Hybrids
05-22-2005 | 02:27 AM
#46
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids
"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:AHTje.12623$6d.8226@trnddc04...
> Michael Pardee wrote:
>
>> Much of the disappointment comes from design considerations. Honda wanted
>> to compete in fuel economy, and to get the very best economy they started
>> with a base model that did well to start with. They could have taken the
>> other path, economical power, as they did with their DualNote concept
>> car... but I'm sure cost would have popped up on that adventure!
>>
>
> The problem as I see it is that hybrids flunk the basic keep it simple
> principle. They have far more components than their conventional
> counterparts and weigh more as well. More complexity and more weight. Not
> good general starting point to achieve better efficiency.
>
> Many of the hybrid vehicles are also using other tricks to get some of the
> fuel economy, which tricks do not require the hybrid powertrain. Smaller
> engines as you mentioned are one trick. Narrow, high pressure tires are
> another trick. Cylinder deactivation is another (as used on the V-6
> hybrid Accord).
>
> Marketing and hype are clouding many of the facts.
>
> John
Smaller engines are not a trick but a consequence of hybridization. One of
the driving philosophies of hybridization is that it is ludicrous to use a
240 hp engine to move a 5 passenger car around town. Hybrid powertrains make
it practical to downsize the engine, since the limiting factor then is the
power required for freeway hill climbing - the electrics determine the
acceleration performance. Again, I'll grant the current crop of hybrids
don't go very far in fulfilling that promise but even the older Prius (like
mine) is far more responsive in town than the 75 hp engine would suggest.
No modern car "keeps it simple" but you might consider the tradeoff. The
Prius powertrain is complex in concept but not in practice. Actually, any
automatic transmission is vastly more complex than the hybrid transaxle.
Honda autoboxes are a good example. They have a controller; the hybrid
system has a controller. The hybrid system has an inverter; the Honda does
not. The hybrid transaxle has a fixed planetary power split device and two
motor/generators; the Honda box has an automatic transaxle with lockup
torque converter, multiple gear sets, pumps, valves, solenoids, and
clutches. The Toyota hybrid system has a main battery, a 12V aux battery and
a voltage converter; the Honda has a starter, alternator, regulator, and
belts. If the Toyota hybrid has cruise control there are switches; if the
Honda has cruise control there is a cruise control module, switches and
vacuum motor.
Reliability has seemed to favor the Toyota hybrid system over conventional
systems in several areas. There are two known cases of hybrid transaxle
failure and unconfirmed rumors of as many as 3 more among the 11000+ members
in the Yahoo Prius group over the past 4 years; compare that to the number
of automatic transmission problems that show up here. The same Yahoo Prius
group has frequent complaints about failure of the undersized 12 volt aux
battery, comparable to the number of complaints here about alternator
problems (but a whole lot easier to fix). There are a modest number of
starter questions here (like "why did my aftermarket rebuilt starter fail
the next week" and "how do I get the darned thing out") while the Toyota
system has no starter.
Mike
news:AHTje.12623$6d.8226@trnddc04...
> Michael Pardee wrote:
>
>> Much of the disappointment comes from design considerations. Honda wanted
>> to compete in fuel economy, and to get the very best economy they started
>> with a base model that did well to start with. They could have taken the
>> other path, economical power, as they did with their DualNote concept
>> car... but I'm sure cost would have popped up on that adventure!
>>
>
> The problem as I see it is that hybrids flunk the basic keep it simple
> principle. They have far more components than their conventional
> counterparts and weigh more as well. More complexity and more weight. Not
> good general starting point to achieve better efficiency.
>
> Many of the hybrid vehicles are also using other tricks to get some of the
> fuel economy, which tricks do not require the hybrid powertrain. Smaller
> engines as you mentioned are one trick. Narrow, high pressure tires are
> another trick. Cylinder deactivation is another (as used on the V-6
> hybrid Accord).
>
> Marketing and hype are clouding many of the facts.
>
> John
Smaller engines are not a trick but a consequence of hybridization. One of
the driving philosophies of hybridization is that it is ludicrous to use a
240 hp engine to move a 5 passenger car around town. Hybrid powertrains make
it practical to downsize the engine, since the limiting factor then is the
power required for freeway hill climbing - the electrics determine the
acceleration performance. Again, I'll grant the current crop of hybrids
don't go very far in fulfilling that promise but even the older Prius (like
mine) is far more responsive in town than the 75 hp engine would suggest.
No modern car "keeps it simple" but you might consider the tradeoff. The
Prius powertrain is complex in concept but not in practice. Actually, any
automatic transmission is vastly more complex than the hybrid transaxle.
Honda autoboxes are a good example. They have a controller; the hybrid
system has a controller. The hybrid system has an inverter; the Honda does
not. The hybrid transaxle has a fixed planetary power split device and two
motor/generators; the Honda box has an automatic transaxle with lockup
torque converter, multiple gear sets, pumps, valves, solenoids, and
clutches. The Toyota hybrid system has a main battery, a 12V aux battery and
a voltage converter; the Honda has a starter, alternator, regulator, and
belts. If the Toyota hybrid has cruise control there are switches; if the
Honda has cruise control there is a cruise control module, switches and
vacuum motor.
