BF2S Forums Hybrid cars

Mek-Stizzle wrote:

CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:

Mek-Stizzle wrote:

If Hybrid cars offer better mileage and cheaper running costs, fuck everything else. Hybrid is the way forward, with the future ultimately being pure electric cars.

In 2009 F1 cars will be using regenerative braking systems and so will effectively be hybrid cars too. Expect big jumps in technology when F1 comes into play with this.

electric cars?  where does the electricity come from for these cars?  from the outlet in the wall?  hopefully we'll be able to build enough clean power generating plants to support this.  in CA, our power grids are already stretched thin as it is.  people are complaining about building new power plants using the NIMBY argument (not in my backyard), hate clean burning coal plants (emissions are still too high), solar is extremely expensive, and also don't like nuke power.  we can build windmills but then the bird lovers out there complain about the hundreds of spotted owls that get chewed up by the turbines.  hydro dams kill fish, etc.  it's like every alternative has someone complaining.  you can't win.

honestly, this problem needs to be looked at objectively and without all these petty special interest people screwing it up.

it's great to be more responsible, but to do that we will ALL have to foot the bill.  new tech like this is certainly not going to be cheap.

Yeah, that's a problem. Really now we should be investing heavily on improving solar power (especially the USA, you guys have some nice areas for that shit on a massive scale) and Nuclear power (again, with modern technology there shouldn't be any problems). I mean France has about 75% of its energy from Nuclear power. People who run their cars from Electricity in France are almost totally independent from all this Oil shit that's going on. France will probably be one of the first countries to incorporate Electric cars on a big scale, seeing as they're already generating electricity on a large scale without fossil fuels. They'll be nice and independent (more or less) from OPEC whilst we're all struggling with these crazy prices.

Who's laughing now

i'm behind you on the nuke issue.  i honestly don't see this as a really scary thing when run correctly.  i happened to live in the same state as TMI (Three Mile Island) and grew up not too far from Berwick nuke reactor.  the problems that caused TMI and Chernobyl are due to operator error and trying to push the things more than design specs.  obvious fail there.  i think nuke power is a go for me

solar power needs to be more cost efficient to be applied.  see, the cost of the panels is what the problem is.  the efficiency of the panels is crap really.  so you have to have tons and tons of these panels to make up for it.  for me to put panels up on my house to get off the grid would cost about 20-30k.  that's a chunk of change.  i guess over 30 years, it might amortize out.  but...imagine powering cities with these things.  what we need is to increase the efficiencies of the polysilicon in the panels so we can get more power out of the sun - hence reducing the cost as we'd have to buy less # of panels

i'm also for more public transportation.  out here where i live we have some light rail but you still have to drive to get to the stations since we are in suburb area.  now if there was propane powered busses available, that might help - but i guess it depends upon demand.  of course this also can bring crime into neighborhoods since now inner city can simply ride a bus to the suburbs, rob the house while you are away at work, get back on bus/light-rail and then u are screwed.  we have a bit of that here too.

an interesting article on slashdot today was about how by using lighter materials, we could improve the fuel efficiency more than hybrids would reduce based on current weight of vehicle.  I would also argue that by changing the shape of vehicles this could help also (air resistance).  SUVs are hardly aerodynamic.  a JEEP has to punch through the air whereas a corvette slices through it.  the coefficient of drag is quite different.  but to take advantage of this, we have to restyle the cars, so design and marketing will have their hands full

Varegg wrote:

The lenght of the highway is hardly the issue here concerning anything in this debate

The tech involved with the hybrid batteries are way better than a normal std car battery and are almost completely recyclable meaning less waste compared to a std battery ...

