Diesels making Hybrid obsolete
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 745
From: New Jersey
Originally posted by muckz
Did you notice the H badge on the trunk of that european Accord? However, the steering clearly has the A symbol for Acura.
What gives?
Did you notice the H badge on the trunk of that european Accord? However, the steering clearly has the A symbol for Acura.
What gives?
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,712
From: Ontario
Originally posted by Big Als Z
Sad part is that none of the progress that GM makes in Hybrid cars, that will actualy make an impact on the world, will never be talked about and just be a footnote. But look at that fancy computer screen in the Prius!! oooooo
Sad part is that none of the progress that GM makes in Hybrid cars, that will actualy make an impact on the world, will never be talked about and just be a footnote. But look at that fancy computer screen in the Prius!! oooooo
GM is pursuing the correct strategy by targeting larger vehicles such as buses or its pickup trucks. Increasing the mileage of a gas-hog by 30% saves a lot more fuel than increasing the mileage of an econobox by 30%. Problem is, when a truck goes from 10 mpg to 13 mpg, people don't think that's nearly as impressive as when a car goes from 30 mpg to 39 mpg, even though the truck will save 3 times as much fuel over the same distance.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,472
From: South Bend, Indiana
Originally posted by R377
Toyota knows how the play the media to its advantage, that's for sure. And the tree-hugging journalists (who obviously don't possess calculators or common sense) lap it right up.
GM is pursuing the correct strategy by targeting larger vehicles such as buses or its pickup trucks. Increasing the mileage of a gas-hog by 30% saves a lot more fuel than increasing the mileage of an econobox by 30%. Problem is, when a truck goes from 10 mpg to 13 mpg, people don't think that's nearly as impressive as when a car goes from 30 mpg to 39 mpg, even though the truck will save 3 times as much fuel over the same distance.
Toyota knows how the play the media to its advantage, that's for sure. And the tree-hugging journalists (who obviously don't possess calculators or common sense) lap it right up.
GM is pursuing the correct strategy by targeting larger vehicles such as buses or its pickup trucks. Increasing the mileage of a gas-hog by 30% saves a lot more fuel than increasing the mileage of an econobox by 30%. Problem is, when a truck goes from 10 mpg to 13 mpg, people don't think that's nearly as impressive as when a car goes from 30 mpg to 39 mpg, even though the truck will save 3 times as much fuel over the same distance.
But everything else is correct, GM is taking the right road as is Toyota... The consumer will see fuel savings on a personal level with Toyota's Prius and the economy in general will appreciate what GM is doing with mass transportation fuel savings.
And these "tree hugging" journalists appreciate what GM is doing as well, read up a little more and you'd be surprised. GM is recieving a lot of praise for what they have in store for us in the near future.
As for Diesels..... What regular small gas engines save in emissions is worth whatever slight advantage an equal deisel would save in fuel economy IMHO. "Diesels making Hybrid obsolete," is a completely biased and completely false statement. Its actually the other way around in the US market.
Last edited by Meccadeth; Jun 15, 2004 at 07:48 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,712
From: Ontario
Originally posted by Meccadeth
I agree with everything except that last part... they would save equal amounts of fuel over the same distance..... right?
I agree with everything except that last part... they would save equal amounts of fuel over the same distance..... right?
Normal truck: 300 miles / 10 mpg = 30 gallons burned
Hybrid truck: 300 miles / 13 mpg = 23 gallons burned
Savings: 7 gallons
Normal car: 300 miles / 30 mpg = 10 gallons burned
Hybrid car: 300 miles / 39 mpg = 7.7 gallons burned
Savings: 2.3 gallons
Therefore the hybrid truck saved (7 / 2.3 =) 3 times as much fuel as the hybrid car.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,647
From: Jupiter, FL
Originally posted by Aeromaks
Because our Acura TL and Acura TSX are the regular Honda Accords in Asia.
Because our Acura TL and Acura TSX are the regular Honda Accords in Asia.
The vid clearly shows this...
more pics
Last edited by ImportedRoomate; Jun 15, 2004 at 09:09 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 439
From: Northern VA
What Imported Roommate said.
The Acura is an American-spec car (the guy who owns it is stationed at Ramstein AF base, had his TL shipped over there).
Note that the European Accord (like the Diesel noted) and the Acura TSX are the same exact chassis/body. The US-spec Accord is a "plus-size" vehicle.
Trouble is, that's easier said than done. Ford dropped its Explorer hybrid program altogether, because they couldn't get more than 10% fuel economy improvements out of it, without making some SERIOUS design compromises. When you're carrying 4500+ lbs through the city, have a giant frontal area, and roll on high aspect tires, there's only so much you can do with current (and short-term future) technology.
The Acura is an American-spec car (the guy who owns it is stationed at Ramstein AF base, had his TL shipped over there).
Note that the European Accord (like the Diesel noted) and the Acura TSX are the same exact chassis/body. The US-spec Accord is a "plus-size" vehicle.