Reliability has seemed to favor the Toyota hybrid system over conventional
systems in several areas. There are two known cases of hybrid transaxle
failure and unconfirmed rumors of as many as 3 more among the 11000+ members
in the Yahoo Prius group over the past 4 years; compare that to the number
of automatic transmission problems that show up here. The same Yahoo Prius
group has frequent complaints about failure of the undersized 12 volt aux
battery, comparable to the number of complaints here about alternator
problems (but a whole lot easier to fix). There are a modest number of
starter questions here (like "why did my aftermarket rebuilt starter fail
the next week" and "how do I get the darned thing out") while the Toyota
system has no starter.
Mike
05-22-2005 | 02:27 AM
#47
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids
"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:AHTje.12623$6d.8226@trnddc04...
> Michael Pardee wrote:
>
>> Much of the disappointment comes from design considerations. Honda wanted
>> to compete in fuel economy, and to get the very best economy they started
>> with a base model that did well to start with. They could have taken the
>> other path, economical power, as they did with their DualNote concept
>> car... but I'm sure cost would have popped up on that adventure!
>>
>
> The problem as I see it is that hybrids flunk the basic keep it simple
> principle. They have far more components than their conventional
> counterparts and weigh more as well. More complexity and more weight. Not
> good general starting point to achieve better efficiency.
>
> Many of the hybrid vehicles are also using other tricks to get some of the
> fuel economy, which tricks do not require the hybrid powertrain. Smaller
> engines as you mentioned are one trick. Narrow, high pressure tires are
> another trick. Cylinder deactivation is another (as used on the V-6
> hybrid Accord).
>
> Marketing and hype are clouding many of the facts.
>
> John
Smaller engines are not a trick but a consequence of hybridization. One of
the driving philosophies of hybridization is that it is ludicrous to use a
240 hp engine to move a 5 passenger car around town. Hybrid powertrains make
it practical to downsize the engine, since the limiting factor then is the
power required for freeway hill climbing - the electrics determine the
acceleration performance. Again, I'll grant the current crop of hybrids
don't go very far in fulfilling that promise but even the older Prius (like
mine) is far more responsive in town than the 75 hp engine would suggest.
No modern car "keeps it simple" but you might consider the tradeoff. The
Prius powertrain is complex in concept but not in practice. Actually, any
automatic transmission is vastly more complex than the hybrid transaxle.
Honda autoboxes are a good example. They have a controller; the hybrid
system has a controller. The hybrid system has an inverter; the Honda does
not. The hybrid transaxle has a fixed planetary power split device and two
motor/generators; the Honda box has an automatic transaxle with lockup
torque converter, multiple gear sets, pumps, valves, solenoids, and
clutches. The Toyota hybrid system has a main battery, a 12V aux battery and
a voltage converter; the Honda has a starter, alternator, regulator, and
belts. If the Toyota hybrid has cruise control there are switches; if the
Honda has cruise control there is a cruise control module, switches and
vacuum motor.
Reliability has seemed to favor the Toyota hybrid system over conventional
systems in several areas. There are two known cases of hybrid transaxle
failure and unconfirmed rumors of as many as 3 more among the 11000+ members
in the Yahoo Prius group over the past 4 years; compare that to the number
of automatic transmission problems that show up here. The same Yahoo Prius
group has frequent complaints about failure of the undersized 12 volt aux
battery, comparable to the number of complaints here about alternator
problems (but a whole lot easier to fix). There are a modest number of
starter questions here (like "why did my aftermarket rebuilt starter fail
the next week" and "how do I get the darned thing out") while the Toyota
system has no starter.
Mike
news:AHTje.12623$6d.8226@trnddc04...
> Michael Pardee wrote:
>
>> Much of the disappointment comes from design considerations. Honda wanted
>> to compete in fuel economy, and to get the very best economy they started
>> with a base model that did well to start with. They could have taken the
>> other path, economical power, as they did with their DualNote concept
>> car... but I'm sure cost would have popped up on that adventure!
>>
>
> The problem as I see it is that hybrids flunk the basic keep it simple
> principle. They have far more components than their conventional
> counterparts and weigh more as well. More complexity and more weight. Not
> good general starting point to achieve better efficiency.
>
> Many of the hybrid vehicles are also using other tricks to get some of the
> fuel economy, which tricks do not require the hybrid powertrain. Smaller
> engines as you mentioned are one trick. Narrow, high pressure tires are
> another trick. Cylinder deactivation is another (as used on the V-6
> hybrid Accord).
>
> Marketing and hype are clouding many of the facts.
