
>
> "M. MacDonald" <mmacdon@bc.cc.ca.us> wrote in message
> news:WUMaf.134$W4.30594@okeanos.csu.net...
>>: Honda says its technology is fuel
>> : efficient and cheaper, but that may not be enough to wow drivers.
>>
>> Honda missed the point.
>>
>> Their hybrid just too ugly - and the blame falls partly on that funky
>> looking, fender-covered thing they tried to peddle (the Insight??).
>
> That may be true for the Insight, but the Civic and Accord Hybrids look
> just like regular Accords and Civics.
>
> Persoanlly, I think the Toyota system is superior, although I remain
> unconvinced that I really care that much about hybrids in general.
> However, I think the size of the Prius, and the very positive press are
> major factors contributing to it sales sucess. Also the distinctive, if
> unual styling lets the world know that the driver really cares about the
> environment. The enviromentalist driving a Civic Hybrid might not get
> noticed....
> Ed
>

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

I suppose the reason is the Civic buyer can get a better perspective on the
premium price one must pay to buy a hybrid when looking at the came car with
the different power plants. That premium will buy nearly ALL of the fuel
for a conventional powered Civic. In the case of the Prius most buyers do
not think to compare it to the Corolla for size, price, and fuel mileage.
To say nothing of the fact dealers never mention the huge battery
replacement cost somewhere down the line.

mike hunt


"Steve" <nmvc@kytr.inv> wrote in message
news:vm5nm1lgt0plq6fmmi1phd8jo6vv17ouj7@4ax.com...
>
> Excerpts from
> http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...6/b3959057.htm
>
>
> While the Toyota Prius sells in eight days, the Honda Accord hybrid
> takes some two months to exit the lot. The Honda Civic hybrid is no
> Prius either - it takes 36 days to move.
>
> Clearly, the Prius's conspicuous display of uber-greenness is key to
> its success. But it also features a radically new driving experience.
> It's quite a thrill to hit the accelerator and slip along in near
> silence.
>
> Not so for Honda hybrids. Because the gasoline engine is working most
> of the time - getting an electrical boost during acceleration - it
> drives much like a regular car. Honda says its technology is fuel
> efficient and cheaper, but that may not be enough to wow drivers.
>
>
>
> ************************************************** *
>
> Drawing on my fine command of the English language, I said nothing.
>
> ...Robert Benchley

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

In article <vm5nm1lgt0plq6fmmi1phd8jo6vv17ouj7@4ax.com>, Steve
<nmvc@kytr.inv> wrote:

> Excerpts from
> http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...6/b3959057.htm
>
>
> While the Toyota Prius sells in eight days, the Honda Accord hybrid
> takes some two months to exit the lot. The Honda Civic hybrid is no
> Prius either - it takes 36 days to move.
>
> Clearly, the Prius's conspicuous display of uber-greenness is key to
> its success. But it also features a radically new driving experience.
> It's quite a thrill to hit the accelerator and slip along in near
> silence.
>
> Not so for Honda hybrids. Because the gasoline engine is working most
> of the time - getting an electrical boost during acceleration - it
> drives much like a regular car. Honda says its technology is fuel
> efficient and cheaper, but that may not be enough to wow drivers.

Thank you for the exerpts, Steve.

A reason why my wife & I opted for the Prius is that it is such a
*usable* car. The premium MSRP buys you an intelligently designed
transportation system, not just an ordinary car with a modified
propulsion package.

All the hybrids have been pared down in various weight-saving ways, but
sometimes I have to wonder at the decisions. The hybrid Accord, e.g.,
has no spare tire. In its place you get a can of puncture-sealer to
spray in through the valve stem. Fine if your tire picked up a nail,
uselss if it hit road debris; fine if you're in a metropolitan area,
infuriating if the nearest help is the gas station you passed a long
time ago.

There are good ways to save weight. It's instructive to test a hybrid's
body panels with a magnet.

Brent.

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

Steve wrote:
> Excerpts from
> http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...6/b3959057.htm
>
>
> While the Toyota Prius sells in eight days, the Honda Accord hybrid
> takes some two months to exit the lot. The Honda Civic hybrid is no
> Prius either - it takes 36 days to move.


The Accord hybrid is almost as bad of an idea as the 8 cylinder powered
VW Passat was (not quite that bad though). Pushing an Accord into
Acura TSX pricing levels really makes no sense.

Now Diesel powered Accords and Civics getting better than hybrid fuel
economy in the real world and selling for no more that a $999 premium
over the gasoline engine car ... that would be a great idea!

John

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

Not if you live in NY or CA though!

"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:i1Xaf.4029$dU6.3327@trnddc03...
> Steve wrote:
>> Excerpts from
>> http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...6/b3959057.htm While
>> the Toyota Prius sells in eight days, the Honda Accord hybrid
>> takes some two months to exit the lot. The Honda Civic hybrid is no
>> Prius either - it takes 36 days to move.
>
>
> The Accord hybrid is almost as bad of an idea as the 8 cylinder powered VW
> Passat was (not quite that bad though). Pushing an Accord into Acura TSX
> pricing levels really makes no sense.
>
> Now Diesel powered Accords and Civics getting better than hybrid fuel
> economy in the real world and selling for no more that a $999 premium over
> the gasoline engine car ... that would be a great idea!
>
> John

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

Supposedly the low-sulfer fuels will be rolled out in 2006 which should
solve the emissions regulations problems for diesels. Even so, there
are a whole lot of vehicles sold in the other 48 states!

