GM and others announce hybrid project

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cwerdna @ Aug 14 2006, 04:58 AM) [snapback]302917[/snapback]</div>

Then let's compare it to a Jetta. Sure the Jetta has 400 pounds more over the Prius, but it is safer, so that weight is probably well spent in that regard. And it's rated at 42mpg on the highway, which based on what I've read, is easier to achieve than the mid to upper 40s that the Prius gets on the highway.

If the Jetta shed about 400 pounds, it'd probably do just as well on the highway as the Prius. Of course, it wouldn't be as safe, but that's a tradeoff I guess.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 14 2006, 05:10 AM) [snapback]302919[/snapback]</div>

Are you serious with this comparison?

You are comparing a Diesel that ranks a 1 in the EPA Air Pollution score!

Not to mention that you are talking about the 06 Jetta, and there is no 07 Diesel Jetta even available!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(sl7vk @ Aug 14 2006, 01:30 PM) [snapback]303062[/snapback]</div>

Well, since we were talking mileage and weight, yes.

Are you serious with your question? Or do you want to alter the discussion?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 14 2006, 01:45 PM) [snapback]303071[/snapback]</div>

You're talking about a vehicle that isn't being built anymore.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(sl7vk @ Aug 14 2006, 01:49 PM) [snapback]303076[/snapback]</div>

You may want to tell VW that... they may not be aware that they're not building the Jetta anymore.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 14 2006, 02:16 PM) [snapback]303101[/snapback]</div>

Jetta Diesel. Find me an 07 Jetta Diesel for sale in the United States. Since you were comparing a Diesel to a Gas engine (Jetta Diesel to Prius), lets compare the Jetta gas to the Prius gas. The smallest 4 cylinder Jetta returns 32 mpg on the highway. Now that is comparing apples to apples.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(sl7vk @ Aug 14 2006, 02:23 PM) [snapback]303108[/snapback]</div>

You won't find a 07 Jetta diesel. You will find '06 Jetta diesels, as VW is (cleverly, IMO) stockpiling them to sell next year until the clean '08 Jetta diesel arrives.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cwerdna @ Aug 14 2006, 03:58 AM) [snapback]302917[/snapback]</div>

Actually the GHG emissions of the Metro XFi are exactly the same as the Prius.

So, you don't like my example of other cars getting good highway mileage without having HSD. That is what it was, it wasn't like a direct comparison of Metro vs. Prius. Ok, so how about we use the Lexus GS. I know, not tuned specifically for economy, rather sportiness while being economical, but it proves my point just the same.

GS450h - 28mpg highway - If you put 15,000 all highway miles on it the annual GHG emissions would be 6.7 tons
GS300 - 30mpg highway - If you put 15,000 all highway miles on it the annual GHG emissions would be 6.2 tons

Now the Toyota Highlander with and without HSD.

Highlander V6 4WD 5-spd auto - 24mpg highway - If you put 15,000 all highway miles on it the annual GHG emissions would be 7.7 tons
Highlander HSD 4WD CVT - 27mpg highway - If you put 15,000 all highway miles on it the annual GHG emissions would be 6.9

The gains experienced with the Highlander HSD could be contributed to the CVT alone.

My point was that the GM two-mode system will work great at low speeds like Toyota's HSD, but will also work very effectively on the highway with it's second planetary gear set.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 14 2006, 03:09 PM) [snapback]303134[/snapback]</div>

If, Volkswagon, comes out with an 08 Diesel, and that's a big if..... It's still unfair to compare a diesel to a gas engine.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AndrewGS @ Aug 14 2006, 04:25 PM) [snapback]303146[/snapback]</div>

Hi AndrewGS,

Well, lets do the apples to apples thing.