>
> John
Smaller engines are not a trick but a consequence of hybridization. One of
the driving philosophies of hybridization is that it is ludicrous to use a
240 hp engine to move a 5 passenger car around town. Hybrid powertrains make
it practical to downsize the engine, since the limiting factor then is the
power required for freeway hill climbing - the electrics determine the
acceleration performance. Again, I'll grant the current crop of hybrids
don't go very far in fulfilling that promise but even the older Prius (like
mine) is far more responsive in town than the 75 hp engine would suggest.
No modern car "keeps it simple" but you might consider the tradeoff. The
Prius powertrain is complex in concept but not in practice. Actually, any
automatic transmission is vastly more complex than the hybrid transaxle.
Honda autoboxes are a good example. They have a controller; the hybrid
system has a controller. The hybrid system has an inverter; the Honda does
not. The hybrid transaxle has a fixed planetary power split device and two
motor/generators; the Honda box has an automatic transaxle with lockup
torque converter, multiple gear sets, pumps, valves, solenoids, and
clutches. The Toyota hybrid system has a main battery, a 12V aux battery and
a voltage converter; the Honda has a starter, alternator, regulator, and
belts. If the Toyota hybrid has cruise control there are switches; if the
Honda has cruise control there is a cruise control module, switches and
vacuum motor.
Reliability has seemed to favor the Toyota hybrid system over conventional
systems in several areas. There are two known cases of hybrid transaxle
failure and unconfirmed rumors of as many as 3 more among the 11000+ members
in the Yahoo Prius group over the past 4 years; compare that to the number
of automatic transmission problems that show up here. The same Yahoo Prius
group has frequent complaints about failure of the undersized 12 volt aux
battery, comparable to the number of complaints here about alternator
problems (but a whole lot easier to fix). There are a modest number of
starter questions here (like "why did my aftermarket rebuilt starter fail
the next week" and "how do I get the darned thing out") while the Toyota
system has no starter.
Mike
05-22-2005 | 12:12 PM
#48
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids (long response)
"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in
news:nvSdnfTZh50jahLfRVn-vA@sedona.net:
> "K`Tetch" <no.email@here.for.you> wrote in message
> news:sakv8153ef517808rqvsiu060ek6r110ic@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 21 May 2005 12:44:59 -0700, "Michael Pardee"
>> <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:
>>>Battery life is most strongly dependent on operating conditions. The
>>>flooded
>>>lead-acids in our communication sites at work have a typical life of
>>>20-30 years, and most of those are taken out of service with the
>>>capacity still within specs (our battery guys load test them twice a
>>>year).
>>
>> Then you have a very low level requirement. Its slightly erring on
>> the cautious side to say that lead acid capacity decreases at
>> 10%/year However, after 10 years, you're left at 35% capacity. oh,
>> the load will still be ok, but the caacity will be shot to hell. The
>> growing terminals are the exact same reason that the capacity drops -
>> chemical action.That 35% is also some eavy rounding. after 20 years,
>> you're at 11-12% capacity. This is, as i remind you, keeping th
>> batteries in their optimum condition.treat them sub-optimally and
>> they won't do half as well.
>>
>>
> 20 years is the standard design life for communications lead-acid
> batteries,
Which only are 'used' when power is lost.
They are "stand-by" batteries used in UPS (uninterruptable power supplies)
systems.
Batteries used for hybrid autos are -always- in use.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
news:nvSdnfTZh50jahLfRVn-vA@sedona.net:
> "K`Tetch" <no.email@here.for.you> wrote in message
> news:sakv8153ef517808rqvsiu060ek6r110ic@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 21 May 2005 12:44:59 -0700, "Michael Pardee"
>> <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:
>>>Battery life is most strongly dependent on operating conditions. The
>>>flooded
>>>lead-acids in our communication sites at work have a typical life of
>>>20-30 years, and most of those are taken out of service with the
>>>capacity still within specs (our battery guys load test them twice a
>>>year).
>>
>> Then you have a very low level requirement. Its slightly erring on
>> the cautious side to say that lead acid capacity decreases at
>> 10%/year However, after 10 years, you're left at 35% capacity. oh,
>> the load will still be ok, but the caacity will be shot to hell. The
>> growing terminals are the exact same reason that the capacity drops -
>> chemical action.That 35% is also some eavy rounding. after 20 years,
>> you're at 11-12% capacity. This is, as i remind you, keeping th
>> batteries in their optimum condition.treat them sub-optimally and
>> they won't do half as well.
>>
>>
> 20 years is the standard design life for communications lead-acid
> batteries,
Which only are 'used' when power is lost.
They are "stand-by" batteries used in UPS (uninterruptable power supplies)
systems.
