Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

flobert wrote:

> As I said, thats a misconception based on non-complete examination of
> all the componants. Theres a video around that shows this graphically
> - a mitsubishi shogun hitting the side of a civic, I think. The shogun
> comes off just as bad, as it went up, over and carried on rolling.
>

Interesting theories, but the real world data is very straightforward,
for example:


"In the latest crash figures available from 2003, provided by the
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (see chart below), there were 142
fatalities per million registered vehicles for the smallest cars. That
figure drops to 108 fatalities for the next larger class of cars. For
large sedans, that number drops to 61 per million. "

That was from:

http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/saf...8/article.html

IIHS and others have studied this issue extensively, and the occupants
of smaller automobiles die in accidents much more often than to those in
larger cars. You can try to handwave it away with driver demographics,
but that doesn't add up either.

John

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:33:04 -0400, flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote:
>>All other things being equal, smaller and lighter is a disadvantage to
>>the occupants in a crash.
>
>As I said, thats a misconception based on non-complete examination of
>all the componants.

Small cars *can* be made much more resistant, but then it's not all
other things being equal, "ceteris paribus".

J.

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:33:04 -0400, flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote:
>>All other things being equal, smaller and lighter is a disadvantage to
>>the occupants in a crash.
>
>As I said, thats a misconception based on non-complete examination of
>all the componants.

Small cars *can* be made much more resistant, but then it's not all
other things being equal, "ceteris paribus".

J.

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 11:33:04 -0400, flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote:
>>All other things being equal, smaller and lighter is a disadvantage to
>>the occupants in a crash.
>
>As I said, thats a misconception based on non-complete examination of
>all the componants.

Small cars *can* be made much more resistant, but then it's not all
other things being equal, "ceteris paribus".

J.

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:55:12 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>IMO Honda completely missed the boat on this one by going for a
>"performance hybrid".

What he said, though it was brave of them to try.

Now, if they want to take the I4 and put on a double hybrid boost so
that it outperforms the V6 and still gets better mileage than the
plain version, we might have something!

J.

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:55:12 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>IMO Honda completely missed the boat on this one by going for a
>"performance hybrid".

What he said, though it was brave of them to try.

Now, if they want to take the I4 and put on a double hybrid boost so
that it outperforms the V6 and still gets better mileage than the
plain version, we might have something!

J.

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:55:12 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>IMO Honda completely missed the boat on this one by going for a
>"performance hybrid".

What he said, though it was brave of them to try.

Now, if they want to take the I4 and put on a double hybrid boost so
that it outperforms the V6 and still gets better mileage than the
plain version, we might have something!

J.

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

I have had an 03 Civic Hybrid and now have an 05' Accord Hybrid. If I
had to have one or the other, in today's market and gas prices, I
still choose the Accord. It is my trip vehicle and the 03 Civic did
not cut it. Wandered, under powered (Do NOT get the CVT Civic if you
pull out onto busy 50 mph two lane roads, regularly), and
uncomfortable, even with the Leather interior (aftermarket) upgrade I
had on it.

Yes, I like power and my first new car was a V8 back in the day -
'70s. The Accord Hybrid (as is true of ALL current Hybrids) will NOT
save you money over the life of ownership, fact - read any study. The
premium cost is too high to be made up by gas savings. Heaven help
you should need something unique fixed. (The AC radiator/condensor is
$750) So, why own it.

It is the fastest production Honda Accord with 15 hp ('05) more than
the non-hybrid V6. The Hybrid gets 29 mpg in town (and I do get about
that) and I get 34.5 mpg at 80 mph average highway and the rated 37
mpg if I average 60 - 65 mph. The non-hybrid 05 V6 comparably
equipped, actually gets 18-22 city and 27- 32 highway.

So, I ride in luxury (the Accord starts with everything and adds
hybrid), get the best mileage of any vehicle with comparable
performance, can comfortably transport 5 and have LOCKOUT-ABLE trunk
storage (the Prius has no secure storage when you leave it for service
or leave valuables in the "trunk").