John

Sapper wrote:
> Not if you live in NY or CA though!
>
> "John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:i1Xaf.4029$dU6.3327@trnddc03...
>
>>Steve wrote:
>>
>>>Excerpts from
>>>http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...6/b3959057.htm While
>>>the Toyota Prius sells in eight days, the Honda Accord hybrid
>>>takes some two months to exit the lot. The Honda Civic hybrid is no
>>>Prius either - it takes 36 days to move.
>>
>>
>>The Accord hybrid is almost as bad of an idea as the 8 cylinder powered VW
>>Passat was (not quite that bad though). Pushing an Accord into Acura TSX
>>pricing levels really makes no sense.
>>
>>Now Diesel powered Accords and Civics getting better than hybrid fuel
>>economy in the real world and selling for no more that a $999 premium over
>>the gasoline engine car ... that would be a great idea!
>>
>>John
>
>
>

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

When we were shopping for a new car three years ago, we only looked at
hybrids. There were four Prius on the lot, and no Civic hybrids to even test
drive, so the choice was pretty much made at that point.

We couldn't be happier. The only repair we've done in those three years is
replacement of a broken windshield. The transmissionless Prius is a joy to
drive; my wife wouldn't have a manual (she knows how but doesn't like it).
There is 50K miles left on the hybrid system warranty (including the
battery... the hybrid system warranty is 10 yrs/150K miles in about half a
dozen states but only 8 yr/100K in AZ). We average upper 40s mpg in real
world driving, more around town where we do the most driving. It's clean,
quiet, comfortable, responsive and superbly maneuverable. What's not to
like?

On the diesel front, count me out. I just got a new work truck last month -
a TDi F350 Super Duty. As a work vehicle there's a lot to like. It gets
easily double the fuel economy of my previous gasser. On the highway, the
power is phenomenal... at 25 psi boost I'm not surprised! Off the line is a
whole different story. Making a left turn across traffic requires great
patience and sometimes the kindness of strangers. I wish I had four feet:
one for the accelerator, one for the clutch, and two more to do the Fred
Flintstone thing. Add in the clatter and smell and it just isn't something
I'd want in a family car.

Mike

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

Michael Pardee wrote:

> On the diesel front, count me out. I just got a new work truck last month -
> a TDi F350 Super Duty.

A modern automotive diesel powerplant, as about half the new cars sold
in Europe use, is a much different story than the converted tractor
motor Ford is using.

John

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

The International engine that Ford uses in its light trucks turns a lot
faster then any either one of them us in their farm equipment. ;)


mike hunt


"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:F3ubf.8839$dU6.6667@trnddc03...
> Michael Pardee wrote:
>
>> On the diesel front, count me out. I just got a new work truck last
>> month - a TDi F350 Super Duty.
>
> A modern automotive diesel powerplant, as about half the new cars sold in
> Europe use, is a much different story than the converted tractor motor
> Ford is using.
>
> John

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

Mike Hunter wrote:
> The International engine that Ford uses in its light trucks turns a lot
> faster then any either one of them us in their farm equipment. ;)
>
>
> mike hunt
>


Even so, it is at nothing approaching the sophistication level of the
best modern European car diesels.

John

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

John Horner wrote:

> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> The International engine that Ford uses in its light trucks turns a lot
>> faster then any either one of them us in their farm equipment. ;)
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>
> Even so, it is at nothing approaching the sophistication level of the
> best modern European car diesels.
>
> John

Pay no attention to "Mike Hunter". He is a notorious pro-Ford liar and
troll in the Toyota newsgroup (to which this thread had been cross-posted).

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 15:41:31 -0500, "Mike Hunter"
<mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:

>I suppose the reason is the Civic buyer can get a better perspective on the
>premium price one must pay to buy a hybrid when looking at the came car with
>the different power plants. That premium will buy nearly ALL of the fuel
>for a conventional powered Civic. In the case of the Prius most buyers do
>not think to compare it to the Corolla for size, price, and fuel mileage.
>To say nothing of the fact dealers never mention the huge battery
>replacement cost somewhere down the line.
>

You know, I've heard this comment about battery life and huge battery
replacement cost before. So I'm curious, just how long is the life
expectancy of a hybrid battery? Would that mean that the resale value
of a used hybrid would drop faster with time than a similar model
non-hybrid?

CD

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

Cranky Dude wrote:

>
> You know, I've heard this comment about battery life and huge battery
> replacement cost before. So I'm curious, just how long is the life
> expectancy of a hybrid battery? Would that mean that the resale value
> of a used hybrid would drop faster with time than a similar model
> non-hybrid?
>
> CD
>

It is a good question and one which I suspect the car makers know the
answer to, but are keeping quiet about. The battery technology being
used is a larger implemenation of the same rechargeable battery types
already deployed in laptops, cordless power tools, digital cameras, cell
phone and the like. I have had more laptop batteries totally fail to
take a charge than I would care to think about. They typically work
great at first, but months or years down the line need to be replaced at
a high cost.

With cordless power tools (drills, etc.) it is often cheaper to buy a
whole new one than it is to replace the power packs. Typically a couple
of years of moderate use is all it takes for those battery packs to be
worthless.

Lithium batteries, for example, are generally rated for 300-500
charge-discharge cycles before being useless. Typically as the number of
cycles adds up, the capacity deteriorates.

See: http://www.batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-34.htm

Nicad batteries are generally considered usefull for around 700
carefully managed cycles.

See: http://www.directron.com/batteryterms.html

I believe that the Prius and other presently available hybrids use Nicad
for this longer cycle life, even though Lithium batteries offer a
higher power density.