Batteries used for hybrid autos are -always- in use.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
05-22-2005 | 12:12 PM
#49
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids (long response)
"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in
news:nvSdnfTZh50jahLfRVn-vA@sedona.net:
> "K`Tetch" <no.email@here.for.you> wrote in message
> news:sakv8153ef517808rqvsiu060ek6r110ic@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 21 May 2005 12:44:59 -0700, "Michael Pardee"
>> <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:
>>>Battery life is most strongly dependent on operating conditions. The
>>>flooded
>>>lead-acids in our communication sites at work have a typical life of
>>>20-30 years, and most of those are taken out of service with the
>>>capacity still within specs (our battery guys load test them twice a
>>>year).
>>
>> Then you have a very low level requirement. Its slightly erring on
>> the cautious side to say that lead acid capacity decreases at
>> 10%/year However, after 10 years, you're left at 35% capacity. oh,
>> the load will still be ok, but the caacity will be shot to hell. The
>> growing terminals are the exact same reason that the capacity drops -
>> chemical action.That 35% is also some eavy rounding. after 20 years,
>> you're at 11-12% capacity. This is, as i remind you, keeping th
>> batteries in their optimum condition.treat them sub-optimally and
>> they won't do half as well.
>>
>>
> 20 years is the standard design life for communications lead-acid
> batteries,
Which only are 'used' when power is lost.
They are "stand-by" batteries used in UPS (uninterruptable power supplies)
systems.
Batteries used for hybrid autos are -always- in use.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
news:nvSdnfTZh50jahLfRVn-vA@sedona.net:
> "K`Tetch" <no.email@here.for.you> wrote in message
> news:sakv8153ef517808rqvsiu060ek6r110ic@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 21 May 2005 12:44:59 -0700, "Michael Pardee"
>> <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote:
>>>Battery life is most strongly dependent on operating conditions. The
>>>flooded
>>>lead-acids in our communication sites at work have a typical life of
>>>20-30 years, and most of those are taken out of service with the
>>>capacity still within specs (our battery guys load test them twice a
>>>year).
>>
>> Then you have a very low level requirement. Its slightly erring on
>> the cautious side to say that lead acid capacity decreases at
>> 10%/year However, after 10 years, you're left at 35% capacity. oh,
>> the load will still be ok, but the caacity will be shot to hell. The
>> growing terminals are the exact same reason that the capacity drops -
>> chemical action.That 35% is also some eavy rounding. after 20 years,
>> you're at 11-12% capacity. This is, as i remind you, keeping th
>> batteries in their optimum condition.treat them sub-optimally and
>> they won't do half as well.
>>
>>
> 20 years is the standard design life for communications lead-acid
> batteries,
Which only are 'used' when power is lost.
They are "stand-by" batteries used in UPS (uninterruptable power supplies)
systems.
Batteries used for hybrid autos are -always- in use.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
05-22-2005 | 12:38 PM
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids
In article <elmop-E84911.21535321052005@text.usenetserver.com>, "Elmo P.
Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> In article <jason-2105051805230001@pm1-broad-91.snlo.dialup.fix.net>,
> jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
> > I read an article about Hybrid vehicles in a car magazine. The magazine
> > staff used a Hybrid vehicle for about two years.
>
> Which kind? The series hybrid type such as what Honda does, or the
> incredibly complex parallel hybrid type such as what Toyota does (and
> licenses to Ford)?
>
>
>
> > The consensus was that gas mileage was
> > great when the trip involved lots of city (aka stop and go) driving but
> > was very poor when the trip involved lots of freeway and interstate
> > driving.
>
> If you understand what a hybrid does, and what problem it's trying to
> solve, this is no surprise at all.
Yes, I agree that it's no surprise at all for those of us that truly
understand Hybrid vehicles. However, the vast majority of people that buy
or plan to buy Hybrid vehicles do NOT understand Hybrid vehicles. I've see
at least a dozen posts in this and other car related newsgroups from
Hybrid owners that were shocked when their miles per gallon were much less
than they expected it to be. In almost all of these cases, those people
were making use of their Hybrid cars to do lots of freeway and interstate
driving. It's obvious that the salesmen that sold them the Hybrid cars did
NOT tell them about these factors.
My memory is not perfect but I seem to recall that the car mentioned in
the above post was a Toyota Prius.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> In article <jason-2105051805230001@pm1-broad-91.snlo.dialup.fix.net>,
> jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
> > I read an article about Hybrid vehicles in a car magazine. The magazine
> > staff used a Hybrid vehicle for about two years.
>
> Which kind? The series hybrid type such as what Honda does, or the
> incredibly complex parallel hybrid type such as what Toyota does (and
> licenses to Ford)?
>
>
>
> > The consensus was that gas mileage was
> > great when the trip involved lots of city (aka stop and go) driving but
> > was very poor when the trip involved lots of freeway and interstate
> > driving.
>
> If you understand what a hybrid does, and what problem it's trying to
> solve, this is no surprise at all.
Yes, I agree that it's no surprise at all for those of us that truly
understand Hybrid vehicles. However, the vast majority of people that buy
or plan to buy Hybrid vehicles do NOT understand Hybrid vehicles. I've see
at least a dozen posts in this and other car related newsgroups from
Hybrid owners that were shocked when their miles per gallon were much less
than they expected it to be. In almost all of these cases, those people
were making use of their Hybrid cars to do lots of freeway and interstate
driving. It's obvious that the salesmen that sold them the Hybrid cars did
NOT tell them about these factors.
