Hybrids make so much more sense. You’ve got the gasoline engine for quick refueling and long-distance trips. You’ve got the electric motors for in-town driving where low pollution and quietness are important. You’ve got regenerative braking capturing kinetic energy in town for high fuel economy in frequent stop and go driving regimes. And finally you’ve got the gasoline engine to power the car and recharge the batteries when they are exhausted.
I find it ironic that the hybrid cars use a fossil fuel engine to backup the electric motor plant, just like you need fossil fuel engines to backup wind and solar when they don’t work. Everything depends on fossil fuel engine backup!
My thoughts exactly. Well stated.
Even though we like our EV enough to do most of our driving (26K miles in the past 12 months), I wouldn't have gotten one unless I was married and needed two cars anyway so that the 2nd car (a pickup) can be ICE for the times an EV won't do. Even if someone is in a similar situation as me, a hybrid would be better than an EV unless you drive it at least 16K or so miles per year (EV's are cheaper to drive per mile than hybrids, but hybrids are cheap enough to so that you the threshold for miles driven to be worth the EV is a bit high.) Those numbers are based on my Alabama gasoline and power prices.
Even with all of that working in my favor I was thiiisssss close to replacing my wife's old ICE car with a hybrid instead of an EV.
I’d have to agree. And now that the early adopters have had their say, I expect BEV sales to taper off, in the coming recession especially. Hybrids seem to have proven themselves for a fairly sizable market. EVs seem like they’re primarily good for an urban niche only, as the size and cost of the infrastructure build-out needed for the net zero fantasy begins to sink in.
+1 for hybrids over EVs. Right now the Camry LE Hybrid is priced around $30K, and the higher end XLE Hybrid is priced at $34K.
In other news Car & Driver did a road test of a non-hybrid 2024 Camry SE 4-cyl. They got 45mpg on the highway, and I believe their highway test involves driving around 75mph. IMO the regular ICE 4-cyl Camry is the real bargain.
Two power sources take a lot more engineering and a many more points of failure It sounds good but it does mean more and unnecessary expense. Ice cars are very reliable and would be even more so without massive list of Government regulations from bumper to bumper.
Except ICE engines are more efficient and dependable. If you believe the Climate Scam then hybrids make sense.
Agree totally. I would have no problem getting a hybrid but never an EV.
Hybrids -- as distinct from "plug-in hybrids" (PHEVs) -- aren't using the ICE as a backup; the ICE is the original source of all of the car's energy.
The hybrid just recaptures the car's kinetic energy during braking and coasting, and uses it to charge a battery. The power generated runs all of the car's electrics, and can be used as supplemental motive power, or even exclusive motive power for short distances at low speeds.
This has other benefits -- the ICE can be optimized more for fuel economy instead of power (a/k/a the "Atkinson cycle" engine), and you can get away with a smaller ICE anyway, since you have electric assist for quick starts from stop.
This is in contrast to a conventional car, which mostly wastes energy in braking and coasting by turning it into heat and worn brake linings.
I've always thought so. Diesel electrics would be even better, but diesel is an anathema to the leftist gaia worshippers. D/E is proven technology, but we can't do it because of propaganda from the know-nothings.