I work around and build military hybrids and chose to own one, just to
say that I do. Status - which is the only reason to own one - today.
That will not be the case in 5 to 10 years.

BTW: Yes, I am hunting for some lightning bolt symbol magnets to put
on the side to flaunt that it is a hybrid,

Honda did just fine, by me. (except for the lack of a spare, which I
have solved - after market.)


On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 17:46:49 -0500, "mrdancer" <mrdancer_at__iw.net>
wrote:

>
>"Gordon McGrew" wrote in message...
>> expensive batteries and motor. I know a woman who owns an Accord
>> Hybrid and claims it gets about 38 mpg on the highway.
>
>A week ago Sunday I did an 850-mile trip with my '02 Accord. Fuel economy
>worked out to 39.5 (measured by topping of the tank at fuel stops). I
>probably could've gotten 40mpg (as I have before), but I was driving 75mph
>with the AC on and had the car pretty heavily loaded.
>
>Mpg is much worse in cold weather, something like 28mpg around town. Warm
>weather, I average 34mpg around town.
>
>BTW, it is a 4-cyl. 5-spd LX coupe.
>

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

I have had an 03 Civic Hybrid and now have an 05' Accord Hybrid. If I
had to have one or the other, in today's market and gas prices, I
still choose the Accord. It is my trip vehicle and the 03 Civic did
not cut it. Wandered, under powered (Do NOT get the CVT Civic if you
pull out onto busy 50 mph two lane roads, regularly), and
uncomfortable, even with the Leather interior (aftermarket) upgrade I
had on it.

Yes, I like power and my first new car was a V8 back in the day -
'70s. The Accord Hybrid (as is true of ALL current Hybrids) will NOT
save you money over the life of ownership, fact - read any study. The
premium cost is too high to be made up by gas savings. Heaven help
you should need something unique fixed. (The AC radiator/condensor is
$750) So, why own it.

It is the fastest production Honda Accord with 15 hp ('05) more than
the non-hybrid V6. The Hybrid gets 29 mpg in town (and I do get about
that) and I get 34.5 mpg at 80 mph average highway and the rated 37
mpg if I average 60 - 65 mph. The non-hybrid 05 V6 comparably
equipped, actually gets 18-22 city and 27- 32 highway.

So, I ride in luxury (the Accord starts with everything and adds
hybrid), get the best mileage of any vehicle with comparable
performance, can comfortably transport 5 and have LOCKOUT-ABLE trunk
storage (the Prius has no secure storage when you leave it for service
or leave valuables in the "trunk").

I work around and build military hybrids and chose to own one, just to
say that I do. Status - which is the only reason to own one - today.
That will not be the case in 5 to 10 years.

BTW: Yes, I am hunting for some lightning bolt symbol magnets to put
on the side to flaunt that it is a hybrid,

Honda did just fine, by me. (except for the lack of a spare, which I
have solved - after market.)


On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 17:46:49 -0500, "mrdancer" <mrdancer_at__iw.net>
wrote:

>
>"Gordon McGrew" wrote in message...
>> expensive batteries and motor. I know a woman who owns an Accord
>> Hybrid and claims it gets about 38 mpg on the highway.
>
>A week ago Sunday I did an 850-mile trip with my '02 Accord. Fuel economy
>worked out to 39.5 (measured by topping of the tank at fuel stops). I
>probably could've gotten 40mpg (as I have before), but I was driving 75mph
>with the AC on and had the car pretty heavily loaded.
>
>Mpg is much worse in cold weather, something like 28mpg around town. Warm
>weather, I average 34mpg around town.
>
>BTW, it is a 4-cyl. 5-spd LX coupe.
>

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

I have had an 03 Civic Hybrid and now have an 05' Accord Hybrid. If I
had to have one or the other, in today's market and gas prices, I
still choose the Accord. It is my trip vehicle and the 03 Civic did
not cut it. Wandered, under powered (Do NOT get the CVT Civic if you
pull out onto busy 50 mph two lane roads, regularly), and
uncomfortable, even with the Leather interior (aftermarket) upgrade I
had on it.