My memory is not perfect but I seem to recall that the car mentioned in
the above post was a Toyota Prius.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
05-22-2005 | 12:38 PM
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids
In article <elmop-E84911.21535321052005@text.usenetserver.com>, "Elmo P.
Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> In article <jason-2105051805230001@pm1-broad-91.snlo.dialup.fix.net>,
> jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
> > I read an article about Hybrid vehicles in a car magazine. The magazine
> > staff used a Hybrid vehicle for about two years.
>
> Which kind? The series hybrid type such as what Honda does, or the
> incredibly complex parallel hybrid type such as what Toyota does (and
> licenses to Ford)?
>
>
>
> > The consensus was that gas mileage was
> > great when the trip involved lots of city (aka stop and go) driving but
> > was very poor when the trip involved lots of freeway and interstate
> > driving.
>
> If you understand what a hybrid does, and what problem it's trying to
> solve, this is no surprise at all.
Yes, I agree that it's no surprise at all for those of us that truly
understand Hybrid vehicles. However, the vast majority of people that buy
or plan to buy Hybrid vehicles do NOT understand Hybrid vehicles. I've see
at least a dozen posts in this and other car related newsgroups from
Hybrid owners that were shocked when their miles per gallon were much less
than they expected it to be. In almost all of these cases, those people
were making use of their Hybrid cars to do lots of freeway and interstate
driving. It's obvious that the salesmen that sold them the Hybrid cars did
NOT tell them about these factors.
My memory is not perfect but I seem to recall that the car mentioned in
the above post was a Toyota Prius.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> In article <jason-2105051805230001@pm1-broad-91.snlo.dialup.fix.net>,
> jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
> > I read an article about Hybrid vehicles in a car magazine. The magazine
> > staff used a Hybrid vehicle for about two years.
>
> Which kind? The series hybrid type such as what Honda does, or the
> incredibly complex parallel hybrid type such as what Toyota does (and
> licenses to Ford)?
>
>
>
> > The consensus was that gas mileage was
> > great when the trip involved lots of city (aka stop and go) driving but
> > was very poor when the trip involved lots of freeway and interstate
> > driving.
>
> If you understand what a hybrid does, and what problem it's trying to
> solve, this is no surprise at all.
Yes, I agree that it's no surprise at all for those of us that truly
understand Hybrid vehicles. However, the vast majority of people that buy
or plan to buy Hybrid vehicles do NOT understand Hybrid vehicles. I've see
at least a dozen posts in this and other car related newsgroups from
Hybrid owners that were shocked when their miles per gallon were much less
than they expected it to be. In almost all of these cases, those people
were making use of their Hybrid cars to do lots of freeway and interstate
driving. It's obvious that the salesmen that sold them the Hybrid cars did
NOT tell them about these factors.
My memory is not perfect but I seem to recall that the car mentioned in
the above post was a Toyota Prius.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
05-22-2005 | 06:14 PM
#52
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids (long response)
Hello,
I have a question for you. Do you know whether or not Toyota and Honda
informed people in the brochures related to their Hybrid vehicles about
the true nature of Hybrid vehicles? For example, do they (in their
brochures) warn people that if they plan to use their Hybrid vehicles
mainly on interstates and freeways that the miles per gallon will not be
very good?
I have seen several posts from Hybrid owners indicating that they were
shocked to learn that they only get great gas mileage (aka miles per
gallon) when they do lots of city driving. The makers of Hybrid vehicles
should inform people about the nature of Hybrid vehicles before they buy
them. I hope that they do it but don't really know since I have not read
the brochures.
Jason
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
05-22-2005 | 06:14 PM
#53
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids (long response)
Hello,
I have a question for you. Do you know whether or not Toyota and Honda
informed people in the brochures related to their Hybrid vehicles about
the true nature of Hybrid vehicles? For example, do they (in their
brochures) warn people that if they plan to use their Hybrid vehicles
mainly on interstates and freeways that the miles per gallon will not be
very good?
I have seen several posts from Hybrid owners indicating that they were
shocked to learn that they only get great gas mileage (aka miles per
gallon) when they do lots of city driving. The makers of Hybrid vehicles
should inform people about the nature of Hybrid vehicles before they buy
them. I hope that they do it but don't really know since I have not read
the brochures.
Jason
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
05-22-2005 | 07:05 PM
#54
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids (long response)
K`Tetch wrote:
> 99 is only 5 years.Still well within life. I've got a niMH battery in
> my MD recorder thats from 97, and thats still going strong, despite
> having a hell of a lot more c/d cycles than that prius. 5 years
> isNOTHING to a battery. 8-10 is the end of the life, even for the very
> best batteries 9which include hawker sbs series, which is around $250
> for a 30Ah 12V battery (also the ONLY lead acid batteries, that i'm
> aware of, that can be checked into aircraft luggage)
Rechargeable batteries are an odd creature. I have a little Milwaukee
power screwdriver (like the ol' Black & Decker "PowerDriver", but an
actual pro-duty tool) that came with two 2.4V NiCads, which have long
been notorious for short life, voltage fall-off and "memory effect".