GS450H - 25 mpg City - 340 hp

GS430 - 18 mpg City - 300 hp

GS300 - 22 mpg City - 245 hp

Unless your an on-the-road regional sales guy, your driving the car in the Suburban sprawl, which is closer to the City EPA cycle than the Highway cycle. If all the cars had 340 hp the chart would be closer to this:

GS450H - 25 mpg City

GS430H at 340 hp - 15.88 mpg City (18 times 300/340)

GS300 at 340 hp - 15.85 mpg City (22 times 245/340)

So, if you want a relative comparison of how much the HSD helpes things, thats it. About a 57 percent improvement. With Atkinson cycle hybrid engine, it would probably be closer to 80 %.

On the EPA Highway test you get one regeneration, at the end of the test, and very little in the middle. The EPA Highway test difference you point out is most likely primarily due to the CVT. But, lets remember the EPA cycle is a laboratory similulation of straight and level. It has no down hill runs. So, the regeneration one can get by maintaining speed, downhill is not factored in. In this respect, the EPA test shorts the Hybrid technology. In the REAL WORLD (yes even here in Illinois) , the gas used to go up a hill is partially recovered going down a hill. In a standard car, you can only recover this energy by coasting up in speed. Which incurs more aerodynamic loss, and engine partly open throttle drag. This can be very unsafe, too. A HSD car will turn the engine off during these regeneration runs down the hill, and even stop it turning altogether. So, there is no throttle plate loss and the regeneration keeps the speed down, which results in more energy being stored in the battery rather than dissipated as heat in the air. If you maintain speed in a standard car, you burn up the gas used to go up the hill with your brakes.

I do not think I have seen this point previously. And its probably why people supporting the Yaris/Versa/Fit and even Metro cars have been getting some success in arguments. The EPA tests are not REAL WORLD, and while people have pointed out that the battery SOC has not been monitored in these tests, the batteries on the Prius and other cars hold so little energy compared to the 11 miles of energy used in the test, the difference would be small. BUT, on the other hand the energy that can be recoverd in a hilly terrain is huge, as the hills repeate many times during a 11 mile drive. This is probably why many people report getting close to the Prius combined EPA FE. Not because the EPA test is so good, not because these people drive 55 mph, but because the usual real world reduction in FE in comparison to the EPA test, is compensated for by the EPA test shorting the Hybrid ability to recover energy due to elevation undulations!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 14 2006, 06:10 AM) [snapback]302919[/snapback]</div>

If you are going to compare apples to apples, you need to compare the EPA ratings or sources who have directly compared to the two vehicles. Like:

EPA: 42 Hwy Jetta 51 Hwy Prius
Frugalympics C&D: 42 Hwy Jetta 50 Hwy Prius
USA Today Comparison: 44 Jetta 51.7 Prius (I think this one was a mixture)

Otherwise, you can say whatever you want using anecdotal evidence which may or may not be accurate. If you are going to use anecdotes about what you hear or your impression, I could just use my anecdote that I almost never have a problem getting mid to high 40's on the interstate in the Prius (only had two tanks out of 20 that were under 45 mpg at 72-75mph)

Irregardless of this, there is one four door vehicle that is not a hybrid that gets near the highway mpg of a Prius and it has the worst EPA pollution score and the Toyota vehicle with the same size engine is rated for 11mpg less on the highway. Yeap, I would call that really inefficient on the highway.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(micheal @ Aug 14 2006, 10:45 PM) [snapback]303319[/snapback]</div>

Since I have the unique experience of having owned a Jetta and currently owning a Prius, I can call it like it is.

There's no way you should honestly be able to tell me that if the Prius bulked up to the Jetta's weight it'd be as efficient. Let's not play that game.

But for a car with the Jetta's weight (and increased safety) the TDI's mileage is nothing short of remarkable. Imagine if a simple IMA/BAS system were integrated... there are a lot of possibilities there.

 

I tend to agree, Johnny: When VW makes a diesel SULEV, with Toyota Prius reliability and Toyota Prius city mpg, I want to know about it !

