The Prius gas-guzzler vs. the SUV planet-saver

Wow.. Interesting article, interesting responses in regards to the email sent to him.

I have a few issues with it. Obviously the original comparison is flawed. Every vehicle has a purpose and if that vehicle is used for that purpose, then I think it's perfectly reasonable. I think large trucks/SUV's..etc have a place in society. The problem however is that most people DON'T use vehicles as they are intended. How many large trucks/Suv's have just 1 person in it?

Example 1: I used to drive a Jeep Grand Cherokee getting 16mpg. I traded it in for a Prius getting (lifetime average over 22k miles) 47mpg. I typically drive alone. So, which vehicle was gas guzzler?

Example 2: I was going with 3 friends (none of which are tiny - 3 average sized guys and 1 above average) to a Patriots game. I told them I'd drive. They thought I was crazy and we wouldn't fit everything. We did in fact fit everything we need and I'm sure I got over 45mpg (I've never had a tank below that).

So, aside from the apples to oranges comparison the author made, he also is oblivious to what the actual capacity of the Prius is. Sure, it's not right for all situations, but it certainly would be capable of holding 4 small kids and their soccer gear.

For the family with 5 kids, I'd say the expedition is probably a fine choice. And for the soccer mom that has 1 or 2 kids and takes some extra kids to the game, she would do just fine in a Prius. Maybe she'd just take 1 less kid.

 

I simply wish we would stop blaming the vehicles and focus on driver education. When better fuel economy makes economic sense for the average driver over the average lifetime of the vehicle taking into all costs like insurance, excise taxes, luxury taxes, tax incentives, and upkeep, without being more of a hassle to use for the average consumer, then more fuel efficient cars will displace the existing fleet of automobiles.

Until then, I believe we should encourage relaxing legislation on existing cars that are off warranty and encourage implementation of better flowing air filters, more freequent tune ups, aftermarket computer tuning, and less restricive exhaust systems on the current fleet of gas guzzling vehicles that most of us own.

Here is a link to a recent article in our local newspaper that drives home my position of driver education being the single best thing we can do for fuel economy in this country:

http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/news/state/060528gas.shtml

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tnthub @ Jun 18 2006, 11:25 AM) [snapback]273030[/snapback]</div>

Sounds like you'll do anything, even compromise air quality to justify not buying a highly fuel efficient car.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tnthub @ Jun 18 2006, 08:25 AM) [snapback]273030[/snapback]</div>

I'm smart as hell about driving. Just ask me. I'll tell you.

But I can't buy a car that doesn't burn gasoline. So how much good does all that education do for me? 20mpg? 40mpg? 60mpg? It is all about gasoline still. Fortunately I was a smart enough driver to buy an EV when I had the chance. I'm not blaming the vehicles. I'm blaming the LACK of green vehicles.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AnOldHouse @ Jun 18 2006, 01:14 PM) [snapback]273092[/snapback]</div>

Actuallt my wife sells Toyotas, especially the Prius... I think you will find that in a conventional car, if the engine works less hard to pull air in and less hard to push exhaust out, that more energy is available for motion. Less fuel burned equates to less polution in a general sense.

I'm not her to start an argument but if you take the time to read the article link I posted you will see about a 90% difference in fuel economy in the same car, on the same route, with two different drivers.

We happen to have a great many older cars on the road and the way to make the most positive impact to our fuel and environmental situation is to make those vehicles more efficient while the newer technologies are integrated into our buying habits.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tnthub @ Jun 18 2006, 03:21 PM) [snapback]273136[/snapback]</div>

I read the article and I think it's something we all knew. The driver has a lot to do with fuel efficiency. And while the article does have a point, it's also comparing 2 extremes. And what happens if you take those same two drives and put them each in a Prius and run the same experiment? I bet the lead foot guy wouldn't get half the mileage. I've driven my prius like a race car at times and I have never gotten below 40mpg on a fill up.

In regards to the original post, I was thinking as I was driving today - What would the author of that article have preferred the Prius drive to be driving? If you are alone, is the Prius (or better yet insight) the most fuel efficient vehicle of choice? Maybe the SUV isn't the planet saver - maybe the soccer mom should buy a bus and pick up the whole soccer team?

