Saturn Aura Hybrid

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Apr 8 2007, 11:21 AM) [snapback]419792[/snapback]</div>

We're not differing here; we're saying two completely separate things.

A system like HSD does have advantages over a standard-engine truck with a simple system that would auto stop/auto start the engine, do some regenerative braking, and give a mild kick during initial acceleration. I don't think anyone questions that.

But that doesn't change the fact that the simple system added on to a standard engine truck, given how much gas that standard engine uses at idle and during initial acceleration, would still be of benefit.

So a big V8 that does nothing but stop the engine at traffic lights and restart it, and give some mild kick to initial acceleration, will be hugely meaningful in city driving--especially given how much gas that thing uses just sitting at idle. Percentage wise, it's a very, very significant improvement.

Will that truck ever get 40mpg? Nope. Will the gas and pollution savings benefit of even a mild battery add-on system such as a basic IMA be significant? Yep--because driving a big pickup truck in city traffic is already so horrendously inefficient. A 5mpg increase with the corresponding pollution decrease is huge for that truck.

And if GM wants to do that, GM needs to be encouraged to do that. Everyone needs to start somewhere, and any company that wants even to start doing it must be encouraged by the public, not shunned simply because "you're not building a Prius, and you're not doing a full-out Prius-like system that's engineered to the nth degree, so you suck".

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(adam1991 @ Apr 8 2007, 11:57 AM) [snapback]419818[/snapback]</div>

We aren't trying to save gas.

We are trying to use less in the first place.

There's a difference.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(john1701a @ Apr 8 2007, 02:24 PM) [snapback]419850[/snapback]</div>

Really?

If I have a system designed to save gas, so that it's consumption is the same as a system that uses less in the first place, isn't that the same?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(adam1991 @ Apr 8 2007, 01:57 PM) [snapback]419818[/snapback]</div>

GMC Sierra mild has two mpg better in the city based on EPA tests--12.5% improvement. Not exactly what I call a significant improvement. Not to say that other hybrid systems wouldn't have a larger improvement, but the basic start/stop doesn't work to well apparently.

Based on EPA Air Pollution Score, both the hybrid and normal version get a 3 out of 10.

Every little bit helps for sure and I often think about how much gas would be saved if all cars would stop at a stoplight. Nevertheless, I think a lot of people's frustration is that the technology to do dramatically improve fuel economy is available now, most automakers just aren't willing to utilize it. If an automaker chooses either 10% improvement or 50% improvement, I for one don't feel like heralding their ingenuity and giving them a pat on the back if they just choose 10%.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(micheal @ Apr 8 2007, 02:46 PM) [snapback]419881[/snapback]</div>

Wasn't that before the new EPA scores? What are the new EPA for the Sierra?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Apr 8 2007, 04:55 PM) [snapback]419887[/snapback]</div>

Good question, I'm not sure. I just went to the fuel economy site and check the specs for 2007 models, assuming it would be update their first. I'm not sure where else to find the update numbers.

I would think very little change in the new test since the range is small anyway, I could see the A/C use and heavy acceleration affecting both equally. I think the EPA test has at last some "stops" but I wonder if it is includes "sitting" at a stoplight. I am too lazy to go look it up right now.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(micheal @ Apr 8 2007, 01:01 PM) [snapback]419891[/snapback]</div>

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorS...%20Hybrid%202WD
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorS...%20Hybrid%204WD
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorS...%20Hybrid%202WD
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorS...%20Hybrid%204WD

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(adam1991 @ Apr 8 2007, 09:57 AM) [snapback]419818[/snapback]</div>

How much gas does that kind of engine use at idle? Numbers please. Quantity of gas per unit time. I suspect that it is a miniscule fraction of the gas used during driving.

 

No just auto-stop, but a boost on initial acceleration.

A "mild" hybrid should never be dismissed or shunned simply because it isn't a Prius. Every effort should be applauded and encouraged.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(adam1991 @ Apr 9 2007, 05:28 AM) [snapback]420184[/snapback]</div>

Praise should be given based on merit... just like grades in school.

If there is no smog-related emission reduction whatsoever, an "A" is not appropriate.

 

Even a mild hybrid will result in a reduction of smog-related emissions.

And do you treat the slow kids the same way you treat an advanced kid? I figure, don't slam the slow kid (GM) for not being at or above grade level. Give him praise. Don't make him go home crying and not even try.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(adam1991 @ Apr 9 2007, 11:59 AM) [snapback]420333[/snapback]</div>

Barely, perhaps. But some don't earn a better emission rating than their non-hybrid counterpart.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(adam1991 @ Apr 9 2007, 11:59 AM) [snapback]420333[/snapback]</div>

GM is an advanced kid. GM is a giant with a wide array of resources available. GM has already proven capable. So there is no excuse for delivering the minimum.

Gas prices and emissions (both smog & carbon) are problems we are already facing. How much longer should we have to wait?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(adam1991 @ Apr 9 2007, 08:59 AM) [snapback]420333[/snapback]</div>

GM is an oversized bully who steals the other kids' lunch money and threatens to beat up anybody who tries to get it to stop throwing his garbage in the sand pit.

(Bringing a lawsuit against the CARB, and forcing the elimination of the ZEV mandate.)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Apr 12 2007, 12:14 PM) [snapback]422037[/snapback]</div>

Toyota was just as involved with these measures. Fair is fair, dude.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Apr 12 2007, 10:21 AM) [snapback]422074[/snapback]</div>

Was Toyota a participant in the lawsuit against CARB?

Anyway, I've said I'd buy an EV from GM if they're the first to market with a car that meets my needs: Freway-capable and 100 mile range in pure EV mode. (That can be a pure EV with a 100-mile range, or it can be a Volt or Volt-like PHEV that will drive 100 miles at freeway speed before turning on the gas engine. I'm no longer willing to accept a plug-in hybrid that runs the gas engine after a short EV run or whenever freeway speed or brisk acceleration is demanded.)

And while Toyota did indeed kill its EV program, it did not refuse to sell those it built, so that now there are at least a few still on the road. And Toyota was not even in the picture when GM killed mass transit in L.A., and probably elsewhere, when I was very young.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Apr 13 2007, 10:34 AM) [snapback]422574[/snapback]</div>

Yes, and Toyota is even now suing California to prevent a proposed decrease in emissions for cars. But whatever, they need to sell more Land Cruisers.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Apr 13 2007, 11:29 AM) [snapback]422642[/snapback]</div>

Way to mis-represent

Toyota is saying that the US should pick one standard and not have a patchwork requiring different designs and tests for different states.

The same thing the Gas Manufacturers are saying about fuel blends.

Anytime you fragment the market, costs go up for everyone, especially the consumer.

The argument is about whether regulation should be at the Federal or State level.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tempus @ Apr 13 2007, 12:32 PM) [snapback]422706[/snapback]</div>

They are suing... you can't misrepresent that.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Apr 13 2007, 08:29 AM) [snapback]422642[/snapback]</div>

Well then, shame on them.

I still think GM is worse, but I've always said that the difference between Toyota and GM is not that Toyota is all green and cuddly, but that Toyota saw and met a demand for greener cars, and Toyota understands that in the long run, impeccable quality sells cars and gains market share.

Every business is in it to make money.