I would not buy it, but it would at least be worthy of consideration IMO.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Aug 14 2006, 11:48 PM) [snapback]303324[/snapback]</div>

Of course you can, if you drove in the exact same conditions in the same commute with both vehicles. And I can chalk it up as one data point.

Maybe, one data point is a convincing story for you, but the three data points I found in a two minute search disagree with your one data point. So which is a better, one data point? Or three?

BTW: I am not dismissing the Jetta mpg in anyway. Above 40 mpg hwy is good no matter what car it is. It is interesting that in your first post I replied to, you said it was based on what you have read. Now it is based on your experience. If it was based on actual comparions, why not say that in the first place?

 

I love hybrid tech, but in the larger scheme of things environmental, too much focus is put on it.

Substantial decreases in National fossil fuel use will occur when people:

Use public transportation
Walk
Bicycle
Think twice before using an ICE device, and then demand the most efficient available for job at hand.

Driving a truck on errands in the city and suburbs with one or two passengers is brain dead, hybridized or not. This is not advance, it is status quo of consumption habits that have to go the way of the dinosaur.

 

I definitely agree with that one Eric!

Too often we overlook other things that can decrease energy consumpton.
Another one that you mentioned was being huge houses that require massive amounts of energy to heat and cool.



The benefit of the bicycle and walking is also that it can be great for your health as well.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EricGo @ Aug 14 2006, 10:18 PM) [snapback]303344[/snapback]</div>

While I agree that people that never use an SUV or truck's capability shouldn't buy one, I also think that most people who buy an SUV or truck need it's capabilities 10-50% of the time and can't afford one vehicle to use when they need to go to Home Depot to remodel the kitchen or take the extended family out to dinner and another vehicle to drive to work and the market.

It's also hard to ride a bike to work when you live in the suburbs and all of the roads are farm to market or highways that connect your home to your office. Not to mention trying to associate in a professional environment after pedaling a bike several miles in 100° heat while the dewpoint reaches 75°.

The point I'm trying to make in this thread is that the people who need or just want to buy an SUV, and there will always be those that do, will at least have the option to buy a relatively clean and efficient model with the GM hybrid SUVs.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AndrewGS @ Aug 15 2006, 12:10 AM) [snapback]303369[/snapback]</div>

It might surprise you what a bit of thought will allow:

Rent a truck for the remodeling, or buy home delivery
Take *two* cars 10% of the time, rather than drive an SUV 100% of the time
Take a shower at the workplace. I know many doctors that do, after riding a bicycle to work.
Or get an electric scooter for commuting with the money saved by avoiding a $30k SUV.
... this list goes on and on ..

For every person you can *actually* identify who saves money by owning an SUV, I'll happily find you ten that do not. Just remember, your poor SUV owner has spend around $10,000 more up front on his vehicle, and spends $100 - $200 more in fuel costs EVERY MONTH compared to a sub-compact or mini car owner. SUV's and trucks in the city when not used in commerical capacities (and that does not include the dentist driving to work in his hummer) are matters of convenience and consumerism. A look around makes that pretty obvious.

The contra point I am trying to make is slightly more efficient GM hybrids that allow our fat, lazy, 'bigger is better' populace opportunity to keep on doing the same old dance is nothing to write home about.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AndrewGS @ Aug 14 2006, 12:25 PM) [snapback]303146[/snapback]</div>

I saw that their greenhouse gas score in terms of tons/year is the same, but it says nothing about some of the criteria used in assigning an EPA pollution score since there isn't one for the Metro of that vintage, unfortunately.

We'll have to see if your statement is true once GM starts shipping the above mentioned vehicles and we see real world numbers and compare them to whatever Toyota and all hybrids shipping at that time. Right now, it's just vaporware as far as I'm concerned.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cwerdna @ Aug 15 2006, 01:54 AM) [snapback]303401[/snapback]</div>

That's why I stopped participating. It's was pointless.

How can you have an objective discussion comparing real-world data to just estimates?