There are no 5-10 year old Nicad laden cars on the road right now, so
only time will tell. My guess is that somewhere around 2009-2010 there
are going to be a bunch of surprised and angry customers, many of them
the second owners of these vehicles.

John

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

On 2005-11-07, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote:

> There are no 5-10 year old Nicad laden cars on the road right now, so
> only time will tell. My guess is that somewhere around 2009-2010 there
> are going to be a bunch of surprised and angry customers, many of them
> the second owners of these vehicles.

A google search using hybrid battery replacement reveals much. The
consensus of many critics seems to be that hybrids, for the price, are
not yet cost effective and are now just a "feel good" car for well off
tree huggers.

nb

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

notbob <notbob@nothome.com> wrote:
>A google search using hybrid battery replacement reveals much. The
>consensus of many critics seems to be that hybrids, for the price, are
>not yet cost effective and are now just a "feel good" car for well off
>tree huggers.

The hybrids have never been cost effective, pretty much everyone
agrees on that.


=====================

Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.

....G.K. Chesterton

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:JkNbf.3914$Bx.3718@trnddc01...
> Cranky Dude wrote:
>
>>
>> You know, I've heard this comment about battery life and huge battery
>> replacement cost before. So I'm curious, just how long is the life
>> expectancy of a hybrid battery? Would that mean that the resale value
>> of a used hybrid would drop faster with time than a similar model
>> non-hybrid?
>>
>> CD
>>
>
> It is a good question and one which I suspect the car makers know the
> answer to, but are keeping quiet about. The battery technology being used
> is a larger implemenation of the same rechargeable battery types already
> deployed in laptops, cordless power tools, digital cameras, cell phone and
> the like. I have had more laptop batteries totally fail to take a charge
> than I would care to think about. They typically work great at first,
> but months or years down the line need to be replaced at a high cost.
>
> With cordless power tools (drills, etc.) it is often cheaper to buy a
> whole new one than it is to replace the power packs. Typically a couple
> of years of moderate use is all it takes for those battery packs to be
> worthless.
>
> Lithium batteries, for example, are generally rated for 300-500
> charge-discharge cycles before being useless. Typically as the number of
> cycles adds up, the capacity deteriorates.
>
> See: http://www.batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-34.htm
>
> Nicad batteries are generally considered usefull for around 700 carefully
> managed cycles.
>
> See: http://www.directron.com/batteryterms.html
>
> I believe that the Prius and other presently available hybrids use Nicad
> for this longer cycle life, even though Lithium batteries offer a higher
> power density.
>
> There are no 5-10 year old Nicad laden cars on the road right now, so only
> time will tell. My guess is that somewhere around 2009-2010 there are
> going to be a bunch of surprised and angry customers, many of them the
> second owners of these vehicles.

The Prius does not use NiCads. It uses nickel-metal hydride (NiMH)
batteries. And the Prius system only discharges htem to about 80% of
capacity. These batteries have very good life, and the limited dicharge
enhances this further. I believe that in normal usage, you can expect the
battery to last 150,000-200,000 miles.

http://www.peve.panasonic.co.jp/catalog/e_kaku.html
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.c...=135399&page=1
http://www.lubbockautos.com/autonews...a/062204.shtml

Ed

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

No matter how one choose to spin it, the Prius will need a new battery pack
at some point in its life and the cost at that time will be so high, in
comparison to the value of the vehicle, that its value with spent batteries
will by virtually nothing. Who is going to foolish enough to replace a
$4,000 battery pack in a $4,000 vehicle?

mike hunt


"C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:YqQbf.6122$m81.3588@newsread1.news.atl.earthl ink.net...
>
> "John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:JkNbf.3914$Bx.3718@trnddc01...
>> Cranky Dude wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> You know, I've heard this comment about battery life and huge battery
>>> replacement cost before. So I'm curious, just how long is the life
>>> expectancy of a hybrid battery? Would that mean that the resale value
>>> of a used hybrid would drop faster with time than a similar model
>>> non-hybrid?
>>>
>>> CD
>>>
>>
>> It is a good question and one which I suspect the car makers know the
>> answer to, but are keeping quiet about. The battery technology being
>> used is a larger implemenation of the same rechargeable battery types
>> already deployed in laptops, cordless power tools, digital cameras, cell
>> phone and the like. I have had more laptop batteries totally fail to
>> take a charge than I would care to think about. They typically work
>> great at first, but months or years down the line need to be replaced at
>> a high cost.
>>
>> With cordless power tools (drills, etc.) it is often cheaper to buy a
>> whole new one than it is to replace the power packs. Typically a couple
>> of years of moderate use is all it takes for those battery packs to be
>> worthless.
>>
>> Lithium batteries, for example, are generally rated for 300-500
>> charge-discharge cycles before being useless. Typically as the number of
>> cycles adds up, the capacity deteriorates.
>>
>> See: http://www.batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-34.htm
>>
>> Nicad batteries are generally considered usefull for around 700 carefully
>> managed cycles.
>>
>> See: http://www.directron.com/batteryterms.html
>>
>> I believe that the Prius and other presently available hybrids use Nicad
>> for this longer cycle life, even though Lithium batteries offer a higher
>> power density.
>>
>> There are no 5-10 year old Nicad laden cars on the road right now, so
>> only time will tell. My guess is that somewhere around 2009-2010 there
>> are going to be a bunch of surprised and angry customers, many of them
>> the second owners of these vehicles.
>
> The Prius does not use NiCads. It uses nickel-metal hydride (NiMH)
> batteries. And the Prius system only discharges htem to about 80% of
> capacity. These batteries have very good life, and the limited dicharge
> enhances this further. I believe that in normal usage, you can expect the
> battery to last 150,000-200,000 miles.
>
> http://www.peve.panasonic.co.jp/catalog/e_kaku.html
> http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.c...=135399&page=1
> http://www.lubbockautos.com/autonews...a/062204.shtml
>
> Ed
>

