|
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
Bob Adkins wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 17:48:29 GMT, "A. Sinan Unur" <1usa@llenroc.ude.invalid> > wrote: > > >>"Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in news:1143908876.004069.326200 >>@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: >> >> >>>But if Hyundai could bring-one out for $10,000 less or whatever, there >>>would seemingly be a significant lessening of oil demand for awhile >>>(several years). >> >>Not by as much as you think though. >> >>Increasing the MPG reduces the cost of driving per mile driven. >> >>Therefore, if more people drove hybrids, they would drive more miles as >>well. >> >>The net effect on quantity of gas demanded is not clear. > > > Not to mention that it probably takes many extra barrels of oil to produce > the extra batteries, electronics, and motors on a hybrid. > > I heard somewhere that hybrids will never pay the average driver back. If > you keep it long enough to pay off the hybrid features, the battery goes > bad. Needless to say, that is no cheap battery to replace! Consumer Reports just recently made such an analysis of several different vehicles that have both a conventional and hybrid version. You are right in that from an purely economic perspective, hybrids are a fools play. Matt |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 19:59:29 GMT, Brian Nystrom
<brian.nystrom@verizon.net> wrote: >Robert Cohen wrote: >> This doesn't belong here, because it's not relevant and so >> neverminddddd, though I gotta a feeling that a certain adaptive Korean >> car manufacturer is duly interested. >> >> My information & perception currently >> is that Toyota has control of hybrid patents, and Hyundai therefore >> couldn't bring-out a relatively inexpensive hybrid, because Toyota >> wouldn't cut its own throat. > >Considering that both manufacturers claim to be losing money on every >hybrid them build, it would actually be more profitable for them to >license the technology to someone else. > >> But if Hyundai could bring-one out for $10,000 less or whatever, there >> would seemingly be a significant lessening of oil demand for awhile >> (several years). >> >> And when China does ditto, then...nirvana. > >Not really, for several reasons: > >- Hybrids aren't that much more effient, especially on the highway. > >- They will probably always be more expensive than comparable gas or >diesel cars, which limits their sales and makes the savings largely >illusory. > >- Battery life is still a major question. > >- Disposal costs will be high, which means you may actually have to pay >someone to take your car when it's worn out. > >> And so, if I were the presiding politico, I'd use my >> influence/talent/finesse to encourage Toyota to consider the public >> interest, perhaps by lubricating Toyota with >> contracts/concessions/advantages so its stockholders would eagerly >> cooperate. > >Why. Hybrids are really nothing but a stop-gap, not a long-term >solution. What we need is cars that don't run on fossil fuels or other >pollution producing fuels. Ideally, that fuel source would be cheaper >than gasoline, so it will appeal to the huge emerging markets in India >and China and help prevent the looming environmental disaster in those >countries (and worldwide) as they burn more and more fossil fuels. > >If you're going to make a long-term investment, it makes more sense to >put your money into alternative technologies. > >> A la Toyota makes U.S. mailsters & other government trucks & heaps so >> long as Toyota licenses its patents reasonably/cheaply/cost-effectively >> to its world competitors. >> >> Any constructive ideas are welcome, because massive distribution of >> hybrid technology is not unimportant in war 'n peace. > >That's a nice idea, but the reality is that hybrids are a technological >dead-end. Partly - it's getting real info on using electric cars and getting the public trainied to think about them. Replace the IC engine with a fuel cell and we may have something worth looking at. |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 19:59:29 GMT, Brian Nystrom
<brian.nystrom@verizon.net> wrote: >Robert Cohen wrote: >> This doesn't belong here, because it's not relevant and so >> neverminddddd, though I gotta a feeling that a certain adaptive Korean >> car manufacturer is duly interested. >> >> My information & perception currently >> is that Toyota has control of hybrid patents, and Hyundai therefore >> couldn't bring-out a relatively inexpensive hybrid, because Toyota >> wouldn't cut its own throat. > >Considering that both manufacturers claim to be losing money on every >hybrid them build, it would actually be more profitable for them to >license the technology to someone else. > >> But if Hyundai could bring-one out for $10,000 less or whatever, there >> would seemingly be a significant lessening of oil demand for awhile >> (several years). >> >> And when China does ditto, then...nirvana. > >Not really, for several reasons: > >- Hybrids aren't that much more effient, especially on the highway. > >- They will probably always be more expensive than comparable gas or >diesel cars, which limits their sales and makes the savings largely >illusory. > >- Battery life is still a major question. > >- Disposal costs will be high, which means you may actually have to pay >someone to take your car when it's worn out. > >> And so, if I were the presiding politico, I'd use my >> influence/talent/finesse to encourage Toyota to consider the public >> interest, perhaps by lubricating Toyota with >> contracts/concessions/advantages