The first battery I had to replace after *EIGHT YEARS* of regular use,
when it wouldn't take a charge anymore. The second finally gave out
three years later... or at least came close to giving out, before I
replaced it anyway. 15 years after I bought it, that driver is the best
$200 I ever spent.
Meanwhile, I've owned two IBM ThinkPad laptops, both using more modern,
supposedly more robust Lithium Ion battery packs. Both started showing
a marked decline in charge life after less than a year, to the point
that they wouldn't hold a charge at all after less than two years. I've
seen similar with several other LiIon laptop batteries as well. At
$200-$300 or more each, they're a pricy investment.
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0520-4, 05/20/2005
Tested on: 5/22/2005 4:04:56 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
> 99 is only 5 years.Still well within life. I've got a niMH battery in
> my MD recorder thats from 97, and thats still going strong, despite
> having a hell of a lot more c/d cycles than that prius. 5 years
> isNOTHING to a battery. 8-10 is the end of the life, even for the very
> best batteries 9which include hawker sbs series, which is around $250
> for a 30Ah 12V battery (also the ONLY lead acid batteries, that i'm
> aware of, that can be checked into aircraft luggage)
Rechargeable batteries are an odd creature. I have a little Milwaukee
power screwdriver (like the ol' Black & Decker "PowerDriver", but an
actual pro-duty tool) that came with two 2.4V NiCads, which have long
been notorious for short life, voltage fall-off and "memory effect".
The first battery I had to replace after *EIGHT YEARS* of regular use,
when it wouldn't take a charge anymore. The second finally gave out
three years later... or at least came close to giving out, before I
replaced it anyway. 15 years after I bought it, that driver is the best
$200 I ever spent.
Meanwhile, I've owned two IBM ThinkPad laptops, both using more modern,
supposedly more robust Lithium Ion battery packs. Both started showing
a marked decline in charge life after less than a year, to the point
that they wouldn't hold a charge at all after less than two years. I've
seen similar with several other LiIon laptop batteries as well. At
$200-$300 or more each, they're a pricy investment.
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0520-4, 05/20/2005
Tested on: 5/22/2005 4:04:56 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
05-22-2005 | 07:05 PM
#55
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids (long response)
K`Tetch wrote:
> 99 is only 5 years.Still well within life. I've got a niMH battery in
> my MD recorder thats from 97, and thats still going strong, despite
> having a hell of a lot more c/d cycles than that prius. 5 years
> isNOTHING to a battery. 8-10 is the end of the life, even for the very
> best batteries 9which include hawker sbs series, which is around $250
> for a 30Ah 12V battery (also the ONLY lead acid batteries, that i'm
> aware of, that can be checked into aircraft luggage)
Rechargeable batteries are an odd creature. I have a little Milwaukee
power screwdriver (like the ol' Black & Decker "PowerDriver", but an
actual pro-duty tool) that came with two 2.4V NiCads, which have long
been notorious for short life, voltage fall-off and "memory effect".
The first battery I had to replace after *EIGHT YEARS* of regular use,
when it wouldn't take a charge anymore. The second finally gave out
three years later... or at least came close to giving out, before I
replaced it anyway. 15 years after I bought it, that driver is the best
$200 I ever spent.
Meanwhile, I've owned two IBM ThinkPad laptops, both using more modern,
supposedly more robust Lithium Ion battery packs. Both started showing
a marked decline in charge life after less than a year, to the point
that they wouldn't hold a charge at all after less than two years. I've
seen similar with several other LiIon laptop batteries as well. At
$200-$300 or more each, they're a pricy investment.
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0520-4, 05/20/2005
Tested on: 5/22/2005 4:04:56 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
> 99 is only 5 years.Still well within life. I've got a niMH battery in
> my MD recorder thats from 97, and thats still going strong, despite
> having a hell of a lot more c/d cycles than that prius. 5 years
> isNOTHING to a battery. 8-10 is the end of the life, even for the very
> best batteries 9which include hawker sbs series, which is around $250
> for a 30Ah 12V battery (also the ONLY lead acid batteries, that i'm
> aware of, that can be checked into aircraft luggage)
Rechargeable batteries are an odd creature. I have a little Milwaukee
power screwdriver (like the ol' Black & Decker "PowerDriver", but an
actual pro-duty tool) that came with two 2.4V NiCads, which have long
been notorious for short life, voltage fall-off and "memory effect".
The first battery I had to replace after *EIGHT YEARS* of regular use,
when it wouldn't take a charge anymore. The second finally gave out
three years later... or at least came close to giving out, before I
replaced it anyway. 15 years after I bought it, that driver is the best
$200 I ever spent.
Meanwhile, I've owned two IBM ThinkPad laptops, both using more modern,
supposedly more robust Lithium Ion battery packs. Both started showing
a marked decline in charge life after less than a year, to the point
that they wouldn't hold a charge at all after less than two years. I've
seen similar with several other LiIon laptop batteries as well. At
$200-$300 or more each, they're a pricy investment.
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0520-4, 05/20/2005
Tested on: 5/22/2005 4:04:56 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
05-22-2005 | 07:29 PM
#56
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids (long response)
"Jason" <jason@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:jason-2205051514560001@pm4-broad-44.snlo.dialup.fix.net...
>
> Hello,
> I have a question for you. Do you know whether or not Toyota and Honda
> informed people in the brochures related to their Hybrid vehicles about
> the true nature of Hybrid vehicles? For example, do they (in their
> brochures) warn people that if they plan to use their Hybrid vehicles
> mainly on interstates and freeways that the miles per gallon will not be
> very good?
What do you consider "not very good'?
05-22-2005 | 07:29 PM
#57
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids (long response)
"Jason" <jason@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:jason-2205051514560001@pm4-broad-44.snlo.dialup.fix.net...
>
> Hello,
> I have a question for you. Do you know whether or not Toyota and Honda
> informed people in the brochures related to their Hybrid vehicles about
> the true nature of Hybrid vehicles? For example, do they (in their
> brochures) warn people that if they plan to use their Hybrid vehicles
> mainly on interstates and freeways that the miles per gallon will not be
> very good?
What do you consider "not very good'?
05-23-2005 | 09:59 AM
#58
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids (long response)
Matt Ion <soundy@moltenimage.com> wrote in
news:Oe8ke.1449067$8l.39712@pd7tw1no:
> K`Tetch wrote:
>
>> 99 is only 5 years.Still well within life. I've got a niMH battery in
>> my MD recorder thats from 97, and thats still going strong, despite
>> having a hell of a lot more c/d cycles than that prius. 5 years
>> isNOTHING to a battery. 8-10 is the end of the life, even for the very
>> best batteries 9which include hawker sbs series, which is around $250
>> for a 30Ah 12V battery (also the ONLY lead acid batteries, that i'm
>> aware of, that can be checked into aircraft luggage)
>
> Rechargeable batteries are an odd creature. I have a little Milwaukee
> power screwdriver (like the ol' Black & Decker "PowerDriver", but an
> actual pro-duty tool) that came with two 2.4V NiCads, which have long
> been notorious for short life, voltage fall-off and "memory effect".
> The first battery I had to replace after *EIGHT YEARS* of regular use,
> when it wouldn't take a charge anymore. The second finally gave out
> three years later... or at least came close to giving out, before I
> replaced it anyway. 15 years after I bought it, that driver is the best
> $200 I ever spent.
>
NiCds are "use it or lose it" type of batteries.If you use
infrequently,they do not hold up as well as if you use and recharge them
often.
Also,using a "fast" smart charger (1 hour or less charge time)goves a
longer battery life.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
news:Oe8ke.1449067$8l.39712@pd7tw1no:
> K`Tetch wrote:
>
>> 99 is only 5 years.Still well within life. I've got a niMH battery in
>> my MD recorder thats from 97, and thats still going strong, despite
>> having a hell of a lot more c/d cycles than that prius. 5 years
>> isNOTHING to a battery. 8-10 is the end of the life, even for the very
>> best batteries 9which include hawker sbs series, which is around $250
>> for a 30Ah 12V battery (also the ONLY lead acid batteries, that i'm
>> aware of, that can be checked into aircraft luggage)
>
> Rechargeable batteries are an odd creature. I have a little Milwaukee
> power screwdriver (like the ol' Black & Decker "PowerDriver", but an
> actual pro-duty tool) that came with two 2.4V NiCads, which have long
> been notorious for short life, voltage fall-off and "memory effect".
> The first battery I had to replace after *EIGHT YEARS* of regular use,
> when it wouldn't take a charge anymore. The second finally gave out
> three years later... or at least came close to giving out, before I
> replaced it anyway. 15 years after I bought it, that driver is the best
> $200 I ever spent.
>
NiCds are "use it or lose it" type of batteries.If you use
infrequently,they do not hold up as well as if you use and recharge them
often.