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:JkNbf.3914$Bx.3718@trnddc01...
> There are no 5-10 year old Nicad laden cars on the road right now, so only
> time will tell. My guess is that somewhere around 2009-2010 there are
> going to be a bunch of surprised and angry customers, many of them the
> second owners of these vehicles.
>
I can't predict the future, but although a number of 2001 Prius are
approaching 200K miles the HV batteries so far have been supremely reliable.
It's instructive to Google "honda transmission fail" and look over some of
the 391K hits. Why they fail, which ones fail, what to do about the failed
ones... and then to Google "prius battery fail." It returns 70K hits
presently, and the only one I see offhand ( http://tinyurl.com/ahc2x ) that
purports to be a failed battery is clearly bogus: the complainant says the
battery released sulfur dioxide in large amounts when it failed, but there
is no sulfur in the NiMH battery Toyota uses. The rest are mainly
speculation about how long the battery might last. If you are in California
or a handful of other states, Toyota will pay the full replacement cost for
10 years or 150K miles. In the other states it is 8 years or 100K miles. Not
sure about Canada.

Mike

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:X6adnX0SI7QAhO3eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> No matter how one choose to spin it, the Prius will need a new battery
> pack at some point in its life and the cost at that time will be so high,
> in comparison to the value of the vehicle, that its value with spent
> batteries will by virtually nothing. Who is going to foolish enough to
> replace a $4,000 battery pack in a $4,000 vehicle?
>
> mike hunt

I don't think that is a safe conclusion at all. With a number of Prius
approaching the 200K mile and 5 year mark, there have been few enough
outright battery failures that validating them is difficult (obvious hoaxes
are common). It is more likely as Toyota indicates; most will never need a
replacement battery. If somebody does need one, used batteries are often
offered for $400-$1000 US on ebay, courtesy of road accidents. To test the
battery, the multi-function display includes a diagnostic screen that
reports individual cell health (one of those secret sequence things) and the
cells are individually replaceable.

Every vehicle dies of something. I've scrapped a Mercury Capri because it
needed a new driveshaft (integral u-joints!) and the price was over $200. To
assume HV batteries will be the death of most hybrids is quite a stretch,
especially given their track record.

Mike

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

In article <QdudnW6t05YXuO3eRVn-vA@sedona.net>
michaeltnull@cybertrails.com "Michael Pardee" writes:

> [re Prius main battery] To test the battery, the multi-function
> display includes a diagnostic screen that reports individual
> cell health (one of those secret sequence things) and the cells
> are individually replaceable.

Can you pass on the sequence, please? I'd love to have it handy
for my UK-spec T4 Prius (new Aug 2005), for occasional checking.

More generally: there are so many ignorant people, ready to make
sweeping and ignorant statements about hybrids that I've learned
to disregard them, or (for fun) pick out the weasel-phrases used
to insure against contradiction. The bleeding things work, now.
I am assuming Toyota (with Honda, and whoever else undertakes to
manufacture advanced vehicles) do accelerated life testing &c &c
with a view to ensuring customers don't get mightily cheesed off
before they've had value for money. Time, not ignorant opinion,
will tell.

FWIW my Toyota dealer tells me today that the UK price for a new
main Prius battery (w/o labour charges or taxes) is GBP 1321.35,
which I hope helps to focus the discussion. (Side note: earlier
this year I posted a substantially lower price, also supplied by
my dealer; but I think he must have misunderstood the question.)
I would expect this price to fall as design refinements are made
and production ramps up -- what to, who knows.
--
Andrew Stephenson

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

In article <1131470940snz@deltrak.demon.co.uk>,
ames@deltrak.demon.co.uk (Andrew Stephenson) wrote:

> More generally: there are so many ignorant people, ready to make
> sweeping and ignorant statements about hybrids that I've learned
> to disregard them, or (for fun) pick out the weasel-phrases used
> to insure against contradiction. The bleeding things work, now.

But what problems do they solve, and what other solutions are there for
the same problems?

They solve exactly one problem: recapturing braking energy to re-use on
acceleration. There's only one place where that works: city driving.

The requirement for braking came from the burning of petrol to create
acceleration in the first place. Must we burn petrol to create the
acceleration? Can anything else solve that problem?

They're also more expensive to make and to buy. That's a problem in and
of itself. If we're trying to save on petrol, can we use any other
motive source for acceleration?

If so, can that other motive source be purchased cheaper than the hybrid?

For example: can a diesel engine solve the problem better/cheaper/more
reliably than a hybrid?

Can I run a diesel and spend less money, or no more than the same money,
as a hybrid? Let's say I spend the exact same amount of money per mile
to motivate the diesel as the hybrid. Now it comes down to maintenance
and reliability. Is the diesel cheaper or more expensive to maintain?
What about the reliability--can I get the diesel fixed cheaper? What
happens when I go out in the country somewhere--can I rely on the magic
black box of software that the hybrid depends upon, or will a diesel be
more reliable because it doesn't depend on a computer just to run?

There are so many questions to ask yourself once you dig down.