so its stockholders would eagerly >> cooperate. > >Why. Hybrids are really nothing but a stop-gap, not a long-term >solution. What we need is cars that don't run on fossil fuels or other >pollution producing fuels. Ideally, that fuel source would be cheaper >than gasoline, so it will appeal to the huge emerging markets in India >and China and help prevent the looming environmental disaster in those >countries (and worldwide) as they burn more and more fossil fuels. > >If you're going to make a long-term investment, it makes more sense to >put your money into alternative technologies. > >> A la Toyota makes U.S. mailsters & other government trucks & heaps so >> long as Toyota licenses its patents reasonably/cheaply/cost-effectively >> to its world competitors. >> >> Any constructive ideas are welcome, because massive distribution of >> hybrid technology is not unimportant in war 'n peace. > >That's a nice idea, but the reality is that hybrids are a technological >dead-end. Partly - it's getting real info on using electric cars and getting the public trainied to think about them. Replace the IC engine with a fuel cell and we may have something worth looking at. |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 19:59:29 GMT, Brian Nystrom
<brian.nystrom@verizon.net> wrote: >Robert Cohen wrote: >> This doesn't belong here, because it's not relevant and so >> neverminddddd, though I gotta a feeling that a certain adaptive Korean >> car manufacturer is duly interested. >> >> My information & perception currently >> is that Toyota has control of hybrid patents, and Hyundai therefore >> couldn't bring-out a relatively inexpensive hybrid, because Toyota >> wouldn't cut its own throat. > >Considering that both manufacturers claim to be losing money on every >hybrid them build, it would actually be more profitable for them to >license the technology to someone else. > >> But if Hyundai could bring-one out for $10,000 less or whatever, there >> would seemingly be a significant lessening of oil demand for awhile >> (several years). >> >> And when China does ditto, then...nirvana. > >Not really, for several reasons: > >- Hybrids aren't that much more effient, especially on the highway. > >- They will probably always be more expensive than comparable gas or >diesel cars, which limits their sales and makes the savings largely >illusory. > >- Battery life is still a major question. > >- Disposal costs will be high, which means you may actually have to pay >someone to take your car when it's worn out. > >> And so, if I were the presiding politico, I'd use my >> influence/talent/finesse to encourage Toyota to consider the public >> interest, perhaps by lubricating Toyota with >> contracts/concessions/advantages so its stockholders would eagerly >> cooperate. > >Why. Hybrids are really nothing but a stop-gap, not a long-term >solution. What we need is cars that don't run on fossil fuels or other >pollution producing fuels. Ideally, that fuel source would be cheaper >than gasoline, so it will appeal to the huge emerging markets in India >and China and help prevent the looming environmental disaster in those >countries (and worldwide) as they burn more and more fossil fuels. > >If you're going to make a long-term investment, it makes more sense to >put your money into alternative technologies. > >> A la Toyota makes U.S. mailsters & other government trucks & heaps so >> long as Toyota licenses its patents reasonably/cheaply/cost-effectively >> to its world competitors. >> >> Any constructive ideas are welcome, because massive distribution of >> hybrid technology is not unimportant in war 'n peace. > >That's a nice idea, but the reality is that hybrids are a technological >dead-end. Partly - it's getting real info on using electric cars and getting the public trainied to think about them. Replace the IC engine with a fuel cell and we may have something worth looking at. |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 12:34:35 -0600, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net>
wrote: >I heard somewhere that hybrids will never pay the average driver back. If >you keep it long enough to pay off the hybrid features, the battery goes >bad. Needless to say, that is no cheap battery to replace! > >I guess hybrids are "feel good" cars right now, but when gas goes up to $10 >a gallon, they will help a lot. :) See http://hybridcars.about.com/od/toyot...oyotaprius.htm I am amazed with the popularity of the Prius. It is a bit of a gimmick. My '03 Accent was $10K and averages about 34mpg. According to the review above, a Prius runs over$20K and averages 48mpg. A not terribly scientific crunching of some numbers: Accent: $10K for car Gas to go 100,000 miles @34mpg: 2,940 gallons of gas @ $2.50/gallon (what I paid today in the Boston suburbs): $7,350 Total: $17,350 Prius $24K (according to edmunds.com Gas to go 100,000 miles @ 48mpg: 2,080 gallons of gas @ $2.50: $5,200 Total: $29,200 |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 12:34:35 -0600, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net>
wrote: >I heard somewhere that hybrids will never pay the average driver back. If >you keep it long enough to pay off the hybrid features, the battery goes >bad. Needless to say, that is no cheap battery to replace! > >I guess hybrids are "feel good" cars right now, but when gas goes up to $10 >a gallon, they will help a lot. :) See http://hybridcars.about.com/od/toyot...oyotaprius.htm I am amazed with the popularity of the Prius. It is a bit of a gimmick. My '03 Accent was $10K and averages about 34mpg. According to the review above, a Prius runs over$20K and averages 48mpg. A not terribly scientific crunching of some numbers: Accent: $10K for car Gas to go 100,000 miles @34mpg: 2,940 gallons of gas @ $2.50/gallon (what I paid today in the Boston suburbs): $7,350 Total: $17,350 Prius $24K (according to edmunds.com Gas to go 100,000 miles @ 48mpg: 2,080 gallons of gas @ $2.50: $5,200 Total: $29,200 |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 12:34:35 -0600, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net>