Increasing the mileage of a gas-hog by 30% saves a lot more fuel than increasing the mileage of an econobox by 30%.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 356
From: Providence, RI, USA
Diesels have a greater impact on the environment than gasoline engines, even though they get better outright fuel mileage. Soot particles change the reflectivity of the snow/ice in polar regions, increasing global warming (that's the *theory*, anyway).
My personal observation is that Europe is MUCH hazier than the U.S., and every fuel station is fricking swimming in oily diesel fuel, what a MESS.
Direct injection gasoline engines should make automotive diesels obsolete in this country. Europe for some reason subsidizes diesel (or, rather doesn't tax it as much as gasoline), so diesel will continue to be the engine of choice there. But WHY does Europe want everyone running diesels? I don't get it.
The idea that a 13mpg truck "saves" more fuel than a 39mpg compact is absurd, given that ~95% of trucks in this country are used as commuter cars ~95% of the time. Are we retarded or what? Anyway, the truck clearly USES 3 times as much fuel as the car. The truth is we don't need ANY new technology to drastically reduce our dependency on foriegn oil and our impact on the environment. We just need to drive smaller, lighter-weight, more fuel efficient vehicles more appropriate for our usage.
Am I a hypocrite of sorts? Er, yeah I guess so...
My personal observation is that Europe is MUCH hazier than the U.S., and every fuel station is fricking swimming in oily diesel fuel, what a MESS.
Direct injection gasoline engines should make automotive diesels obsolete in this country. Europe for some reason subsidizes diesel (or, rather doesn't tax it as much as gasoline), so diesel will continue to be the engine of choice there. But WHY does Europe want everyone running diesels? I don't get it.
The idea that a 13mpg truck "saves" more fuel than a 39mpg compact is absurd, given that ~95% of trucks in this country are used as commuter cars ~95% of the time. Are we retarded or what? Anyway, the truck clearly USES 3 times as much fuel as the car. The truth is we don't need ANY new technology to drastically reduce our dependency on foriegn oil and our impact on the environment. We just need to drive smaller, lighter-weight, more fuel efficient vehicles more appropriate for our usage.
Am I a hypocrite of sorts? Er, yeah I guess so...
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Originally posted by Dan Baldwin
The idea that a 13mpg truck "saves" more fuel than a 39mpg compact is absurd, given that ~95% of trucks in this country are used as commuter cars ~95% of the time. Are we retarded or what? Anyway, the truck clearly USES 3 times as much fuel as the car. The truth is we don't need ANY new technology to drastically reduce our dependency on foriegn oil and our impact on the environment. We just need to drive smaller, lighter-weight, more fuel efficient vehicles more appropriate for our usage.
Am I a hypocrite of sorts? Er, yeah I guess so...
The idea that a 13mpg truck "saves" more fuel than a 39mpg compact is absurd, given that ~95% of trucks in this country are used as commuter cars ~95% of the time. Are we retarded or what? Anyway, the truck clearly USES 3 times as much fuel as the car. The truth is we don't need ANY new technology to drastically reduce our dependency on foriegn oil and our impact on the environment. We just need to drive smaller, lighter-weight, more fuel efficient vehicles more appropriate for our usage.
Am I a hypocrite of sorts? Er, yeah I guess so...
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,801
From: Nashville, TN
Originally posted by Dan Baldwin
The idea that a 13mpg truck "saves" more fuel than a 39mpg compact is absurd, given that ~95% of trucks in this country are used as commuter cars ~95% of the time. Are we retarded or what? Anyway, the truck clearly USES 3 times as much fuel as the car. The truth is we don't need ANY new technology to drastically reduce our dependency on foriegn oil and our impact on the environment. We just need to drive smaller, lighter-weight, more fuel efficient vehicles more appropriate for our usage.
The idea that a 13mpg truck "saves" more fuel than a 39mpg compact is absurd, given that ~95% of trucks in this country are used as commuter cars ~95% of the time. Are we retarded or what? Anyway, the truck clearly USES 3 times as much fuel as the car. The truth is we don't need ANY new technology to drastically reduce our dependency on foriegn oil and our impact on the environment. We just need to drive smaller, lighter-weight, more fuel efficient vehicles more appropriate for our usage.
The issue is that if a 13mpg truck goes to 16 mpg, that is a 19% improvement, whereas a 33mpg car going to 36 is only an 8% improvement. If both vehicles travel the same distance every day, because the truck uses far more to start with, any savings will make a greater impact on overall consumption because the car's consumption is already very low as a percentage of the whole.
Yes the truck still uses far more gas but the total amount of fuel saved will also be far greater in the MPG improvements to the truck vs. to the car. Plus given the massive sales volumes of trucks and SUVs compared to compact cars, the potential to save millions of gallons is far greater by improving big users even a little, vs. making sipper cars sip even more sparingly.
Unless you FORCE us to drive little efficient cars, this is the best way.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 356
From: Providence, RI, USA
The comparison discussed above assumed a 30% improvement for the truck and the car (10-13 for the truck, 30-39 for the car).
The larger point is, it is foolish for us to continue to consume fuel as rapidly as we can. The obvious solution of increasing CAFE standards and applying them equally to trucks/SUVs that aren't work vehicles is, unfortunately, politically impossible, given that the domestic manufacturers can only seem to sell trucks/SUVs (domestic market share doesn't decline each year ONLY because people are buying more trucks/SUVs and fewer cars, GOD knows why...).
The larger point is, it is foolish for us to continue to consume fuel as rapidly as we can. The obvious solution of increasing CAFE standards and applying them equally to trucks/SUVs that aren't work vehicles is, unfortunately, politically impossible, given that the domestic manufacturers can only seem to sell trucks/SUVs (domestic market share doesn't decline each year ONLY because people are buying more trucks/SUVs and fewer cars, GOD knows why...).
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,712
From: Ontario
Originally posted by Dan Baldwin
The obvious solution of increasing CAFE standards and applying them equally to trucks/SUVs that aren't work vehicles is, unfortunately, politically impossible, given that the domestic manufacturers can only seem to sell trucks/SUVs (domestic market share doesn't decline each year ONLY because people are buying more trucks/SUVs and fewer cars, GOD knows why...).
The obvious solution of increasing CAFE standards and applying them equally to trucks/SUVs that aren't work vehicles is, unfortunately, politically impossible, given that the domestic manufacturers can only seem to sell trucks/SUVs (domestic market share doesn't decline each year ONLY because people are buying more trucks/SUVs and fewer cars, GOD knows why...).
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Originally posted by R377
I wouldn't call that the obvious solution. This was debated indepth a few months ago , but the obvious solution is increasing gas taxes. That encourages everyone to conserve, not just the 10% or so of the population that is buying a new car in any given year. And given enough time to phase it in, it also allows the manufacturers to respond to true market demand and price vehicles accordingly, instead of essentially being forced to try to sell unwanted smaller vehicles to offset the mileage of the bigger vehicles that the consumer really wants. Plus the tax is largely avoidable for those willing to change their habits.
I wouldn't call that the obvious solution. This was debated indepth a few months ago , but the obvious solution is increasing gas taxes. That encourages everyone to conserve, not just the 10% or so of the population that is buying a new car in any given year. And given enough time to phase it in, it also allows the manufacturers to respond to true market demand and price vehicles accordingly, instead of essentially being forced to try to sell unwanted smaller vehicles to offset the mileage of the bigger vehicles that the consumer really wants. Plus the tax is largely avoidable for those willing to change their habits.
Gov't backed programs like the planned mission to Mars and Moon will help develop new energy technologies that will not only help the auto industry, but all of our energy needs.
West South Central Moderator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,371
From: Kilgore TX 75662
Originally posted by R377
I wouldn't call that the obvious solution. This was debated indepth a few months ago , but the obvious solution is increasing gas taxes. That encourages everyone to conserve, not just the 10% or so of the population that is buying a new car in any given year. And given enough time to phase it in, it also allows the manufacturers to respond to true market demand and price vehicles accordingly, instead of essentially being forced to try to sell unwanted smaller vehicles to offset the mileage of the bigger vehicles that the consumer really wants. Plus the tax is largely avoidable for those willing to change their habits.
I wouldn't call that the obvious solution. This was debated indepth a few months ago , but the obvious solution is increasing gas taxes. That encourages everyone to conserve, not just the 10% or so of the population that is buying a new car in any given year. And given enough time to phase it in, it also allows the manufacturers to respond to true market demand and price vehicles accordingly, instead of essentially being forced to try to sell unwanted smaller vehicles to offset the mileage of the bigger vehicles that the consumer really wants. Plus the tax is largely avoidable for those willing to change their habits.
By raising the tax on gasoline, do you think we will suddenly sell our big cars and buy smaller cars that make less power that get better gas mileage?
We have reduced the usage, but not by much. I still drive my 2 ton 4.10 geared Impala SS that sucks premium about 500 miles a week. It's fun and comfortable. 
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,472
From: South Bend, Indiana
Originally posted by AdioSS
By raising the tax on gasoline, do you think we will suddenly sell our big cars and buy smaller cars that make less power that get better gas mileage?
By raising the tax on gasoline, do you think we will suddenly sell our big cars and buy smaller cars that make less power that get better gas mileage?
If it is increased enough then you would have to be rich not too...
The problem is, average joe commuting to his low paying job every day is going to be hurt the most. Why should he have to pay extra just because people like you feel the need to waste? Thats the gas tax problem, but I think thats the way its going to go if the auto industry doesn't catch up with the game more. Congrats to Toyota who is going to bring the first hybrid SUV to the market. Something like 300 HP but the gas milage of a V6 sedan and the room of an SUV
.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,306
From: Jersey Shore
See...saying 30% is nice...but thoes new Hyrbid Busses will increase gas milage by 60%.
I think a combo of DoD, hybrid engine, and a 5 or 6spd auto trans with double over drive could really help trucks out a lot.
I think a combo of DoD, hybrid engine, and a 5 or 6spd auto trans with double over drive could really help trucks out a lot.