I prize reliability and simplicity. The Toyota hybrid fails the
simplicity test horribly, the Honda hybrid much less so, the diesel
virtually not at all.

And frankly, it's all about MY pocketbook. Which one, over 200K miles,
cost me the least out of pocket to buy, maintain, repair, and insure?

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

In article <elmop-811E23.13304108112005@nntp2.usenetserver.com>
elmop@nastydesigns.com "Elmo P. Shagnasty" writes:

> In article <1131470940snz@deltrak.demon.co.uk>,
> ames@deltrak.demon.co.uk (Andrew Stephenson) wrote:
>
> > More generally: there are so many ignorant people, ready to make
> > sweeping and ignorant statements about hybrids that I've learned
> > to disregard them, or (for fun) pick out the weasel-phrases used
> > to insure against contradiction. The bleeding things work, now.
>
> But what problems do they solve, and what other solutions are there for
> the same problems?

At the risk of turning this into one of those endlessly circling
threads, I'll try to go through your points, which are reasonable
but based (in a couple of places at least) on insufficient facts.

All of the following is AFAIK, okay?

At this stage in the development of hybrids and advanced vehicle
design in general, the industry is having to play catch-up after
decades of, frankly, unforgivable negligence. Now that pressure
is on to make best use of resources, they are seeking answers.

So these vehicles are, to some extent, test beds. The initial
experiments have been done at the factory and have reached the
stage where the product is deemed good enough to be released for
long-term market testing. As with ANY product, there will be
imperfections, which we hope will be removed by re-design.

The main problems the Prius (and, I assume, competing designs) is
_trying_ to solve seem to fall into at least three areas: better
conversion of the fuel (petrol/gas/&c) into a form useful within
the vehicle (eg, movement, light, heat, communications); reduced
waste of same thereafter; improved control generally to make the
car more efficient (re: energy) and a good drive (eg, responsive,
surer-footed on slippery surfaces, positive steering+braking).

On top of those perfomance-related issues, there is the question
of improving the vehicle's green credentials. Now, I know that
for some people "green" is a red-rag-to-a-bull trigger word. By
it, I mean "how to reduce the amount you throw away needlessly".
Manufacturers are learning to waste less whilst building the car,
waste less whilst it's working, recover more when it's scrapped.
It's not a political question, unless we insist on making it so.
Saving makes such bleeding obvious sense, I'll stop beating that
drum right there.

> They solve exactly one problem: recapturing braking energy to
> re-use on acceleration. There's only one place where that
> works: city driving.

Well, no, they already solve more problems than that. The Prius
uses several tricks to cut fuel consumption. The regenerative
braking is significant, certainly; but the greater effiiency of
the Atkinson engine (less power for the same capacity, but much
greater efficiency) is the first major plus. Then, yes, waste
due to braking counts for a lot. On top of that, the electric
motor does a better job of start/slow/stop movement than a plain
old ICE would, as technology stands now. Finally, there is the
control system, which works behind the scenes, choosing optimal
strategies as best it can.

> [...]
>
> They're also more expensive to make and to buy. That's a
> problem in and of itself. If we're trying to save on petrol, can
> we use any other motive source for acceleration?

A dangerous generalisation. The Prius has bits conventional cars
lack, yes (eg: battery, electric generator and motor, inverter,
planetary gear), but lacks some conventional parts (eg: clutch,
gearbox); and some parts are simplified or smaller (eg: 1.5 litre
petrol engine, 45 litre fuel tank, lightweight transmission). A
slew of parts are entirely conventional and can benefit from past
developments and existing production methods (eg: wheels+tyres,
suspensions, hydraulic brake components (augmented by regen.),
lights, seating, steering, structure parts, body panels, paint
and plastics bits). Get the idea? It's a trade-off.

And, to repeat something that really shouldn't need repeating, in
an age when we trust horrendously complex gadgets with our lives
every hour: complexity does not have to mean unreliability. The
Prius braking system, for example, is full of feedback loops that
cope with small failures. Go look it up: Toyota are fairly free
with their literature and sent me detailed techical info.

> If so, can that other motive source be purchased cheaper than
> the hybrid?

It'll be something that surprises us -- count on it.

> For example: can a diesel engine solve the problem
> better/cheaper/more reliably than a hybrid?

Time will tell. My money is on someone developing a diesel that
can be fitted into a hybrid, thereby gaining the best of both.

> There are so many questions to ask yourself once you dig down.

Indeed. I totally agree with you there.

> And frankly, it's all about MY pocketbook. Which one, over
> 200K miles, cost me the least out of pocket to buy, maintain,
> repair, and insure?

One of the nice aspects of a free market is that _you_ can choose
not to participate in the Great Experiment. With more of us out
there, trying alternative solutions, we may find a better way a
lot sooner. So go for it. Or not. Thus far, I like my Prius.
It cost me significantly less (purchase price) and serves me more
to my taste than some quite swanky cars I looked at.
--
Andrew Stephenson

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

You forgot one very impotent part of that equation....REPLACEMENT cost. The
hybrids, all of them, cost more to buy than conventionally power vehicles of
the same size and equipment. They will cost more to replace as well.
Especially if the batteries are depleted. The fact is the premium one pays
to acquire a hybrid will generally buy ALL of the fuel, used by a comparable
conventionally power vehicle, for three to four years. For the average new
car buyer in the US that replaces their new vehicle with another new vehicle
in three to four years that can mean all of the fuel for as long as they
generally own their vehicles. Personally I hope more buyers choose hybrids
to save the planet, that will stretch the supply of fuel for those of use
that prefer high powered, safer, large vehicles. The only problem I see is
if the consumption of fuel, in total, is going down the price of fuel will
rise for those that have trouble buying fuel at todays prices evn for hybrid
owners. ;)


mike


"Elmo P. Shagnasty" > And frankly, it's all about MY pocketbook. Which one,
over 200K miles,
> cost me the least out of pocket to buy, maintain, repair, and insure?
>