wrote: >I heard somewhere that hybrids will never pay the average driver back. If >you keep it long enough to pay off the hybrid features, the battery goes >bad. Needless to say, that is no cheap battery to replace! > >I guess hybrids are "feel good" cars right now, but when gas goes up to $10 >a gallon, they will help a lot. :) See http://hybridcars.about.com/od/toyot...oyotaprius.htm I am amazed with the popularity of the Prius. It is a bit of a gimmick. My '03 Accent was $10K and averages about 34mpg. According to the review above, a Prius runs over$20K and averages 48mpg. A not terribly scientific crunching of some numbers: Accent: $10K for car Gas to go 100,000 miles @34mpg: 2,940 gallons of gas @ $2.50/gallon (what I paid today in the Boston suburbs): $7,350 Total: $17,350 Prius $24K (according to edmunds.com Gas to go 100,000 miles @ 48mpg: 2,080 gallons of gas @ $2.50: $5,200 Total: $29,200 |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 12:34:35 -0600, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net> wrote: >On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 17:48:29 GMT, "A. Sinan Unur" <1usa@llenroc.ude.invalid> >wrote: > >>"Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in news:1143908876.004069.326200 >>@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: >> >>> But if Hyundai could bring-one out for $10,000 less or whatever, there >>> would seemingly be a significant lessening of oil demand for awhile >>> (several years). >> >>Not by as much as you think though. >> >>Increasing the MPG reduces the cost of driving per mile driven. >> >>Therefore, if more people drove hybrids, they would drive more miles as >>well. >> >>The net effect on quantity of gas demanded is not clear. > >Not to mention that it probably takes many extra barrels of oil to produce >the extra batteries, electronics, and motors on a hybrid. > Also, they never mention that hybrids don't help on the highway! Batteries get charged (the energy benefit part) by electronic breaking. Hit the highway and the batteries add no benefit. How about 69 mpg in a non hybrid? http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005...roduces_t.html gerry -- Personal home page - http://gogood.com gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 12:34:35 -0600, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net> wrote: >On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 17:48:29 GMT, "A. Sinan Unur" <1usa@llenroc.ude.invalid> >wrote: > >>"Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in news:1143908876.004069.326200 >>@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: >> >>> But if Hyundai could bring-one out for $10,000 less or whatever, there >>> would seemingly be a significant lessening of oil demand for awhile >>> (several years). >> >>Not by as much as you think though. >> >>Increasing the MPG reduces the cost of driving per mile driven. >> >>Therefore, if more people drove hybrids, they would drive more miles as >>well. >> >>The net effect on quantity of gas demanded is not clear. > >Not to mention that it probably takes many extra barrels of oil to produce >the extra batteries, electronics, and motors on a hybrid. > Also, they never mention that hybrids don't help on the highway! Batteries get charged (the energy benefit part) by electronic breaking. Hit the highway and the batteries add no benefit. How about 69 mpg in a non hybrid? http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005...roduces_t.html gerry -- Personal home page - http://gogood.com gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 12:34:35 -0600, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net> wrote: >On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 17:48:29 GMT, "A. Sinan Unur" <1usa@llenroc.ude.invalid> >wrote: > >>"Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in news:1143908876.004069.326200 >>@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: >> >>> But if Hyundai could bring-one out for $10,000 less or whatever, there >>> would seemingly be a significant lessening of oil demand for awhile >>> (several years). >> >>Not by as much as you think though. >> >>Increasing the MPG reduces the cost of driving per mile driven. >> >>Therefore, if more people drove hybrids, they would drive more miles as >>well. >> >>The net effect on quantity of gas demanded is not clear. > >Not to mention that it probably takes many extra barrels of oil to produce >the extra batteries, electronics, and motors on a hybrid. > Also, they never mention that hybrids don't help on the highway! Batteries get charged (the energy benefit part) by electronic breaking. Hit the highway and the batteries add no benefit. How about 69 mpg in a non hybrid? http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005...roduces_t.html gerry -- Personal home page - http://gogood.com gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:13:35 -0400, gerry <gerrrry__net@gogood.com> wrote:
