Honda will try to out-hybrid Toyota

[AllGold]

Announcing they will introduce a hybrid-only model to compete with the Toyota Prius, plus offer a hybrid version of their Fit subcompact.

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf...233500.xml&storylist=newsmichigan

[Article Accelerator]

Even better:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/05/13/b...nissan.php

[OWC Jamie]

unless they are putting solar cells on it, it is not zero emissions
they really need to insist on the word <> being in there

[Chupa Chupa]

But BMW is going to out-hybrid all of them with their new X5 Hybrid. 36 mpg w/ combined city/hwy driving. That's compared to the 16 mpg the X5 3.0 gets.

Highlight include rad rims designed to create less drag and a solar panel on the roof to keep the transmission fluid warm so that you don't get huge fuel burn of on cold days while the engine is warming up. Pretty slick (no pun intended).

The only downside is it's still "concept," but I'm guessing w/ the price of gas now and the mpg of gas X5s it won't be for long.

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/02/bmw-reveals-hyb.html

[Racer X]

they should just go back and start making the CIVIC CRX HF-i again, back from the late 80s blueprints. 51 MPG IIRC.

fuel economy went down the toilet when everyone's ass got wide and demanded bigger vehicles loaded down with all sorts of options. That adds weight, and kills economy,

Within the middle weight range, 100 pounds takes an extra 10 hp to move it around. So the new CIVICS being 30-40% bigger/heavier than the old ones from 15-20 years ago is the core of the problem.

We already had smart cars when I was a kid. They were tiny 2 door hondas.

[deckeda]

Nailed it. Add to that the continued preoccupation with horsepower and torque --- and not just to overcome our fat asses --- and you get lackluster MPG.

Years ago you sell a car that could only do 0-60 in 12 seconds --- and the world didn't end. Nowadays, if your mom's new car doesn't do it in 8 seconds or less it's not competitively quick enough.

To be fair however, better crumple zones, stiffer structures and stability control etc. all add weight too. Not saying all that safety crap is absolutely necessary, but there it is.

[DRR]

The safety point is a very valid one and has done a lot to drive up the size of cars in recent years. That 51MPG Honda you referenced probably only had a one or two star govt crash test rating. Back then it didn't make a difference, but how many do you think they'd sell in today's market?

Gotta keep our fat asses safe.

[Racer X]

with the better designs, and better high-tensile strength steel alloys, they don't need to be as heavy as you think.

as an example. the steel reinforcing bars in the 2 doors of my '71 GSX and '72 Skylark add 125# to the weight of the cars. A '70 door is identical, but lacks the side crash bar, so thats why the weight is known. Racers figured out what the NHTSB wouldn't disclose. Now with modern steel, and a waffle weave or honey comb design, I bet they could meet standards with under 30#s. Better steel, better designs.

[Mike V]

turbo diesel makes more sense than leccky.

[simonm]

[quote Mike V]turbo diesel makes more sense than leccky.
There is also an argument that the best option would be a diesel hybrid. Diesels do very well when running at constant fairly low revs. In trains diesel electric traction is a well known technolgy afaik so the knowledge is there. It is also used in some domestic heating systems off grid - get hot water and electricity from the same device.

From what I have read, the main reason blocking the development is the lack of clean diesel in the USA. In countries where diesel is common (Europe) diesel has 6ppm sulphur of less. Apparently some US diesel had up to 200ppm in the recent past which is hard for modern diesel vehicles to handle. As the US is the major hydrid market a diesel hybrid won't happen until diesels in general are more common in the US.

I can"t remember where I read this stuff -- may have been the car review section of the la times years ago.