Posted on 07/12/2007 11:13:17 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
Rumblings in the automotive world suggest that Honda killing its Accord hybrid may have been just the canary in the over-hyped hybrid coal mine. Honda’s decision raises the question: Are hybrids just a fad -- a short-term solution to a long-term problem?
Until now, the big reason why people bought hybrids was the dual promise of frugal fuel consumption and zero emissions — save your money, save the Earth.
Trouble is, the media has generated enough hybrid hype that dealers are reluctant to negotiate on the purchase price. Beyond the current get-‘em-while-you-can government rebates, zero per cent financing or cash-back incentives on hybrids in Canada are about as rare as free gas.
Hybrid operating costs also need to be heeded.
Do you drive at the speed of traffic on the highway in less than ideal conditions (i.e., when it's windy and the road is hilly?) Or live in a climate where you use your car’s defroster or air conditioning (which, here in Ottawa, where we go from winter frost to summer humidity over lunch, is about 365 days of the year)? Using the condenser in the A/C system uses more power, which uses more fuel.
If this sounds like your driving lifestyle, you can pretty much forget about achieving the typically surreal fuel consumption estimates that most hybrids claim.
(In addition, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is in the process of updating its fuel consumption testing for the first time in more than 40 years to include real-world conditions. Not surprisingly, hybrids — like all other cars — take a beating. Some experts are estimating a 20 per cent increase in consumption compared to the current EPA ratings.)
The final reason hybrids may end up as a passing fancy is that, in a traditional sense, they effectively remove the act of driving as a visceral experience.
So hybrids are expensive to own, don’t deliver on advertised fuel consumption and are about as exciting to drive as a Kenmore side-by-side. Yet hybrid fans can absolve their vehicles of all these sins by self-righteously claiming ownership of the low emissions crown, right?
Yes, up until now.
New car customers are demanding vehicles that are cleaner, and more fuel-efficient — without the extra costs and driving compromises that are inherent with hybrids. And automakers are responding.
One example is the very non-hybrid Mini D. Not planned for Canada (yet), it will arrive in Europe later this summer.
The “D” is for diesel. And if you’re thinking, “Oooo, a stinky, soot emitting diesel” you would be wrong. In addition to achieving a better-than-60 U.S. m.p.g. (3.9 L/100 km) rating, the Mini D’s carbon dioxide tailpipe emissions are 104 g/km — a figure that, not incidentally, matches the cleaner-than-thou Prius.
And it’s not just the Mini D that can achieve hybrid-like fuel consumption and emissions without asking owners to sacrifice traditional car ownership expectations.
By way of stop-and-start technologies, sophisticated aerodynamics or the use of low weight materials, European-only cars like BMW’s 118 D, Volkswagen’s Polo Bluemotion or Peugeot 107 are not only mean with fuel, but also green.
Hybrids have been perceived as a panacea to our planet’s non-renewable energy and dirty skies crisis. But they’re really only one solution. There needs to be a greater variety of “green” vehicles that can meet the diversity of people’s needs, which would have a further-reaching positive environmental impact.
As a more mainstream solution that’s cheaper to own, and more fun to drive, maybe we can look at what Honda will be replacing its Accord hybrid with in 2009: an ultra clean 2.2-litre D-I-E-S-E-L.
There’s an old adage in the car business: “There’s an ass for every seat”. Which has never been truer than when it comes to hybrids. If people are stupid enough to fall for buying them, by all means they should buy them.
Added!
We’re just old farts, that’s all...
:)
I’ve actually got both - a Camry and a Taurus.
In real world conditions, mine get the same mpg (within about 0.5 mpg, but neither is consistently on top)....
I’m just amazed at how people rail against the mpg figures as inaccurate, but use them to decide one model is more fuel efficient than the other.... they aren’t all biased by the same amount, and some actually do meet their mpg figures. Hybrids are notorious for failing to meet their numbers, but they still get good mpg.
Actually, here are some interesting numbers:
So except for the 2008 4WD version (sample size=1), they all exceed the EPA estimates.
I have access to two different company pickups that I take home for commuting to work. ONe is a 96 F250 2wd with the old fashioned 5.8 liter pushrod 2valve per cylinder, V8 motor, throttle body injection, 4 speed auto overdrive trans, twin 18gallon fuel tanks and about 150,000 miles on odometer.
The other is a 99 F250 2wd with the modern 5.4 liter V8 with sequential injection, overhead cams, 3 valves per cylinder, 4 speed auto overdrive trans, one 35 gallon gas tank, and about 75,000 miles on odometer.
The company buys the gas, so I don’t figure fuel economy or even worry about it. But I’ve noticed that the 99 ford goes through about one tank of fuel in a weeks time of commuting plus errands. The older 96 ford will almost get through one week without using the second gas tank at all...call it 4 days.
The newer ford is noticeably more powerful and accelerates like a hotrod, while the older ford is very sluggish. I have no idea what the EPA mileage ratings are on these two. But there is a HUGE difference in fuel consumption. One would think the newer smaller more advanced motor would be the better in terms of fuel economy. But this is most definitely NOT THE CASE.
There appears to be very little progress being made in fuel economy...if any.
Yes.
My 25 year old diesel VW Rabbit pickup gets better mileage than a hybrid. The pickup cost me roughly the price of a new battery pack for a hybrid.
You missed the point. On the commute I mentioned, half the time you are sitting still or moving 4 mph. IN a Prius, the engine is never running at that point, even to creep along, until it uses up the battery, and then the engine runs for just a bit with all the power recharging the battery.
The Geo gets LOUSY gas mileage when the engine is running and it’s not moving. 0 mpg, to be exact.
I haven’t had to spend money to fix mine yet, but I can’t say it hasn’t had a problem. I’ve got about 41,000 miles on it, and I just burned out the Inverter on a trip two weeks ago.
On the other hand, I called my Toyota dealer, he found a toyota dealer within 10 miles of where I was, I called them up, they towed the car, rented me a car for free, and I was back on the road in less than 2 hours. And I had my car back the next day, no charge.
I was looking at new cars last year, and I could not make the math work on a Prius (or any other hybrid.) Gas would have to be over $4 a gallon for it to work out cheaper than a smaller traditional car.
At the time, there was not a lot of information (reliable at least) that I could base the higher price / higher mileage cost of ownership.
Based on your story (and others) and I might re-visit it in a year or two when I start the process again. I put about 40,000 miles year on a car so I tend to go through them pretty quickly—and get very little for trade in’s (based on their age—the mileage kills me every time.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.