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

My satellite phone has the same type of battery as used in the Pruis. It is
about the size of a thick postage stamp and it costs $52 to replace. ;)


mike hunt


"Andrew Stephenson" <ames@deltrak.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1131470940snz@deltrak.demon.co.uk...
> In article <QdudnW6t05YXuO3eRVn-vA@sedona.net>
> michaeltnull@cybertrails.com "Michael Pardee" writes:
>
>> [re Prius main battery] To test the battery, the multi-function
>> display includes a diagnostic screen that reports individual
>> cell health (one of those secret sequence things) and the cells
>> are individually replaceable.
>
> Can you pass on the sequence, please? I'd love to have it handy
> for my UK-spec T4 Prius (new Aug 2005), for occasional checking.
>
> More generally: there are so many ignorant people, ready to make
> sweeping and ignorant statements about hybrids that I've learned
> to disregard them, or (for fun) pick out the weasel-phrases used
> to insure against contradiction. The bleeding things work, now.
> I am assuming Toyota (with Honda, and whoever else undertakes to
> manufacture advanced vehicles) do accelerated life testing &c &c
> with a view to ensuring customers don't get mightily cheesed off
> before they've had value for money. Time, not ignorant opinion,
> will tell.
>
> FWIW my Toyota dealer tells me today that the UK price for a new
> main Prius battery (w/o labour charges or taxes) is GBP 1321.35,
> which I hope helps to focus the discussion. (Side note: earlier
> this year I posted a substantially lower price, also supplied by
> my dealer; but I think he must have misunderstood the question.)
> I would expect this price to fall as design refinements are made
> and production ramps up -- what to, who knows.
> --
> Andrew Stephenson
>

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

Wanna bet the replacement cost is prorated, not fully covered by the
warranty?

mike hunt

"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in message
news:PL-dnfEPE5YHg-3eRVn-tA@sedona.net...
> "John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:JkNbf.3914$Bx.3718@trnddc01...
>> There are no 5-10 year old Nicad laden cars on the road right now, so
>> only time will tell. My guess is that somewhere around 2009-2010 there
>> are going to be a bunch of surprised and angry customers, many of them
>> the second owners of these vehicles.
>>
> I can't predict the future, but although a number of 2001 Prius are
> approaching 200K miles the HV batteries so far have been supremely
> reliable. It's instructive to Google "honda transmission fail" and look
> over some of the 391K hits. Why they fail, which ones fail, what to do
> about the failed ones... and then to Google "prius battery fail." It
> returns 70K hits presently, and the only one I see offhand (
> http://tinyurl.com/ahc2x ) that purports to be a failed battery is clearly
> bogus: the complainant says the battery released sulfur dioxide in large
> amounts when it failed, but there is no sulfur in the NiMH battery Toyota
> uses. The rest are mainly speculation about how long the battery might
> last. If you are in California or a handful of other states, Toyota will
> pay the full replacement cost for 10 years or 150K miles. In the other
> states it is 8 years or 100K miles. Not sure about Canada.
>
> Mike
>

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

On 2005-11-08, Mike Hunter <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:

> to acquire a hybrid will generally buy ALL of the fuel, used by a comparable
> conventionally power vehicle, for three to four years.

Probably closer to 8 years, the life expectency of a hybrid battery
pack.

> For the average new
> car buyer in the US that replaces their new vehicle with another new vehicle
> in three to four years that can mean all of the fuel for as long as they
> generally own their vehicles.

Or longer.

> Personally I hope more buyers choose hybrids
> to save the planet....

I'm not. It's a diversion from hydrogen technology. Besides, battery
production is an incredibly toxic industry. Your trading one plague
for another.

nb

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

In article <1131480732snz@deltrak.demon.co.uk>,
ames@deltrak.demon.co.uk (Andrew Stephenson) wrote:

> > But what problems do they solve, and what other solutions are there for
> > the same problems?
>
> At the risk of turning this into one of those endlessly circling
> threads, I'll try to go through your points, which are reasonable
> but based (in a couple of places at least) on insufficient facts.
>
> All of the following is AFAIK, okay?

Good discussion, thanks.



> Now, I know that
> for some people "green" is a red-rag-to-a-bull trigger word. By
> it, I mean "how to reduce the amount you throw away needlessly".
> Manufacturers are learning to waste less whilst building the car,
> waste less whilst it's working, recover more when it's scrapped.

That pretty much sums it up. "Green" isn't a car, it's a holistic
philosophy.



> Finally, there is the
> control system, which works behind the scenes, choosing optimal
> strategies as best it can.

Personally, I have trouble evaluating the control system in a vacuum. I
need to evaluate the benefits of the control system against the cost of
the fact that the control system is incredibly complex--and complexity
brings its own set of problems to the table.

Now we're into the law of unintended consequences.


> The Prius has bits conventional cars
> lack, yes (eg: battery, electric generator and motor, inverter,
> planetary gear), but lacks some conventional parts (eg: clutch,
> gearbox);

Many cars can use less complex transmissions as well. That they don't
choose to is another matter.




> And, to repeat something that really shouldn't need repeating, in
> an age when we trust horrendously complex gadgets with our lives
> every hour: complexity does not have to mean unreliability.

Pull back a bit, and see what happened when a hurricane hit our
incredibly complex and teetering on the edge energy market.

Complexity puts you that much closer to the edge.




> > For example: can a diesel engine solve the problem
> > better/cheaper/more reliably than a hybrid?
>
> Time will tell. My money is on someone developing a diesel that
> can be fitted into a hybrid, thereby gaining the best of both.

That's such a simple concept, I'm amazed it hasn't been done. Didn't I
read in Car and Driver magazine some time ago that an idling diesel
engine consumes virtually no fuel? This was in regard to big rig
trucks, but still. The question came up about why truck drivers don't
shut their engines off in situations where car drivers would, and that
was the answer.


> Thus far, I like my Prius.
> It cost me significantly less (purchase price) and serves me more
> to my taste than some quite swanky cars I looked at.

Frankly, if anyone can do it it'll be Toyota.

I find it mildly humorous that Ford has licensed Toyota hybrid
technology for their Escape...

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

hybrids don't just work by capturing braking energy.

They run a more fuel efficient cycle with a longer expansion stroke.
The Miller/Atkinson cycle. They can do this because acceleration is
supplemented by the battery. They also have a smaller engine b/c it
can use batteries to accelerate.

By using the Miller cycle they get a higher % of energy out of the gas
and into the drivetrain.

It's very ingenious.

Hydrogen is probably never going to "be here". You need a fuel source
to get hydrogen. Hydrogen is very hard to transport (harder than
natural gas which is difficult enough) and there are no cheap "fuel
cells". The advantages of a liquid fuel are great.

I think the next step is using a smaller gas engine and a
larger/cheaper battery that you can plug in. You could plug it in for
an hour a night and that would take you maybe 30-40 miles. On longer
trips and under acceleration the gas engine would turn on. That way
you'd be replacing gas with electricity, which can come from
nuclear/coal/wind whatever.

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-811E23.13304108112005@nntp2.usenetserver.com...
> But what problems do they solve, and what other solutions are there for
> the same problems?
>
> They solve exactly one problem: recapturing braking energy to re-use on
> acceleration. There's only one place where that works: city driving.
>
Regenerative braking is very far down on the list of values in
hybridization. The essential purpose is to use the primary power source more
efficiently. Putting a 240 hp engine in a passenger car to cruise around
town at 35 mph is extremely inefficient. Using a 50 hp engine to do that is
far more efficient, but responsiveness suffers badly. We are in the infancy
of hybridization now, but as the power technology advances a 50 hp hybrid
can be more efficient than a 50 hp conventional car and provide better
responsiveness than a 240 hp conventional car. The difference is made up by
stored electric power.

In actuality, a car would have to be pretty small to warrant only a 50 hp
engine. The design becomes straightforward, though. The power necessary to
climb a 6% grade at the prevailing maximum speed (75 mph in the US) at
maximum gross weight is exactly the engine power needed. For a mid-size car
that is in the 100 hp range, maybe slightly less.

The side effects of running the engine at higher power levels are valuable,
too. Hybridization increasingly separates the engine from the driver
control, so there are no issues with suddenly mashing the accelerator.
Emissions are much easier to control as the engine comes under computer
control.

I can understand why there isn't a lot of enthusiasm for the current
generation of hybrids. Not only do they have a limited track record, the
level of hybridization is not enough to knock anybody's socks off. (Well,
mostly not. See Honda's DualNote
http://world.honda.com/Tokyo2001/auto/DUALNOTE/ for a glimpse of what is
possible.)

Mike

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:n02dnUi0CLdClOzeUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> My satellite phone has the same type of battery as used in the Pruis. It
> is about the size of a thick postage stamp and it costs $52 to replace.
> ;)
>
>
> mike hunt
>
Your battery has the same basic chemistry, but is a very different animal.
In portable electronics the most important design characteristics are power
density, light weight, barely affordable replacement cost, and short,
spectacular life. The last two are economic considerations. In the Prius
power density and light weight are not very important at all, the
replacement cost is what it is (since it is not designed to be replaced),
and the life is designed to match the life of the rest of the car. If you
were willing to have a much larger and heavier battery that used only a
third of its potential capacity, and a very sophisticated and expensive
charger that was always connected to a charging source when the battery was
in use, your battery could easily outlast your satellite phone. I doubt you
would like it, though.

Mike

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:ck2dnfJ60v3MluzeUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Wanna bet the replacement cost is prorated, not fully covered by the
> warranty?
>
> mike hunt

Nope - 100% covered.

Mike

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

So you would like us to believe the useful life of a Pruis is 8yr 100K? A
Corolla that can be had for 5,000 less will easily last to 200k or more,
don't you think All the more reason one would be better off buying a
Corolla ;)

mike


"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in message
news:cLGdnfHveeaTtOzeRVn-rw@sedona.net...
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:n02dnUi0CLdClOzeUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> My satellite phone has the same type of battery as used in the Pruis. It
>> is about the size of a thick postage stamp and it costs $52 to replace.
>> ;)
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
> Your battery has the same basic chemistry, but is a very different animal.
> In portable electronics the most important design characteristics are
> power density, light weight, barely affordable replacement cost, and
> short, spectacular life. The last two are economic considerations. In the
> Prius power density and light weight are not very important at all, the
> replacement cost is what it is (since it is not designed to be replaced),
> and the life is designed to match the life of the rest of the car. If you
> were willing to have a much larger and heavier battery that used only a
> third of its potential capacity, and a very sophisticated and expensive
> charger that was always connected to a charging source when the battery
> was in use, your battery could easily outlast your satellite phone. I
> doubt you would like it, though.
>
> Mike
>

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:NHydnV8_052qrezeUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> So you would like us to believe the useful life of a Pruis is 8yr 100K?
> A Corolla that can be had for 5,000 less will easily last to 200k or more,
> don't you think All the more reason one would be better off buying a
> Corolla ;)
>
> mike

No - the *warranty* is 8 yr/100K miles. Engine warranties (like the one in
the Corolla) are typically 3 yr/36K miles, but I'm sure you expect more.