>How about 69 mpg in a non hybrid? > >http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005...roduces_t.html Nice car! Sort of like a Miata on steroids. Ya, if you are willing to forego size, comfort, and options, it's very easy to get 64mpg. :) Engine technology/efficiency has pretty much hit a wall. VW takes up the next challenge with that concept car, which is to reduce weight. If my V6 Sonata weighed only 1800 pound, LOOK OUT!!! :) A good breakthrough would be high MPG rotary or turbine engines. A turbine engine the size of a basketball and weighing under 100 pounds can easily put out 250 HP. Problem is, it would get about 5 MPG. :) -- Bob |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:13:35 -0400, gerry <gerrrry__net@gogood.com> wrote:
>How about 69 mpg in a non hybrid? > >http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005...roduces_t.html Nice car! Sort of like a Miata on steroids. Ya, if you are willing to forego size, comfort, and options, it's very easy to get 64mpg. :) Engine technology/efficiency has pretty much hit a wall. VW takes up the next challenge with that concept car, which is to reduce weight. If my V6 Sonata weighed only 1800 pound, LOOK OUT!!! :) A good breakthrough would be high MPG rotary or turbine engines. A turbine engine the size of a basketball and weighing under 100 pounds can easily put out 250 HP. Problem is, it would get about 5 MPG. :) -- Bob |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:13:35 -0400, gerry <gerrrry__net@gogood.com> wrote:
>How about 69 mpg in a non hybrid? > >http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005...roduces_t.html Nice car! Sort of like a Miata on steroids. Ya, if you are willing to forego size, comfort, and options, it's very easy to get 64mpg. :) Engine technology/efficiency has pretty much hit a wall. VW takes up the next challenge with that concept car, which is to reduce weight. If my V6 Sonata weighed only 1800 pound, LOOK OUT!!! :) A good breakthrough would be high MPG rotary or turbine engines. A turbine engine the size of a basketball and weighing under 100 pounds can easily put out 250 HP. Problem is, it would get about 5 MPG. :) -- Bob |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
gerry wrote:
> [original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth] > On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 12:34:35 -0600, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net> wrote: > > >>On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 17:48:29 GMT, "A. Sinan Unur" <1usa@llenroc.ude.invalid> >>wrote: >> >> >>>"Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in news:1143908876.004069.326200 >>>@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: >>> >>> >>>>But if Hyundai could bring-one out for $10,000 less or whatever, there >>>>would seemingly be a significant lessening of oil demand for awhile >>>>(several years). >>> >>>Not by as much as you think though. >>> >>>Increasing the MPG reduces the cost of driving per mile driven. >>> >>>Therefore, if more people drove hybrids, they would drive more miles as >>>well. >>> >>>The net effect on quantity of gas demanded is not clear. >> >>Not to mention that it probably takes many extra barrels of oil to produce >>the extra batteries, electronics, and motors on a hybrid. >> > > Also, they never mention that hybrids don't help on the highway! Batteries > get charged (the energy benefit part) by electronic breaking. Hit the > highway and the batteries add no benefit. A hybrid does give some benefit on the highway as they can get by with a smaller gasoline engine since the electric motor is there to back it up when greater acceleration is needed, but the benefit certainly is much less relative to the benefit in the city. Probably the greatest benefit of hybrids is the learning they will provide with respect to energy storage and engine control systems that will be needed some day for all electric cars. Matt |
Re: NY TIMES: Comparison of Toyota & Honda Hybrids
gerry wrote:
> [original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth] > On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 12:34:35 -0600, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net> wrote: > > >>On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 17:48:29 GMT, "A. Sinan Unur" <1usa@llenroc.ude.invalid> >>wrote: >> >> >>>"Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in news:1143908876.004069.326200 >>>@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: >>> >>> >>>>But if Hyundai could bring-one out for $10,000 less or whatever, there >>>>would seemingly be a significant lessening of oil demand for awhile >>>>(several years). >>> >>>Not by as much as you think though. >>> >>>Increasing the MPG reduces the cost of driving per mile driven. >>> >>>Therefore, if more people drove hybrids, they would drive more miles as >>>well. >>> >>>The net effect on quantity of gas demanded is not clear. >> >>Not to mention that it probably takes many extra barrels of oil to produce >>the extra batteries, electronics, and motors on a hybrid. >> > > Also, they never mention that hybrids don't help on the highway! Batteries > get charged (the energy benefit part) by electronic breaking. Hit the > highway and the batteries add no benefit. A hybrid does give some benefit on the highway as they can get by with a smaller gasoline engine since the electric motor is there to back it up when greater acceleration is needed, but the benefit certainly is much less relative to the benefit in the city. Probably the greatest benefit of hybrids is the learning they will provide with respect to energy storage and engine control systems that will be needed some day for all electric cars. Matt |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:51 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands