"Hybrids are technologically of doubtful benefit, and expensive, but necessary from a political and public relations point of view. The reduction in fuel consumption does not pay for the technological content and cost of the vehicle." GM Car Czar Bob Lutz, July 19, 2006. Fast forward to today… "While the overall U.S. vehicle market is down, hybrids are a bright spot in the automotive industry with this category projected to easily exceed 300,000 vehicles this year." This from R.L. Polk's Lonnie Miller. Compared to the first seven months of 2006, hybrid sales are up more than 49 percent. "Hybrids are being adopted by vehicle buyers in all regions at an increasing rate for many factors which include fuel prices, differentiating themselves from other consumers and environmental activism," Miller announced in a PRNewswire press release. Overall, the Toyota Prius captured over 50 percent of hybrid sales, followed by the Camry hybrid at 15 percent. Looks like the technology Lutz claimed best suited the "what-would-Jesus-drive crowd" is here to stay. “Hybrids have not hit plateau,” Miller affirmed.
Find Reviews by Make:
4 years ago I was moderately impressed with GM for hiring Lutz. Apparently I wasn’t paying any better attention than The Rick was.
Frank’s trend lines show the net effect of Ol’ Bob-a-looey on GM’s sales. Zip. Nada. Nuttin’.
He should have quit while he was still resepcted in the industry.
Hybrid hype should be placed on hold until after the first round of battery replacements hit in a few years. Hope those owners are piggy-banking the money that they are supposed to be saving at the pump!
FunkyD hit the nail on the head! All those who are ‘saving’ money (with Hybrids, or anything else) aren’t really saving anything – they’re just spending the same 103% of their income on other crap.
Lutz’ comment was absolutely correct. There is no environmental or cost savings justification for the hybrid premium.
Polk’s comment is merely an indication of the gullibility of the American consumer. Anyone who uses the success of hybrids as an indication of their superiority must also draw the same conclusions regarding the success of SUVs.
It’s shameful that the US government perverts the economics of hybrid vehicles by subsidizing Honda and Toyota with tax rebates.
shr: isn’t this also shameful where the gov’t gave the Big 2.8 CAFE credits for making their cars E85 capable (there was no market and less than 300 E85 stations in the 90’s) while they ignored the small fuel efficient car market entirely.
Anyway who got the tax credits? Honda or Toyota? Nope, the american citizens who bought them. Just b/c Honyota went well ahead of the curve on hybrids than their much larger rivals (Big 2.8) doesn’t mean they should not get any advantages. Hybrid technology is still a wash in total resources but improvements will be made over time and it will be through developing these vehicles over several generations. Not by ignoring them altogether and making truck based v8 suvs for rap stars.
Right now we are dealing with a tradeoff. Less wasted gasoline now (due to better mileage from hybrids) versus battery replacements down the line. It might come out even in the long run as many hybrids have been on the road for 6+ years now and still the majority have good batteries. I’m sure someone can make a business doing replacement and rebuilds of these batteries at a reduced cost.
Lutz downplayed hybrids for a long time. He had some points but he’s jaded as GM is. Now he’s crowing GM hybrids (which are well over a generation behind even Honyota’s first generation hybrids). Lutz is GM’s decrepit car guy. He’ll sell or say anything.
Lutz is right – from an engineering point of view there are better technologies to reduce fuel consumption. However, the market sees the act of buying a hybrid as “doing something for the environment” and that is driving sales.
Subsidies based on a specific technology pervert the economics behind developing more efficient cars.
Yes, it is shameful that the government subsidizes E85 cars. But the article was about hybrids, not E85.
Honda and Toyota *DO* get the tax credits, however indirectly. If a person chooses to pay $20,000 for a car because he gets a $3000 tax credit, then Honda and Toyota are effectively receiving that tax credit.
Hybrids popularity is a function of conspicuous consumption married with an inability to calculate ROI and a willingness to waste Other People’s Money (aka tax revenue).
The prior comments here will in my opinion be in the future seen as the same light as those who questioned why anyone would want a computer in their home.
They also illustrate why I will have no sympathy what so ever if and when any of the former big three go belly up.
If there is better solution where the hell is it?
The disdain for the customers is amazing. Note the cost savings to the customer is real. Ignoring the reality of customers wanting and actually liking cars like the Prius is yet another nail in the coffin of the big 2, point whatever and the complete lack of understanding of this is simply amazing
I’m all for more efficient vehicles. There is a proper way to encourage efficiency and an improper way to encourage efficiency.
The proper way to encourage efficiency is to increase gas taxes. Higher gas taxes will encourage consumers to use less gas. How they do that is up to them. They may choose to drive less, they may choose to buy a more efficient vehicle. They may do both or neither. That is a market based approach. That approach also gives *all* technologies an equal opportunity to succeed.
The improper way to encourage efficiency is for government bureaucrats and industry lobbyists to “anoint” a given technology (hybrids) as the best way to achieve efficiency and to subsidize it. This decreases the motivation for automakers to investigate other alternatives. It decreases the motivation for consumers to use less fuel. That is a “command-economy” approach, in which a central bureaucracy dictates how a desired end will be achieved, rather than letting the market determine how it will be achieved.
I really don’t understand the backlash against hybrid vehicles. You can’t the argue the premium you pay isn’t worth it. It obviously is for all those who pay the price. Fuel economy and emissions are improved and that has value for some.
To me, the trade offs make most sense in SUVs where the extra weight of the batteries and the space they takeup doesn’t matter much. I certain prefer the Lexus RX400h to drive over the RX350 although I don’t wish to own either.
I finally had to take my 04 Prius in to the dealer this week [85K]. This was the first time outside of 2 recalls that I have been to the dealer. And I had to pay money [$50] because a mouse got into the AC vents and had to be removed. Boy did that car stink. The dealer checked it out and it is good until the 120K mile check. The only schedules service then is new plugs. And recheck the fluids.
Besides getting around 40mpg I have had no service outside of oil and filter changes and new tires. This has been a truly remarkable vehicle and has saved me alot of money when compared to previous cars owned. Just the savings in service is worth owning the vehicle. Brakes are not even 50% worn and should last indefinitely.
People that bad mouth hybrids haven’t owned one or driven one very much. The Prius is by far the best car I have ever owned and I have owned many good cars/trucks over the last 40 years.
Rday:
Your comments are completely orthogonal to the hybrid debate.
The lack of maintenance cost is because the Prius is a high quality car. It has nothing to do with whether it is a hybrid or not.
It is likely that if Toyota were to market a Prius that was *not* a hybrid the maintenance costs would be about the same, the mileage would be about the same, and the car would cost less.
But it would not have the “environmental cachet” that came with the inflated EPA mileage estimates, and would therefore sell about as well as the Toyota Echo.
srh:
Rday:
Your comments are completely orthogonal to the hybrid debate.
Well. Every now and again a word I’m not familiar with has me consulting ye olde Google; or an (old fashioned) printed dictionary.
Wikki says (in part): orthogonal: a generalization of perpendicular.
Two streets that cross each other at a right angle are orthogonal to one another.
Extra credit for the vocab lesson, srh!
Oh yea, this was about hybrids- carry on. :-)
For all the hype, hybrid sales are only 2% of total car sales.
As to Rday’s Prius being so exceptionally reliable, my Ranger is approaching 120,000 miles and, outside of routine maintenance, has had a battery and oxygen sensor replaced under warranty and a starter replaced afterward.
3 visits to the dealer for the $10K cheaper “inferior” domestic, and 3 for the Prius in 120,000 miles. Some superiority!
If, if, if, blah, blah, blah. Hybrid critics always talk about the other technologies that would be better at reducing gas consumption and emissions. Yes, there are lots of viable alternatives including just making cars lighter. Great – tell me where I can buy a non-hybrid 4 door that runs on regular gas and gets 40+ mpg with Toyota reliability and resale value and I’ll take 2.
And furthermore reliablity is not orthogonal to the discussion. The most common point critics make is that the batteries suck and (a) will need to be replaced frequently at great expense and supposed environmental damage, and (b) face a rapid dropoff in capacity and performance that will reduce mileage tremendously after the first year. User experience tells us that neither is the case for the Prius, and the Prius is (effectively) the entire compact hybrid market.
Hybrid bashing is silly, just let it go everyone. And this is coming from the proud owner of a car that gets 17mpg on a good day.
I find the argument that no money is saved by purchasing a hybrid interesting. In fact, it could have been thought up by Exxon-Mobil.
I would rather pay Toyota $3000 more for the hybrid than pay oil companies $3000 in gas money. At least Toyota can use that money for R&D into fuel-efficient cars.
Also, remember the tax deduction you can drive a truck through?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,879419,00.html
The US president’s economic stimulus package includes a provision that would allow small business owners and the self-employed to deduct from their taxable income the entire cost of a vehicle – up to $75,000 (about £47,000) – providing it weighs over 2,700 kilos. The entire deduction could be taken in the year of purchase, rather than being spread out over several years using a depreciation schedule.
The tax break would encourage professionals who might have opted for a smaller, more fuel efficient car to purchase a full-size SUV or pick-up truck instead. The Bush plan triples the current $25,000 allowance on heavy vehicles, which was meant to benefit farmers and others who require workhorse trucks.
Let’s see $75,000 deductible in the first year of purchase for gas guzzlers versus $3000 for a hybrid (which doesn’t even apply to the Prius anymore). This policy could almost have been written by the oil industry. Wait. It was.
Well, I just started into my second battery on my 2000 Honda Insight, it was free under my 10 year / 150,000 mile warranty for a 1st gen battery. If this battery holds up as well as the last, I’m gonna have to buy my own battery in… 2014. I wonder if GM will be making it’s own hybrid drive train then.. Or even still be in business.
Value is in the eye of the beholder. Does a Camry “pay back” its premium over a Corolla? Does a Corvette “pay back” its premium over an Aveo? Nonsense questions — some people will pay more for whatever it is that they value. People do not, in fact, seek the cheapest possible price on lots of things. I think anyone who buys a car costing more than $40,000 is a total idiot, yet people do that, and who am I to judge?
Since Bob Lutz sells both Aveos and Cadillacs, he should know this, and his statement was unforgivably stupid — just another sign of the incredible incompetence among Detroit 3 executives.
The beauty of a free market with multiple competing producers is that that the producers will experiment and try stuff to gain an edge, see what sticks. That’s necessary, since no one can always anticipate what consumers will want. Little surprise that Toyota has been kicking Bob Lutz’s ass.
srh is right in that higher gas taxes combined with a free market is a better solution than trying to pick a winner, or “annointing” a technology with targeted subsidies.
Unfortunately, it is a whole lot more politically palatable to offer $3000 credits on a hybrid than it is to tell Joe Sixpack that he needs to pay an additional $1/gallon in gasoline tax. So of course governments have all hopped on the bandwagon because it gives them the appearance of doing something to encourage fuel efficiency without pissing everybody off.
Lutz’s original comments about hybrids were actually correct, but he lacked vision (isn’t that what he is there for?). As an example, look at the Civic hybrid. It doesn’t sell nearly as well as the Prius because Lutz is right. The hybrid doesn’t pay for itself, and in fact makes no sense, on a strictly economic basis.
What Lutz failed to appreciate, however, is the number of people who are concerned about the environment and are prepared to put their money where their mouth is. They are willing to pony up extra $$ for a hybrid, even though at current gas prices and their annual useage it will probably never pay for itself. One reason the Prius outsells all other hybrids by a longshot is simply because everyone knows it is a hybrid. The Civic isn’t identifiable as one, so it suffers among those wanting to be identified as “green.” So the Prius scoops up everyone that wants to be noticed.
srh :
September 19th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Rday:
Your comments are completely orthogonal to the hybrid debate.
The lack of maintenance cost is because the Prius is a high quality car. It has nothing to do with whether it is a hybrid or not.
It is likely that if Toyota were to market a Prius that was *not* a hybrid the maintenance costs would be about the same, the mileage would be about the same, and the car would cost less.
That’s not true. The electrical motor means the gasoline motor is used less, and therefore has less wear and tear on it. Likewise, regenerative braking means the standard brakes get less use.
One thing that no one has mentioned is that the supposed tax credit for buying a hybrid is largely a mirage due to the reach of the Alternative Minimum Tax, at least for married couples.
The ALT includes a steep “marriage penalty” so if both husband and wife are working and earning a middle-class to upper middle class income, they get ZERO tax break.
As for raising gas taxes, yes, that’s what should have been done 30 years ago, but raising taxes is now the “third rail” of politics. I imagine that if the Interstate Highway System hadn’t been initiated in the 50s and largely built in the 60s, we’d still be riding around the country on a patchwork of 2- and 3-lane roads, and a few expressways.
“Great – tell me where I can buy a non-hybrid 4 door that runs on regular gas and gets 40+ mpg with Toyota reliability and resale value and I’ll take 2.”
The Toyota Corolla. I get over 40 (record 42.5), and it’s got some power through 1st and 2nd gear too. Never had to do a damn thing to it.
I think the Yaris 4 door fits those specifications as well.
Well, I have to add my 2 cents worth – again.
First, when I bought my 2005 Prius (after a 9 1/2 month wait), I started saving money straight away – because my intended purchase prior to finding out about the new Prius, was a similarly priced 20 mpg Hyundai XG. So I “traded” leather, power seats and an ersatz “Bentley” look – for 50 mpg, futuristic look, vehicle stability control and smart key. ergo, I started saving money straight away on my gas (and insurance, too).
Second, I understand from several sources that Prius cars are being used as Canadian taxicabs and are routinely pulling 250,000 miles on the original traction battery (that’s the big, expensive one).
Third, about 6 weeks ago, I decided (given the economic conditions and possibility that credit may tighten up / the dollar is collapsing vs other currencies, etc.) that I’d best hit the “reset” button on my 2005 Prius and get a new one, so I put my money where my mouth is (again) and put $100 down on an ’08 Prius. It arrived yesterday. It’s sweet. White with a, beige and charcoal interior (nice change from gray and “what color izzat?!” in the ’05). The ’05 was silver, kind of generic, the white car looks bigger (optical illusion) and just looks “clean”. I love the “citroen-esque” look.
More interesting trade-offs. I lost the HID headlamps and fog lights, but gained a reverse camera, and a quieter car with 3 miles on it (instead of 48,200 – in 2 years 2 months – hence my need for a hybrid). The retail price was about $200 more than 2005 – amazingly.
I’m not certain that I’ll get any tax “credit” relief at all – if I do, that’s gravy. I know the ’07 Prius is eligible for about $775 or so ’til the end of the month (1/4 of what it started out to be). On my 2005, it was a $2000 “deduction” which amounted to maybe $400. As someone else mentioned, if you are eligible for the AMT, you’re screwed out of the tax break anyway.
Maybe I should go into biz for myself and garner that $25,000 tax break annually for a massive frickin’ Stupid Utility Vehicle thanks to Herr klop the idjit prez and his merry band of morons in congress (with an 11% approval rating, a new record low). Prez has a slightly higher 29% approval rating. But I digress….
I’ve looked at people bad-mouthing hybrids (read: the Prius) for years and most of the comments are – politely put, here – ill advised (by the 2.8 stooges? oil companies?) and inaccurate.
My “fave” is the “oh, the battery is filled with all these nasty chemicals”. What balderdash. There’s a bounty on every hybrid battery, which means that they WILL be recycled. Let’s face it – small town Americans are way smarter than the 2.8 execs – most salvage yards can actually make money for their owners?! Yep, these guys can actually read and will see the $300 bounty on the battery pack, turn it in….
Besides which, hasn’t anyone considered the lovely, harmless (NOT) hytdrochloric acid in the huge 12 volt batteries required to start hundreds of millions of conventional cars? Did you know there IS a 12 volt battery with acid in it, in a Prius. It’s a LAWN TRACTOR size 12 volt battery -tiny – all it has to do is boot the 16 CPU’s. It never actually starts the internal combustion engine, and obviously never powers the car.
The only issues I have with the Prius (nothing is pperfect) is that it – like all other highly aerodynamic cars I’ve ever driven – is pushed around a bit in high gust side-winds. Not uncontrollable, nor exhausting – but you know you’re in a side-wind. (Nothing NEARLY as bad as the old rear-engine Beetle). Oh, and I am muttering unkind things about the decision to put “HYBRID” on each front fender, when I think the car should have euro-style side indicator orange repeater lights there, instead, like much of the rest of the world. Like “DUH” yeah, it’s a hybrid…. If you can’t tell, you likely don’t care one way or another about cars!
Oh by the way, it has to be said that the ’05 Prius NEVER EVER EVER let me down – not in -20 degrees F., not in 110 degrees F., not EVER. Total reliability. To me, a car guy who’s loved cars all my life and studied them virtually all my life, the fact that you can have total reliability in the most complex car built on planet earth, and afford it, and obtain a 90-100% improvement in MPG compared to other mid-sized cars – is phenomenal. Kudos, Toyota (and also Honda).
So, hey, GM, Ford, Chrysler? Where are YOUR “Supercars” engineered with tax-payer monies during the Clinton administration? Why didn’t you bring these vehicles to market? (I already know the answer – they were “pushmobiles” and just a means of grabbing free money out of taxpayer’s pockets).
Toyota and Honda have REAL solutions to the emission and (upcoming) oil crisis right now.
T. Boone Pickens was in the news today – he’s a famous old-school oil man – he said that we “probably” wouldn’t see $100 per barrel oil – in 2007 (unless there’s a middle-east war, of course) – but he also said world wide production in the 4th quarter of 2007 (i.e. starting virtually now) is 85 million barrels per day (BPD) – demand is 88 million BPD.
I think anyone with even an 8th grade education can figure out what is going to happen to the price of gas. VERY soon.
You forget our legislative branches are run by excons, pervs, hypocrits and greedy people. They will not do anything particularly good for the country (nat’l gas tax) but only for their short term vested interest.
The day Congress puts their heads together and actually care about what is really going on rather than their careers will be the day that hell freezes over. And guess what…with global warming that will become even more impossible.
Nemphre
Where I come from the current model manual Corolla has a rated fuel consumption of about 33mpg. The Prius has a rated fuel consumption of about 54mpg.
I suspect that you get much better mpg than most.
Despite being often compared with the Corolla the Prius has greater interior space. I have a Prius and use it as a family car (four of us). I tested a Corolla, it’s good but felt significantly smaller inside (as does a civic).
jaje: They are in office to represent us, the public. They’d get thrown out of office if they tried to impose a gas tax. By us, the public. If you want a gas tax, you need to sell it to the general public before blaming the politicians for shortsightedness. If the politicians ignore public sentiment, as the GOP is doing on Iraq, then we have a shortsightedness issue — but one that will get corrected in the next election cycle.
dean:
So the Prius scoops up everyone that wants to be noticed
I think it’s also a remarkably attractive little car; it doesn’t look weird, but it also doesn’t look quite like anything else on the road (mostly from the rear). I’d buy it not to be seen in one, but because I like the aesthetics. I’d feel like I was getting in an anime slot car every day.
If there are better technologies for highly fuel-efficient vehicles… where are GM’s highly fuel-efficient vehicles?
The people I know that bought the Prius bought it to reduce fuel consumption (either to reduce carbon footprint or save money). Period. They’re not stupid people. If GM was building something simpler, more conventional (therefore, more readily repaired), that got fuel economy equal to the Prius, with similar interior room, etc, they’d buy it.
But, certainly not in the first model year. Like I said, they’re not stupid people.
As Geotpf mentioned, many of you are incorrect about your criticism about hybrids.
The Prius (and other Toyota hybrids) by design have less mechanical parts, and more electrical parts than compared to a regular car. That means there is automatically less service costs to deal with, since electric systems are typically more reliable than mechanical systems. With a full hybrid, the engine does in fact experience less wear and tear than a regular car, and regenerative braking extends the life of the brakes.
What does this mean for a hybrid owner? Less service costs compared to a regular car of similar quality/reliability.
Also, nobody has mentioned that Toyota will pay you $250 if you bring your dead batteries to them.
Also (this is a fact) since the first Prius came out in 1997 in Japan, there have been NO reports of dead batteries from a Prius. So we’re talking about 10 years now and still no dead batteries. Toyota gives an 8 year warranty on the batteries and hybrid system, so you know that they will last *at least* that long. Toyota claims that their hybrid batteries can last as long as 15 – 20 years.
Does anyone here realize how cheap NiMH batteries will be several years? Very cheap I will add.
If you buy a Prius now, you can expect the batteries to last 10 years at least. And in 10 years, replacement batteries should cost next-to-nothing.
All this criticism of hybrids is smoke and mirrors, built on misconceptions.
Picture a playhouse…full of life, lots of people, lights, actors belting out their lines, animation…
Soon it’s over. The crowds get up and head for the doors. The actors have all performed their bows and, by and large, have all left the stage. The lights are dimming, the few stragglers in the audience have finally left …and there are the final firm closures of the heavy exterior doors.
Yet there is Bob Lutz, alone on a very dimly lit stage (lit only with the “Exit” signs) speaking his “vision” of an automotive future.
“Wait, WAIT…HEAR me OUT!! The new Suburban…!!!, the new Escalade!!!…”
Sorry Bobby, the crowds have left.
And re. your new Aura…you’re in for a hell of a fist-fight, there buddy. I just ogled a new 2008 Accord today :)
Aura, you’re barking up a California Redwood!
Claims by any car maker that their fuel efficient cars are “enviromentally friendly” make me cringe. It’s better than running a gas guzzler, but saving the planet you’re not.
So while Lutz is spouting this out of one side of his mouth, the other side is talking up his last-ditch “hybrid” SUV’s and pick-em-up trucks. Ya can’t have it both ways, Mr. Lutz. And whether hybrid technology is here to stay, it has pushed battery and electric motor technology dramatically.
Then again, the steam guys were probably saying similar things about diesel-electric locomotives when they came out… “Stick with Steam – it’s tried and true!” Not too many steam locos out there anymore.
Johnson :
The Prius (and other Toyota hybrids) by design have less mechanical parts, and more electrical parts than compared to a regular car.
Please explain, since they have a 4-cylinder gasoline engine that works just like the one in millions of “regular” cars PLUS the mechanical parts needed to engage and disengage the electric drive motor and the mechanically-driven charging system (to include the regenerative brake system). And don’t bring up the CVT because there are hundreds of thousands of “regular” cars that use those too.
Mr WIlliams,
The Prius does have a “brake by wire” system, which eliminates a lot of mechanical components, makes the car lighter (hence, less fuel consumption) and eradicates the need for toxic brake fluid.
The Prius is environmentally friendly in more ways than fuel consumption. The carbon footprint argument does have merit because hybrids do have a rather large one, but, the more hybrids which are sold means Toyota/Honda will work out more efficient ways of manufacturing them. And don’t say that they won’t happen because Toyota fundamental principles is the elimination of “muda” (waste). So, the more which are bought, the more efficient they will become. Remember, Detroit said that “small cars cannot bear a profit”. The Japanese manufacturers beg to differ. In fact, Detroit also said they couoldn’t meet emission standards without a catlytic converter in 1975 and that the law would have to be changed, Honda proved them wrong with their CVCC engine. So, I wouldn’t take what Detroit says too seriously A piece of advice I wish I took a couple of days ago……! ;O)
Katie, it’s truly nice to see you back. If you hadn’t stayed on, I was considering dropping off (as I did from autoblog.com a year or so ago). One’s known by the company one keeps, as the saying goes.
Frank, the Prius does not have a transmission in the strictest sense. There are no gears to shift, only one planetary set, no CVT belt or metal “belt”. The simplest explanation (if such a thing is possible) is that an electric motor is attached to part of the planetary (epicyclic, in English) set, and with rotation, provides a continuously variable set-up – and can also quickly disconnect the engine from the wheels without benefit of a clutch. So while it “feels” like you are driving a CVT (like the 1950’s/1960’s DAF and all following) you are really not. There’s no belt, no pulleys, etc.
As I say, it’s hard to visualize. But trust me, it is true, the car has “less to go wrong” in the mechanical sense.
BTW the Prius cannot connect the gasoline engine to the ground in reverse. Despite whether the IC engine is running (charging the battery) or not, one of the two MG’s (“Motor Generators” not British sportscars hidden under the hood/bonnet) is solely providing tractive force to move the car backwards.
Sorry for the re-post but editing is busted again. Frank, forgot to mention, the regeneration system in Prius is not mechanical. It’s solely high-tech electronics, apart from the two permanent magnet MG’s of course….
Welcome back Katie. In my past automotive experience, the companies i worked for laughed at hybrids, the fuel efficiency benefits were always better by tweaking your engine technology and guess what, by using diesels you get the same if not better claims of fuel efficiency. yes ok i hear americans cry about carcogenics etc etc, but it works its proven and your premium is way less for a diesel than it is for a hybrid. until hybrids or whatever the next "successful" fad will be that can provide huge increases in fuel efficiency, i and many others will laugh at prius owners etc etc who have paid through the nose for a vehicle that unless driven absoloutely perfectly will not get you the mileage you think you'll get.
Katie’s back! woo-hoo! ;o)
What is Honda coming out with to challenge the Prius? Is it the FCX, or is that their hydrogen prototype?
Pound for pound, diesels are nowhere near as efficient as a hybrid powertrain.
The example I keep seeing (mainly pushed forward by VW) is their VW Polo Bluemotion emits 102gm/km2 whereas the Toyota Prius emits 104gm/km2. But there is one glaring flaw with this test. A Polo is about the size of a Toyota Yaris whereas the Prius is about the size of a VW Passat. So, a really fair comparision would be either a Toyota Yaris with a hybrid powertrain against a VW Polo Bluemotion or a VW Passat Diesel against a Toyota Prius. Either way, the hybrid comes off much better. What they, also, mention less often is that the Polo Bluemotion is about £14000 whereas the Toyota Prius is £18000. So, for an extra £4000, you get the reliability of a Toyota, with none of the electrical gremlins from VW, a more efficient powertrain, a bigger car and a lot more kudos brand wise. And as we’ve seen before, people are willing to pay a premium for a better quality car. If the auto industry were determined by price alone, then, Detroit would be streets ahead, err, not quite!
Also, if Hybrids sold in the volumes of diesels, Toyota and Honda could push the price down even further (economy of scale) to make hybrids even more viable.
The only thing which is hindering hybrids is their small sales figures. But remember, Toyota and Honda had small sales figures and look what happened to them……..
BostonTeaParty: So when the next great technology comes out in affordable cars in another 10 years, you’ll laugh at the people who were driving reliable, fuel-efficient cars for the previous 15-20 years? It’s like lauging at people who bought a Civic in 1985 because they could get a Prius today. Yeah, the joke’s on them…
Seriously, who cares about what might be better than hybrids someday? Let me say it again: THERE IS NO BETTER ALTERNATIVE AVAILABLE TODAY OR IN THE NEXT 5 YEARS WITH COMPARABLE PRICE, UTILITY, RELIABILITY AND RESALE VALUE. Hybrid tech works; it is increasingly standard in industrial transport applications (like locomotives) where dollars and cents clearly rule the day. When will we all finally agree to get over it?
Perhaps the title “Hybrid Hype RIP” has a double meaning. If you apply the “RIP” to the term “Hype” then you have the current situation.
The tax credits for Prius have ramped down and may be completely gone soon, yet sales continue to rise.
Unlike the Segway scooter, in this case when the hype has died away there is much substance replacing it.
Hybrid powertrains are at about the same level of evolution as the IBM PC-AT was when it came out in the mid 1980s. It was a leading edge second generation design that sold for $2500-$5000 per computer and had less capability than do today’s $49.99 hand held calculators. Now you can buy for $600 a desktop computer which puts a 1980s multi-million dollar Cray supercomputer to shame.
The cool thing about hybrid power-trains is that they put a larger portion of the automobile onto an electronics industry price:performance learning curve.
I don’t get the Hybrid vs. Diesel arguement. As far as I know a diesel engine and a hybrid powetrain can be combined in the same manner as a Gasoline engine and hybrid powertrain.
So what is the point of arguing about the benefits of diesel powered vehicle over a gas/hybrid vehicle?
Also, if you were to pair up a diesel engine with a hybrid powertrain would you not end up with even better mileage?
One more point. In my neck of the woods diesel can be purchased at maybe one out of every 10 gas stations. It is usually only dispened at one out of 10 or 12 pumps. You do the math! At least in the NA market Toyota and the Hybrid supports have the correct approach to solve this particular problem.
MgoBLUE, I was at the Honda dealer last weekend “considering” a left-over 2007 Honda Civic IMA (instead my ordered ’08 Prius arrived Monday – yeah!) and talked with the salesman, who I’ve visited before (in my prior Prius) and he says there will be a Prius competitor coming – a gasoline/hybrid car – at a lower price than the Civic IMA, in about 2009.
As for the FCX, Honda said 18 months ago or so that by 2008, they’d be offering some for lease in Japan and California, in pretty much the form the (burgundy and beautifully futuristic) show cars were seen.
Thing is, just like the natural gas powered Civic GX, a hydrogen fuelled car would need to be filled up at home (and specialty equipment installed).
I haven’t seen “one” hydrogen fillin’ station ’round here, nor anywhere else in my travels.
Perhaps I’ll see one before I die? (Just turned 50).
glenn126 — thanks for the info. What does IMA stand for?
Frank Williams:
Please explain, since they have a 4-cylinder gasoline engine that works just like the one in millions of “regular” cars PLUS the mechanical parts needed to engage and disengage the electric drive motor and the mechanically-driven charging system (to include the regenerative brake system). And don’t bring up the CVT because there are hundreds of thousands of “regular” cars that use those too.
As others have already mentioned, the Prius has a “brake-by-wire” system which is more reliable than traditional mechanical brakes. The regenerative braking system also extends the life of the brakes compared to a non-hybrid. Furthermore, let’s not forget the electric steering the Prius has which is more reliable than mechanical steering.
And the Prius does have a 4 cylinder like many other cars, BUT it is detuned (and runs at lower revs) meaning less stress put on the engine, AND the engine is not always on like a regular car. On average, the engine is on less than a regular car, which means again less stress put on the engine.
While it’s true that some cars might have electric steering, or some cars might have a CVT or “brake-by-wire” technology, there are no non-hybrid cars that have the combination of electric systems that the Prius has. Electric steering, brake-by-wire, CVT, regenerative braking, engine being detuned and not always turned on … combine all these things together and you have a much more reliable car than your average vehicle, which also translates to lower service costs than a typical vehicle.
Hi MgoBLUE
Honda’s IMA acronym = “Integrated Motor Assist”. While their technology is far more “simple” in some respects than Toyota/Nissan/Ford, and Hyundai/Kia are experimenting with a copy of IMA, in the big scheme of things I’d have to say the Toyota/Ford system is better, since the Honda system requires a transmission. In the case of the latest iteration of the Civic IMA, a dual pulley and steel belt constant velocity automatic. Earlier versions of the IMA Civic and Insight could have either 5 speed manual or CVT automatics.
This doesn’t mean I’m dissing the Honda system as “no-account” (aka “useless/stupid”) because it’s not.
IMHO, any hybrid system which obtains a reasonable improvement in efficiency is worth-while, whether it be hydraulic or electric.
I’m afraid my opinion of GM’s “hybrid lite” system in the Aura and Malibooby are not that positive. “So, okay, GM – you’re telling me that – with the added expense of the lite hybrid system and batteries – you’re only giving me HOW much efficiency advantage?!”
Therefore, if you are going to do hybrid, why not have 100% efficiency gain, as seen on a Prius (when compared to COMPARABLE MID-SIZED cars, not titchy little not-available-in-the-US VW Bluethingiemajigger whatever it’s called micro diesel cars with room for your @ss and a gallon of diesel – oh wait – that limerick won’t work with a diesel car, dang…)