And as is the case in both articles, extremes are being measured. Here's an example based on the author's thinking. Killer vs Hero. (This is fictional) A major terrorist was killed last week just days prior to him setting off a bomb that surely would have killed 50 innocent people. The terrorist was kill by John Doe as he proceded to go on a killing spree in a parking lot one day after his car wouldn't start. In addition to the terrorist being killed, 9 other innocent victims were killed. Due to the fact that John Doe's actions saved the lives of 50 others, he is being honored later today at town hall.

While I go to the extreme, I thought this was a funny way of illustrating my point. How can we say an SUV getting 16mpg (that's what mine got) is a planet saver and a car getting 50mpg is a gas guzzler? I guess in the author's mind, same way we might make a killer a hero?

What it really comes down to is whether or not someone is using the best vehicle suited for their needs. A soccer mom who constantly takes 5 kids to soccer practice, may very well be doing so with the SUV. A consultant like myself who travels 30k miles a year is perfectly suited for a Prius. Maybe the other soccer mom though, who has 2 kids might also do well in a Prius. Anyone can justify the need for a gas guzzling SUV, but it's the smart people who find a way to make alternative (less wasteful) solutions work.

How's that Mom's fuel consumption after she's dropped the kids off and is driving alone?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tnthub @ Jun 18 2006, 03:21 PM) [snapback]273136[/snapback]</div>

That's very nice, but I see you don't actually own one yourself. What do you drive?

And all the forgoing still doesn't justification your statement that we "should encourage relaxing legislation on existing cars that are off warranty," which is clearly another way to say dropping emmissions and clean air standards on vehicles generally 3 or more years old.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Maytrix @ Jun 18 2006, 10:20 PM) [snapback]273253[/snapback]</div>

Maybe Dad in the Prius will go pick up the kids after soccer is over.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tnthub @ Jun 18 2006, 08:25 AM) [snapback]273030[/snapback]</div>

I'm sorry, but if better driver education worked here in the United States, the people you see on the streets would be naturally preferring fast, nimble cars, they would only pass on the left, they would be able to yak on the celphone and cut a high-speed corner with near-full road awareness, yadda, yadda, IMO.

However, since we cherish our freedoms so much here in the States, the roads are total chaos with formal rules taught, but not usually followed in reality. Drivers' education mostly focuses on keeping us safe, and not making us better drivers.

If we were really serious, it would start with a driver's license test 3x as hard focusing on what amounts to making drivers the equivalent of low-speed race car drivers. Even in Japan, they have separate licenses for manual vs auto. But no, we practically pass anybody that can roll a car down the road without hitting somebody, and that's good enough.

Therefore, because we cherish this freedom to be chaotic with no restrictions on being able to drive and how we drive, IMO, it's a zero sum game to get to better fuel-economy. People will drive badly and very badly, so target it so that even the lowest common denominator gets great economy, and that's what the Prius can give us to start.

IMO, there's academia, and then there's the real world.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AnOldHouse @ Jun 18 2006, 10:40 PM) [snapback]273260[/snapback]</div>

I have a 2000 Bonneville which averages between 30-36, depending on whether or not the miles are highway or city.When I obtaned the car it was getting what the window sticker predicted with a top mpg of 30 on the highway.

Car manufacturers produce vehicles that will sell and not usually the best vehicles to accomplish a task (except increase sales).

Mt brother was driving a 1990 Lincoln Continental until a few years ago and getting 14-16 mpg. I was able to obtain 25....

I am trying to learn about the Prius. I have driven a couple of newer Prius, and a Hylander.

If relaxing regulations will decrease fuel consumption and increase air quality then why not do it? New hybrid technology (probably a stepping stone technology), will likely be here in force for 40 years but acceptance is slow at the beginning so why not save some petrol and improve the air while it is catching on.

I don't understand the concept of ignoring the enormous base of older cars that are on the road when that is where we can make a large positive impact with technology that already existsm that is already carb compliant, and we know functions in the manner intended.

The ultimate answer to a cleaner environment and less petroleum usage is a fuel other than gasoline or diesel.

Relaxing "requirements" to modify older vehicles is needed to legally perform modifications that will improve the emissions and improve the fuel economy. I am not talking about changing the air quality standards, but I am talking about reprogramming computers, changing gear ratios, and modifying exhaust and air intakes.