Also,using a "fast" smart charger (1 hour or less charge time)goves a
longer battery life.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
05-23-2005 | 09:59 AM
#59
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids (long response)
Matt Ion <soundy@moltenimage.com> wrote in
news:Oe8ke.1449067$8l.39712@pd7tw1no:
> K`Tetch wrote:
>
>> 99 is only 5 years.Still well within life. I've got a niMH battery in
>> my MD recorder thats from 97, and thats still going strong, despite
>> having a hell of a lot more c/d cycles than that prius. 5 years
>> isNOTHING to a battery. 8-10 is the end of the life, even for the very
>> best batteries 9which include hawker sbs series, which is around $250
>> for a 30Ah 12V battery (also the ONLY lead acid batteries, that i'm
>> aware of, that can be checked into aircraft luggage)
>
> Rechargeable batteries are an odd creature. I have a little Milwaukee
> power screwdriver (like the ol' Black & Decker "PowerDriver", but an
> actual pro-duty tool) that came with two 2.4V NiCads, which have long
> been notorious for short life, voltage fall-off and "memory effect".
> The first battery I had to replace after *EIGHT YEARS* of regular use,
> when it wouldn't take a charge anymore. The second finally gave out
> three years later... or at least came close to giving out, before I
> replaced it anyway. 15 years after I bought it, that driver is the best
> $200 I ever spent.
>
NiCds are "use it or lose it" type of batteries.If you use
infrequently,they do not hold up as well as if you use and recharge them
often.
Also,using a "fast" smart charger (1 hour or less charge time)goves a
longer battery life.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
news:Oe8ke.1449067$8l.39712@pd7tw1no:
> K`Tetch wrote:
>
>> 99 is only 5 years.Still well within life. I've got a niMH battery in
>> my MD recorder thats from 97, and thats still going strong, despite
>> having a hell of a lot more c/d cycles than that prius. 5 years
>> isNOTHING to a battery. 8-10 is the end of the life, even for the very
>> best batteries 9which include hawker sbs series, which is around $250
>> for a 30Ah 12V battery (also the ONLY lead acid batteries, that i'm
>> aware of, that can be checked into aircraft luggage)
>
> Rechargeable batteries are an odd creature. I have a little Milwaukee
> power screwdriver (like the ol' Black & Decker "PowerDriver", but an
> actual pro-duty tool) that came with two 2.4V NiCads, which have long
> been notorious for short life, voltage fall-off and "memory effect".
> The first battery I had to replace after *EIGHT YEARS* of regular use,
> when it wouldn't take a charge anymore. The second finally gave out
> three years later... or at least came close to giving out, before I
> replaced it anyway. 15 years after I bought it, that driver is the best
> $200 I ever spent.
>
NiCds are "use it or lose it" type of batteries.If you use
infrequently,they do not hold up as well as if you use and recharge them
often.
Also,using a "fast" smart charger (1 hour or less charge time)goves a
longer battery life.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
05-23-2005 | 02:12 PM
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Hybrids
"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:wETje.3104$6d.1549@trnddc02...
>L Alpert wrote:
>> muzz wrote:
>>
>>>It might help you to be aware that even tho the Honda people advertise
>>>48 mpg on the civic hybrid, mine gets 33 in the summer and 34 in the
>>>winter after 18 months of conservative driving.
>
> Count me as a hybrid skeptic right now. Most people seem to be reporting
> real world fuel economy much lower than the EPA published numbers.
>
Here in Tucson, we've had good mileage with our Civic Hybrid. In cool-season
city driving, we really do get 45-48 miles per gallon (those are our
calculations--the car's computer display inflates mileage by about 3 mpg),
with the CVT. In summer, we probably lose about 3 miles per gallon, thanks
to the A/C, and whether we have to force the engine to run to keep the cool
air blowing at traffic lights (when it's 110 degrees outside).
Freeway driving gives around 36-42--speed limit is 75; real-world practice
is closer to 80. Mileage is somewhat better on two-lane roads where the
limit is 65. I've noticed a bigger hit on this car from using A/C than on
other cars we've had. I'm not complaining; the vast majority of our driving
is city driving, and that is this car's strength. It's very enjoyable to get
close to 600 miles on a tank of gas.
David
news:wETje.3104$6d.1549@trnddc02...
>L Alpert wrote:
>> muzz wrote:
>>
>>>It might help you to be aware that even tho the Honda people advertise
>>>48 mpg on the civic hybrid, mine gets 33 in the summer and 34 in the
>>>winter after 18 months of conservative driving.
>
> Count me as a hybrid skeptic right now. Most people seem to be reporting
> real world fuel economy much lower than the EPA published numbers.
>
Here in Tucson, we've had good mileage with our Civic Hybrid. In cool-season
city driving, we really do get 45-48 miles per gallon (those are our
calculations--the car's computer display inflates mileage by about 3 mpg),
with the CVT. In summer, we probably lose about 3 miles per gallon, thanks
to the A/C, and whether we have to force the engine to run to keep the cool
air blowing at traffic lights (when it's 110 degrees outside).
Freeway driving gives around 36-42--speed limit is 75; real-world practice
is closer to 80. Mileage is somewhat better on two-lane roads where the
limit is 65. I've noticed a bigger hit on this car from using A/C than on
other cars we've had. I'm not complaining; the vast majority of our driving
is city driving, and that is this car's strength. It's very enjoyable to get
close to 600 miles on a tank of gas.
David