Yes, I like power and my first new car was a V8 back in the day -
'70s. The Accord Hybrid (as is true of ALL current Hybrids) will NOT
save you money over the life of ownership, fact - read any study. The
premium cost is too high to be made up by gas savings. Heaven help
you should need something unique fixed. (The AC radiator/condensor is
$750) So, why own it.

It is the fastest production Honda Accord with 15 hp ('05) more than
the non-hybrid V6. The Hybrid gets 29 mpg in town (and I do get about
that) and I get 34.5 mpg at 80 mph average highway and the rated 37
mpg if I average 60 - 65 mph. The non-hybrid 05 V6 comparably
equipped, actually gets 18-22 city and 27- 32 highway.

So, I ride in luxury (the Accord starts with everything and adds
hybrid), get the best mileage of any vehicle with comparable
performance, can comfortably transport 5 and have LOCKOUT-ABLE trunk
storage (the Prius has no secure storage when you leave it for service
or leave valuables in the "trunk").

I work around and build military hybrids and chose to own one, just to
say that I do. Status - which is the only reason to own one - today.
That will not be the case in 5 to 10 years.

BTW: Yes, I am hunting for some lightning bolt symbol magnets to put
on the side to flaunt that it is a hybrid,

Honda did just fine, by me. (except for the lack of a spare, which I
have solved - after market.)


On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 17:46:49 -0500, "mrdancer" <mrdancer_at__iw.net>
wrote:

>
>"Gordon McGrew" wrote in message...
>> expensive batteries and motor. I know a woman who owns an Accord
>> Hybrid and claims it gets about 38 mpg on the highway.
>
>A week ago Sunday I did an 850-mile trip with my '02 Accord. Fuel economy
>worked out to 39.5 (measured by topping of the tank at fuel stops). I
>probably could've gotten 40mpg (as I have before), but I was driving 75mph
>with the AC on and had the car pretty heavily loaded.
>
>Mpg is much worse in cold weather, something like 28mpg around town. Warm
>weather, I average 34mpg around town.
>
>BTW, it is a 4-cyl. 5-spd LX coupe.
>

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

(Note: also posted elsewhere in the topic)

I have had an 03 Civic Hybrid and now have an 05' Accord Hybrid. If I
had to have one or the other, in today's market and gas prices, I
still choose the Accord. It is my trip vehicle and the 03 Civic did
not cut it. Wandered, under powered (Do NOT get the CVT Civic if you
pull out onto busy 50 mph two lane roads, regularly), and
uncomfortable, even with the Leather interior (aftermarket) upgrade I
had on it.

Yes, I like power and my first new car was a V8 back in the day -
'70s. The Accord Hybrid (as is true of ALL current Hybrids) will NOT
save you money over the life of ownership, fact - read any study. The
premium cost is too high to be made up by gas savings. Heaven help
you should need something unique fixed. (The AC radiator/condensor is
$750) So, why own it.

It is the fastest production Honda Accord with 15 hp ('05) more than
the non-hybrid V6. The Hybrid gets 29 mpg in town (and I do get about
that) and I get 34.5 mpg at 80 mph average highway and the rated 37
mpg if I average 60 - 65 mph. The non-hybrid 05 V6 comparably
equipped, actually gets 18-22 city and 27- 32 highway.

So, I ride in luxury (the Accord starts with everything and adds
hybrid), get the best mileage of any vehicle with comparable
performance, can comfortably transport 5 and have LOCKOUT-ABLE trunk
storage (the Prius has no secure storage when you leave it for service
or leave valuables in the "trunk").

I work around and build military hybrids and chose to own one, just to
say that I do. Status - which is the only reason to own one - today.
That will not be the case in 5 to 10 years.

BTW: Yes, I am hunting for some lightning bolt symbol magnets to put
on the side to flaunt that it is a hybrid,

Honda did just fine, by me. (except for the lack of a spare, which I
have solved - after market.)

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:55:12 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>IMO Honda completely missed the boat on this one by going for a
>"performance hybrid". Nobody needs even higher performance than the V-6
>Accord already offers, and the price of the Hybrid Accord is a show
>stopper. Why pay the price on an Acura TL to get a Honda sedan?
>
>Hybrids should be about great fuel economy, and the Accord hybrid real
>world economy is little better than the 4 cylinder Accord.
>
>IMO Honda would do much better selling a high economy 1.8 L turbocharged
>version of the Accord instead of the silly V-6 hybrid. With the new
>focus on fuel economy we are going to see more use of smaller engines
>with turbochargers. Even Honda is about to get into the turbo act with
>the new Acura RDX.
>
>John

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

(Note: also posted elsewhere in the topic)

I have had an 03 Civic Hybrid and now have an 05' Accord Hybrid. If I
had to have one or the other, in today's market and gas prices, I
still choose the Accord. It is my trip vehicle and the 03 Civic did
not cut it. Wandered, under powered (Do NOT get the CVT Civic if you
pull out onto busy 50 mph two lane roads, regularly), and
uncomfortable, even with the Leather interior (aftermarket) upgrade I
had on it.

Yes, I like power and my first new car was a V8 back in the day -
'70s. The Accord Hybrid (as is true of ALL current Hybrids) will NOT
save you money over the life of ownership, fact - read any study. The
premium cost is too high to be made up by gas savings. Heaven help
you should need something unique fixed. (The AC radiator/condensor is
$750) So, why own it.

It is the fastest production Honda Accord with 15 hp ('05) more than
the non-hybrid V6. The Hybrid gets 29 mpg in town (and I do get about
that) and I get 34.5 mpg at 80 mph average highway and the rated 37
mpg if I average 60 - 65 mph. The non-hybrid 05 V6 comparably
equipped, actually gets 18-22 city and 27- 32 highway.

So, I ride in luxury (the Accord starts with everything and adds
hybrid), get the best mileage of any vehicle with comparable
performance, can comfortably transport 5 and have LOCKOUT-ABLE trunk
storage (the Prius has no secure storage when you leave it for service
or leave valuables in the "trunk").

I work around and build military hybrids and chose to own one, just to
say that I do. Status - which is the only reason to own one - today.
That will not be the case in 5 to 10 years.

BTW: Yes, I am hunting for some lightning bolt symbol magnets to put
on the side to flaunt that it is a hybrid,

Honda did just fine, by me. (except for the lack of a spare, which I
have solved - after market.)

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:55:12 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>IMO Honda completely missed the boat on this one by going for a
>"performance hybrid". Nobody needs even higher performance than the V-6
>Accord already offers, and the price of the Hybrid Accord is a show
>stopper. Why pay the price on an Acura TL to get a Honda sedan?
>
>Hybrids should be about great fuel economy, and the Accord hybrid real
>world economy is little better than the 4 cylinder Accord.
>
>IMO Honda would do much better selling a high economy 1.8 L turbocharged
>version of the Accord instead of the silly V-6 hybrid. With the new
>focus on fuel economy we are going to see more use of smaller engines
>with turbochargers. Even Honda is about to get into the turbo act with
>the new Acura RDX.
>
>John

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

(Note: also posted elsewhere in the topic)

I have had an 03 Civic Hybrid and now have an 05' Accord Hybrid. If I
had to have one or the other, in today's market and gas prices, I
still choose the Accord. It is my trip vehicle and the 03 Civic did
not cut it. Wandered, under powered (Do NOT get the CVT Civic if you
pull out onto busy 50 mph two lane roads, regularly), and
uncomfortable, even with the Leather interior (aftermarket) upgrade I
had on it.

Yes, I like power and my first new car was a V8 back in the day -
'70s. The Accord Hybrid (as is true of ALL current Hybrids) will NOT
save you money over the life of ownership, fact - read any study. The
premium cost is too high to be made up by gas savings. Heaven help
you should need something unique fixed. (The AC radiator/condensor is
$750) So, why own it.

It is the fastest production Honda Accord with 15 hp ('05) more than
the non-hybrid V6. The Hybrid gets 29 mpg in town (and I do get about
that) and I get 34.5 mpg at 80 mph average highway and the rated 37
mpg if I average 60 - 65 mph. The non-hybrid 05 V6 comparably
equipped, actually gets 18-22 city and 27- 32 highway.

So, I ride in luxury (the Accord starts with everything and adds
hybrid), get the best mileage of any vehicle with comparable
performance, can comfortably transport 5 and have LOCKOUT-ABLE trunk
storage (the Prius has no secure storage when you leave it for service
or leave valuables in the "trunk").

I work around and build military hybrids and chose to own one, just to
say that I do. Status - which is the only reason to own one - today.
That will not be the case in 5 to 10 years.

BTW: Yes, I am hunting for some lightning bolt symbol magnets to put
on the side to flaunt that it is a hybrid,

Honda did just fine, by me. (except for the lack of a spare, which I
have solved - after market.)

On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:55:12 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>IMO Honda completely missed the boat on this one by going for a
>"performance hybrid". Nobody needs even higher performance than the V-6
>Accord already offers, and the price of the Hybrid Accord is a show
>stopper. Why pay the price on an Acura TL to get a Honda sedan?
>
>Hybrids should be about great fuel economy, and the Accord hybrid real
>world economy is little better than the 4 cylinder Accord.
>
>IMO Honda would do much better selling a high economy 1.8 L turbocharged
>version of the Accord instead of the silly V-6 hybrid. With the new
>focus on fuel economy we are going to see more use of smaller engines
>with turbochargers. Even Honda is about to get into the turbo act with
>the new Acura RDX.
>
>John

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

"..get the best mileage of any SIMILAR SIZED vehicle with comparable
performance,..."
CC

On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:23:03 -0500, CC <cwcjunior@REM.juno.com> wrote:

>(Note: also posted elsewhere in the topic)
>
>I have had an 03 Civic Hybrid and now have an 05' Accord Hybrid. If I
>had to have one or the other, in today's market and gas prices, I
>still choose the Accord. It is my trip vehicle and the 03 Civic did
>not cut it. Wandered, under powered (Do NOT get the CVT Civic if you
>pull out onto busy 50 mph two lane roads, regularly), and
>uncomfortable, even with the Leather interior (aftermarket) upgrade I
>had on it.
>
>Yes, I like power and my first new car was a V8 back in the day -
>'70s. The Accord Hybrid (as is true of ALL current Hybrids) will NOT
>save you money over the life of ownership, fact - read any study. The
>premium cost is too high to be made up by gas savings. Heaven help
>you should need something unique fixed. (The AC radiator/condensor is
>$750) So, why own it.
>
>It is the fastest production Honda Accord with 15 hp ('05) more than
>the non-hybrid V6. The Hybrid gets 29 mpg in town (and I do get about
>that) and I get 34.5 mpg at 80 mph average highway and the rated 37
>mpg if I average 60 - 65 mph. The non-hybrid 05 V6 comparably
>equipped, actually gets 18-22 city and 27- 32 highway.
>
>So, I ride in luxury (the Accord starts with everything and adds
>hybrid), get the best mileage of any vehicle with comparable
>performance, can comfortably transport 5 and have LOCKOUT-ABLE trunk
>storage (the Prius has no secure storage when you leave it for service
>or leave valuables in the "trunk").
>
>I work around and build military hybrids and chose to own one, just to
>say that I do. Status - which is the only reason to own one - today.
>That will not be the case in 5 to 10 years.
>
>BTW: Yes, I am hunting for some lightning bolt symbol magnets to put
>on the side to flaunt that it is a hybrid,
>
>Honda did just fine, by me. (except for the lack of a spare, which I
>have solved - after market.)
>
>On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:55:12 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>IMO Honda completely missed the boat on this one by going for a
>>"performance hybrid". Nobody needs even higher performance than the V-6
>>Accord already offers, and the price of the Hybrid Accord is a show
>>stopper. Why pay the price on an Acura TL to get a Honda sedan?
>>
>>Hybrids should be about great fuel economy, and the Accord hybrid real
>>world economy is little better than the 4 cylinder Accord.
>>
>>IMO Honda would do much better selling a high economy 1.8 L turbocharged
>>version of the Accord instead of the silly V-6 hybrid. With the new
>>focus on fuel economy we are going to see more use of smaller engines
>>with turbochargers. Even Honda is about to get into the turbo act with
>>the new Acura RDX.
>>
>>John