Mike

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

C. E. White wrote:

>>See: http://www.directron.com/batteryterms.html
>>
> The Prius does not use NiCads. It uses nickel-metal hydride (NiMH)
> batteries. And the Prius system only discharges htem to about 80% of
> capacity. These batteries have very good life, and the limited dicharge
> enhances this further. I believe that in normal usage, you can expect the
> battery to last 150,000-200,000 miles.

We shall see. NiMH batteries typically have a reduced charge cycle
lifetime compared to NiCADs. That is one reason NiMH never caught on in
power tools where a contractor might cycle a battery several times per day.

Lifetime in cars is going to be highly variable depending upon usage
patterns and random manufacturing variations.

John

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

Michael Pardee wrote:
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
> news:elmop-811E23.13304108112005@nntp2.usenetserver.com...
>
>>But what problems do they solve, and what other solutions are there for
>>the same problems?
>>
>>They solve exactly one problem: recapturing braking energy to re-use on
>>acceleration. There's only one place where that works: city driving.
>>
>
> Regenerative braking is very far down on the list of values in
> hybridization. The essential purpose is to use the primary power source more
> efficiently. Putting a 240 hp engine in a passenger car to cruise around
> town at 35 mph is extremely inefficient. Using a 50 hp engine to do that is
> far more efficient, but responsiveness suffers badly. We are in the infancy
> of hybridization now, but as the power technology advances a 50 hp hybrid
> can be more efficient than a 50 hp conventional car and provide better
> responsiveness than a 240 hp conventional car. The difference is made up by
> stored electric power.

One problem with that is the fact that the stored electric power
eventually runs down. It would not be fun to be in the passing lane on
a long uphill section of road going around a vehicle only to discover
that your battery storage has just been exhausted and that the available
torque is suddenly reduced 50%. Yikes!

One thing hybrids bring into the equation is a significant depenence on
near term prior history to a degree which conventional engines do not.

John

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Iedcf.54339$An6.619@trnddc08...
> Michael Pardee wrote:
>> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>> news:elmop-811E23.13304108112005@nntp2.usenetserver.com...
>>
>>>But what problems do they solve, and what other solutions are there for
>>>the same problems?
>>>
>>>They solve exactly one problem: recapturing braking energy to re-use on
>>>acceleration. There's only one place where that works: city driving.
>>>
>>
>> Regenerative braking is very far down on the list of values in
>> hybridization. The essential purpose is to use the primary power source
>> more efficiently. Putting a 240 hp engine in a passenger car to cruise
>> around town at 35 mph is extremely inefficient. Using a 50 hp engine to
>> do that is far more efficient, but responsiveness suffers badly. We are
>> in the infancy of hybridization now, but as the power technology advances
>> a 50 hp hybrid can be more efficient than a 50 hp conventional car and
>> provide better responsiveness than a 240 hp conventional car. The
>> difference is made up by stored electric power.
>
> One problem with that is the fact that the stored electric power
> eventually runs down. It would not be fun to be in the passing lane on a
> long uphill section of road going around a vehicle only to discover that
> your battery storage has just been exhausted and that the available torque
> is suddenly reduced 50%. Yikes!
>
> One thing hybrids bring into the equation is a significant depenence on
> near term prior history to a degree which conventional engines do not.
>
> John

It's all a matter of design. In your example, a properly designed hybrid
will not run out of passing power because the engine power was enough to
maintain full legal speed, while passing power is available because it was
not needed to reach the cruising speed. A major reason multi-hundred
horsepower engines are used in passenger cars today is to provide that
margin, in spite of the economy penalty the vast majority of the time.

Even in the previous generation Prius - the one we have - our battery has
never dropped to "empty" (actually something like 50% charge) although we
live at 7000 feet and have made trips with ful load to Washington state and
the LA area. I've never heard anybody complain about that happening, either.
It just isn't a problem.

Mike

Re: Hybrids - Toyota vs Honda
 

"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:m9dcf.54217$An6.8868@trnddc08...
> C. E. White wrote:
>
>>>See: http://www.directron.com/batteryterms.html
>>>
>> The Prius does not use NiCads. It uses nickel-metal hydride (NiMH)
>> batteries. And the Prius system only discharges htem to about 80% of
>> capacity. These batteries have very good life, and the limited dicharge
>> enhances this further. I believe that in normal usage, you can expect the
>> battery to last 150,000-200,000 miles.
>
> We shall see. NiMH batteries typically have a reduced charge cycle
> lifetime compared to NiCADs. That is one reason NiMH never caught on in
> power tools where a contractor might cycle a battery several times per
> day.
>
> Lifetime in cars is going to be highly variable depending upon usage
> patterns and random manufacturing variations.
>
> John

The Prius first went on sale in Japan in 1997, 8 years ago. I don't have
solid information, but AFAIK no reports have come out about failures of
those batteries.

As you say, we shall see.

Mike