GM and others announce hybrid project

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(john1701a @ Aug 11 2006, 07:17 PM) [snapback]301813[/snapback]</div>

But it IS cleaner and more efficient than a normal gas-only model. The fuel economy is 5mpg better combined than the standard 4-cyl VUE while emissions have been cut by .6 tons. It's definately better than the non-hybrid 4-cyl Highlander since it emits 1.2 tons less GHG per year.

AGAIN, it is too new to have an emissions classification yet. The EPA will evaluate it and give it either a ULEV or SULEV rating. GM does not decide this classification. No smoke and mirrors, no impersonations.

For the first year of production the two-mode system will be limited production due to capacity, but it will ramp-up after the first year and availability will expand. It's a hell of a lot better than the full-size truck/SUV system Honda or Toyota are working on (because they aren't).

 

If you're going to compare hybrids, use something like fueleconomy.gov. At least you'll get an accurate comparison of ALL of the characteristics including highway and city mpg, size of fuel tank, size of engine and green house gas emissions.

hybrid car comparison

hybrid truck comparison

hybrid SUVs

It looks like the 2WD VUE (27/32) 2.4 liter engine is going to put 6.4 tons of emissions into the air. That's the same as a 4WD Lexus 400h (31/27) 3.3 liter engine or 4WD HyHighlander (31/27) 3.3 liter engine. The Ford Escape 4WD (32/29) puts out 6.0, but didn't someone post that it's "weaker" (2.3 liter engine). Notice that both the HyHigh and the Lexus do much better in the City (31 as opposed to 27). The HyHigh has a 19 gallon tank, the Ford only 15 gallons.

SULEV covers a wide range. You can either be on the very top or the very bottom or something in between. The problem with a designation like that is you don't know what cars are just "barely" SULEV. I like their little temperature gauge for greenhouse gases. Keep your eye on the little black triangle.

As has been stated, not all hybrids are built the same. There are assist hybrids and there are full hybrids. I don't consider the 2 mpg increase in fuel economy between the regular and hybrid Silverado to be a shining example of "efficiency". It just happens to be the only truck out there except for the Sierra. Let someone build a real hybrid truck and then there'll be something to compare.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AndrewGS @ Aug 11 2006, 07:59 PM) [snapback]301806[/snapback]</div>

I think most people here welcome any hybrid that reduces emissions and fuel consumption. John1701 is kind of a 'special' case, with a bit of a Toyota fetish. If it isn't a Toyota product, it's somehow inferior, even when it's not.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AndrewGS @ Aug 11 2006, 07:38 PM) [snapback]301823[/snapback]</div>

You are confusing GLOBAL WARMING emissions with the SMOG type. They are very, very different.

There hasn't been any mention of the SMOG type actually having been reduced at all. To do that, special cleansing equipment needs to be added and/or a change to the engine itself. Neither of which GM has said anything about.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 11 2006, 08:15 PM) [snapback]301843[/snapback]</div>

You can insult all you want. But that won't reduce SMOG emissions.

Vehicles that don't achieve at least a SULEV rating are just status quo, like most all the other vehicles on the road.

If they deliver higher MPG, emissions of the SMOG type could actually be worse... as we have seen demonstrated by diesel vehicles.

 

Airborne particulate matter is what is contributing to melting glaciers. Dust falls all over the world, even in Antartica. And it makes the snow and ice melt faster. So let's please add that to the CO2 discussions.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BellBoy @ Aug 11 2006, 01:40 PM) [snapback]301579[/snapback]</div>

I believe that the best way to reduce fuel consumption is to wean ourselves from the habit or 'need' to drive vehicles with curbweights that are more than 10 times the typical payload of passengers and cargo. If this draws people away from more fuel efficient lighter cars and causes them to substitute heavier hybrid vehicles, it would be a failure in my eyes. I suspect that most buyers of a hybrid behemoth would have bought a behemoth anyways.

You're right. Hybridizing large, heavy vehicles will not result in much of a MPG increase. So what? Suppose that the Hybrid Yukon/Tahoe only increases it's MPG from 18 mpg to 22 mpg. Who cares? Saving fuel and reducing emissions is what I care about. If it does increase fuel efficiency this much, hybridizing a Yukon would reduce fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions more than hybridizing a Camry or a Civic. Yes, even thought the Camry Hybrid increases combined EPA MPG from 27 to 39 and the Civic hybrid goes from 34 to 50. When will we stop focusing on increasing MPG and start focusing on lowering fuel consumption?

Can substituting a hybrid behemoth for a conventional behemoth really save as much fuel and CO2 emissions as substituting a hybrid Camry for a conventional Camry or a hybrid Civic for a conventional Civic? According to FuelEconomy.gov, hybridizing a Camry reduces its fuel consumption by 31% and greenhouse gas emissions by 29% Hybridizing a Civic reduces its fuel consumption by 32% and emissions by 33%. If hybridizing a Yukon or Tahoe reduces its fuel consumption and emissions by even 21%, then hybridizing a Tahoe or Yukon will reduce total fuel consumption and greenhouse emissions more than hybridizing a Civic or a Camry.

On the other hand, hybridizing a Yukon would have to save over 41% in fuel and emissions in order to match substituting a Scion xB for a Yukon. Yes, this is a sacrifice. Of course this sacrifice for the environment is one which technology for the environment cannot yet match. Furthermore, there isn't any price premium for this kind of conservation. Buying a Scion xB instead of a Yukon would save the buyer over 50% on the purchase price. And depreciation in the coming years ...


---

Supporting data from FuelEconomy.gov

Camry, conventional, 4cyl, aT:
556 gallons
6.7 tons

Camry Hybrid:
385 gallons,
4.8 tons

Conservation per Camry to Camry Hybrid substitution:
171 gallons gas / year; 31%
1.9 tons greenhouse gas emissions / year; 29%


Civic (LX sedan, automatic)
441 gallons
5.5 tons

Civic Hybrid:
300 gallons
3.7 tons

Conservation per Civic to Civic Hybrid substitution:
141 gallons gas / year; 32%
1.8 tons greenhouse gas emissions / year; 33%


Tahoe or Yukon (most 'fuel efficient' versions now available)
833 gallons gas/year
10.1 tons greenhouse gasses / year

Assuming the Hybrid Tahoe/Yukon saves a mere 25% in gas and emissions:
Hybrid Tahoe/Yukon ?
625 gallons gas/year
7.6 tons greenhouse gasses / year

Predicted savings from substituting a Hybrid Tahoe/Yukon for a conventional Tahoe/Yukon:
208 gallons gas/year
2.5 tons greenhouse gasses / year

Scion xB
484 gallons gas/year
5.9 tons greenhouse gasses / year

(All of this is from FuelEconomy.gov and assumes 55% city miles, 45% highway miles, EPA fuel economy, and 15,000 miles a year.)

 

a lot of whining.... i say any hybrid is good. start out as base models and then build better ones. think of it as the model T of hybrids.

Now.. this is kinda new. They did team up with Diamler Chrysler, and BMW to develop a hybid system that will work. it's a good start. Plus.. gm is putting their "cylinder displacement" i believe it's called.. into effect... so.. when they get it all tuned up in the long run, it should do well.(plus it's a two stage like the newer high end lexus hybrids)... but it's also not full from what i hear. it's an assist, like honda.

I dont' see why you guys are trying to talk crap. If we get better reliable cars out of this, so be it. think of it as banks, and credit unions.


i swear us prius owners are turning into whining babies...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 11 2006, 08:15 PM) [snapback]301843[/snapback]</div>

Thanks for the explanation.


I really don't understand some of you. The inexpensive VUE Green Line starts at less than $23,000. That's over $10,000 less than the least expensive Highlander hybrid and over $3,000 less than the least expensive Escape hybrid. No, it's not as efficient and clean as the other two, but it's cleaner and more efficient than the non-hybrid version of all other SUVs. The lower price will make it more affordable to those that can't spend more than $23,000-25,000 on a compact SUV. Is it a replacement for a compact car or Prius? Hell no, and I don't think anyone is trying to convey that. It is an affordable replacement for the gas-only compact SUV. Some people actually need an SUV, so here's another wise choice.

As for the two-mode system you all seem to dismiss as well, some people actually need a full-size SUV. A tiny Scion XB or Escape hybrid will not do. As of right now you can't choose a better full-size when it comes to fuel economy and emissions than GM's lineup, and with the introduction of the two-mode hybrid system it will only get better.

Here's some fun info about the current full-size SUVs on sale:
2007 Chevrolet Tahoe 2WD
18mpg combined, 10.1 tons annual GHG
2006 Ford Expedition 2WD
16mpg combined, 11.7 tons annual GHG
2006 Nissan Armada 2WD
15mpg combined, 11.9 tons annual GHG
2006 Toyota Sequoia 2WD
16mpg combined, 11.1 tons annual GHG
Just for fun, the old 2006 Chevrolet Tahoe 2WD
17mpg combined, 11.0 tons annual GHG

The two-mode hybrid system will further increase GM's lead in fuel economy and emissions. Again, if you don't need a full-size SUV you should'nt buy one, but if you do which would be your choice?

As for GHG vs. smog-forming, the one to really worry about is GHG as it is what directly negatively affects the Global Warming theory. Smog is nice to cut down on, but all new cars are so clean it's not even funny. Older cars and diesels are what cause most transportation-induced smog. GHG is the number to look at.

BTW: I always use the EPA's webiste (www.fueleconomy.gov) as my fuel economy and emissions reference.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(V8Cobrakid @ Aug 11 2006, 10:42 PM) [snapback]301937[/snapback]</div>

:lol: Thankyou. I love the Prius for what it is and I plan to buy one as much as I'd rather give GM or Ford my business, but they don't build a car like the Prius. You don't see me just dismissing the Prius since it's not built by GM or Ford though.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 11 2006, 08:52 PM) [snapback]301869[/snapback]</div>

Go sprinkle some freezing-cold dust over some freezing-cold ice and see what happens.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tideland Prius @ Aug 11 2006, 11:20 PM) [snapback]301960[/snapback]</div>

The target audience is unfortunately much smaller than we hoped for though.

Dig through some of the more detailed articles. They reveal that cylinder shutdown is an integral part of the design. That's why it is targeted for large vehicles. The ones that only need 4 cylinders, like Camry, would lose that supposed advantage. Shutdown on engines with that few cylinders for sustained highway cruising isn't realistic. (You need at least 3 for complete rotation.)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(john1701a @ Aug 12 2006, 12:00 AM) [snapback]301979[/snapback]</div>

Supposed advantage? It is an advantage, an advantage that is in use today and helps Tahoe get over 21mpg on the highway without the hybrid system. The two-mode system has nothing to do with cylinder deactivation (Active Fuel Management as GM calls it). You are right about smaller engines not being able to use cylinder deactivation, but it's the bigger engines that really need it. Anything to use less fuel is an advantage.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AndrewGS @ Aug 12 2006, 10:36 AM) [snapback]302120[/snapback]</div>

You misunderstood that reference. Sorry about that. It's the nature of interpreting their spin.

By "advantage" I meant the way they portray their "two mode" as being more efficient. BY ITSELF alone, it actually isn't. But they don't tell you that. You have to discover on your own that it is IN COMBINATION with.

It would be like replacing the Prius body with a light-weight material, then giving the hybrid system credit for the efficiency improvement.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AndrewGS @ Aug 12 2006, 12:09 AM) [snapback]301944[/snapback]</div>

No problem.. it's sort of fun to watch some of his FUD and whatnot. I'm still waiting for him to make good on some of his older accusations.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AndrewGS @ Aug 12 2006, 12:09 AM) [snapback]301944[/snapback]</div>

The Saturn Aura hybrid is supposed to go on sale in December! That's the car that my Prius is being traded in on.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 12 2006, 11:59 AM) [snapback]302151[/snapback]</div>

The Aura is a great car and the Green Line will be a great option, but as I'm sure you know it won't get nearly the mileage of the Prius or Camry hybrid. It shouldn't be too hard to beat the Accord hybrid to death though.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AndrewGS @ Aug 12 2006, 03:45 PM) [snapback]302215[/snapback]</div>

If it gets what the Malibu hybrid gets (40MPG highway, 29MPG city), it'll actually beat the Camry on the Highway, while falling short on the City route. I'd expect the combined mileage to be in the mid to high 30s, and let's face it, it's got to be more of a 'drivers car' than the Camry.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AndrewGS @ Aug 11 2006, 11:09 PM) [snapback]301944[/snapback]</div>

Some people don't drive an SUV because they need to. Marketing has convinced them that they need to drive an SUV, not a car.

I think making all automobiles of any type hybrid is the way to go. But for me, I'd rather see the person in a hybrid campry, civic, Prius or whatever than driving a hybrid SUV of any kind. Because no matter how well they make the hybrid SUV, it will never get the fuel economy or LOW emissions of the hybrid cars.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AndrewGS @ Aug 11 2006, 11:09 PM) [snapback]301944[/snapback]</div>

Dust, dirty, airborne particulate matter. Call it what you want, it speeds up melting.

Do you live with snow in the winter? Put a piece of cardboard or a tarp out to cover the snow and see how fast the snow melts around it. Someone had posted a picture once but I'm not sure if it was here on Priuschat or somewhere else.

Go read up on global warming. Dirty snow melts faster than clean snow. It absorbs and retains heat. Even in the antarctic. I was watching TV about glaciers melting in Greenland and the interviewer was standing with a scientist on a glacier. The camera panned down to show the cracks. But what I saw was how dirty the top of the glacier was. But don't rely on me. Go look it up for yourself.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 12 2006, 05:34 PM) [snapback]302258[/snapback]</div>

You do know that the Escape Hybrid gets better mileage than *ANY* lexus hybrid (car or SUV), and has better emissions to boot.

You do now.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 12 2006, 04:34 PM) [snapback]302258[/snapback]</div>

I completely agree with you here. But, if they are going to buy an SUV or actually do need an SUV, I'd rather it be a hybrid or other type of high efficiency vehicle.

While I'm no geologist or any other type of scientist, I can assure you that the particulate emissions of todays cars and light trucks are miniscule. I'm sure some or most of the dirt there occurs naturally. So this one is up in the air for me (no pun intended) until I have more time to fully research it.

The two-mode system by itself efficient enough; cylinder deactivation just makes it better. The two parts of the two-mode system are 'High Speed' and 'Low Speed ' ECVT modes. Unlike the Toyota HSD which is only at peak efficiency at low speed, it is designed to be at peak efficiency at both low speeds and high speeds.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 12 2006, 05:12 PM) [snapback]302264[/snapback]</div>

What kind of BS are you pushing now?

The Escape is the only one with a 4-cylinder engine. So of course it gets better mileage. Geez!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AndrewGS @ Aug 12 2006, 05:48 PM) [snapback]302288[/snapback]</div>

True. And thank you for being objective. The next step is to analyze the application of it.

The system uses clutches. What mechanical linkage & sensors are needed for them to operate? How much does that add to the cost? How much of a gain does that actually provide?

In other words, what is its worth? That's just like asking which battery type to use. Differences offer pluses & minuses. It's the balance of the two that we are interested in. Will that be something that consumers will want to pay for?

Remember, GM has been mocking the "full" hybrid design for years with reasoning of cost & complexity. Now they are planning to offer one themselves, only their system will be more expensive and more complex. So it is a very fair question to question that. They are now endorsing the very thing they were recently fighting.