Re: News Report re: Hybrid Accords
 

"..get the best mileage of any SIMILAR SIZED vehicle with comparable
performance,..."
CC

On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 11:23:03 -0500, CC <cwcjunior@REM.juno.com> wrote:

>(Note: also posted elsewhere in the topic)
>
>I have had an 03 Civic Hybrid and now have an 05' Accord Hybrid. If I
>had to have one or the other, in today's market and gas prices, I
>still choose the Accord. It is my trip vehicle and the 03 Civic did
>not cut it. Wandered, under powered (Do NOT get the CVT Civic if you
>pull out onto busy 50 mph two lane roads, regularly), and
>uncomfortable, even with the Leather interior (aftermarket) upgrade I
>had on it.
>
>Yes, I like power and my first new car was a V8 back in the day -
>'70s. The Accord Hybrid (as is true of ALL current Hybrids) will NOT
>save you money over the life of ownership, fact - read any study. The
>premium cost is too high to be made up by gas savings. Heaven help
>you should need something unique fixed. (The AC radiator/condensor is
>$750) So, why own it.
>
>It is the fastest production Honda Accord with 15 hp ('05) more than
>the non-hybrid V6. The Hybrid gets 29 mpg in town (and I do get about
>that) and I get 34.5 mpg at 80 mph average highway and the rated 37
>mpg if I average 60 - 65 mph. The non-hybrid 05 V6 comparably
>equipped, actually gets 18-22 city and 27- 32 highway.
>
>So, I ride in luxury (the Accord starts with everything and adds
>hybrid), get the best mileage of any vehicle with comparable
>performance, can comfortably transport 5 and have LOCKOUT-ABLE trunk
>storage (the Prius has no secure storage when you leave it for service
>or leave valuables in the "trunk").
>
>I work around and build military hybrids and chose to own one, just to
>say that I do. Status - which is the only reason to own one - today.
>That will not be the case in 5 to 10 years.
>
>BTW: Yes, I am hunting for some lightning bolt symbol magnets to put
>on the side to flaunt that it is a hybrid,
>
>Honda did just fine, by me. (except for the lack of a spare, which I
>have solved - after market.)
>
>On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:55:12 GMT, John Horner <jthorner@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>IMO Honda completely missed the boat on this one by going for a
>>"performance hybrid". Nobody needs even higher performance than the V-6
>>Accord already offers, and the price of the Hybrid Accord is a show
>>stopper. Why pay the price on an Acura TL to get a Honda sedan?
>>
>>Hybrids should be about great fuel economy, and the Accord hybrid real
>>world economy is little better than the 4 cylinder Accord.
>>
>>IMO Honda would do much better selling a high economy 1.8 L turbocharged
>>version of the Accord instead of the silly V-6 hybrid. With the new
>>focus on fuel economy we are going to see more use of smaller engines
>>with turbochargers. Even Honda is about to get into the turbo act with
>>the new Acura RDX.
>>
>>John