The data you present of prices and disposal fees only tells me the US is lacking the will to do something about emissions ...

length of highway IS a problem.  Go to Wyoming.  Talk to farmers out there that have to drive 40 miles into town.  My mother works in Pennsylvania about 35 miles away from her job.  This is pretty common in more rural areas.  not everyone works/lives in a city and has access to public transportation.

prices for disposal fees will likely be high because of the insurance that will have to be purchased to offset the lawsuits filed by the environmentalists if and when the approved methods of disposal and recycling result in environmental impact.  every year also, these regulations get tighter and tighter.  who foots the bill for retrofits?  well, the consumer of course.

i'm all for helping the environment, but it's definitely not going to be cheap.  people on here seem to be saying 'go green - it's the way'  sure...it's great and all, but when i have to choose to eat or pay taxes for a landfill, guess what i'm going to do?  cost will become a major factor here.  figure out ways to do it cheaply and people will be all over it.  plain and simple.

CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:

Varegg wrote:

The lenght of the highway is hardly the issue here concerning anything in this debate

The tech involved with the hybrid batteries are way better than a normal std car battery and are almost completely recyclable meaning less waste compared to a std battery ...

The data you present of prices and disposal fees only tells me the US is lacking the will to do something about emissions ...

length of highway IS a problem.  Go to Wyoming.  Talk to farmers out there that have to drive 40 miles into town.  My mother works in Pennsylvania about 35 miles away from her job.  This is pretty common in more rural areas.  not everyone works/lives in a city and has access to public transportation.

True, but does our geographical situation excuse us from our behaviour?  Not that we can help it but again, does that excuse?  Matter of opinion, I certainly don't.

On the Hybrid car front.  There crap, tbh.  I used to work for Ford europe with the luxury brands, I had more to do with the likes of Aston/Jag/land rover at the time, but even I had the ''pleasure'' of testing many a prototype hybrid car.  Fact of the matter is they take more energy to make, and the ''savings'' take years to become realised. 

The theroy behind them is admirable but in practise there lacking.  Still, it has to start somewhere.  It isnt a solution though.  Even if we waved a magic wand and made all cars hybrids, it at best temporarily stablise gas consumption, and then start it's rises again, saw a documentary quoting four years at best and even that was in that ''magic wand scenario''.

Martyn

Todays hybrids are a joke

1. they only get 10 to 15% better mileage than the gas engine the car has. This does not make economical sense given the extra expense of the batteries and the technology... A small diesel like a vw lupo blows hybrids out the door - it gets 80 or 90 mpg... but VW refuses to bring the Lupo to America.

2. If you get in an accident with a hybrid I have heard that some EMS and fire departments won't touch the car because of the risk of electrocution and the risk of explosion from the gases released by cracked batteries.

3. Batteries will only last 5 years... replacement is not likely to be covered under warranty AND who is going to pay to dispose of these batteries and where are they all going to go?????? that's an ecological disaster waiting to happen

4. Hybrids only make sense for military application where supplies can be reduced by 10 to 15% or supply lines can be stretched 10 to 15% further. The consumer is really paying for a product that has a military application, in other words you're paying to make the technology cheaper for the military.


With that all said I will say that I would be interested in a "plug in hybrid." with the ability to recharge the car at home, you should be able to get 100mpg or even alot better if you only make small trips to the store and the gas engine never has to turn on..... until they are available and reasonably priced I'm sticking with my VW 1.6 diesel that can burn anything I put in its tank.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Todays hybrids are a joke

1. they only get 10 to 15% better mileage than the gas engine the car has. This does not make economical sense given the extra expense of the batteries and the technology... A small diesel like a vw lupo blows hybrids out the door - it gets 80 or 90 mpg... but VW refuses to bring the Lupo to America.

Your knowledge about hybrids is the joke, you nurture all the common misconseptions ... 10 to 15% better milage ? ... where do you have those numbers from ? ... most hybrids today are normal sized cars that can fit the need for a normal sized family (mom, dad and 2 kids)

A small diesel like Lupo can't even cover the daily needs of a family of midgets ... know what you are comparing before you make stupid comments like that ...

Diesel_dyk wrote:

2. If you get in an accident with a hybrid I have heard that some EMS and fire departments won't touch the car because of the risk of electrocution and the risk of explosion from the gases released by cracked batteries.

You have heard ? ... again your knowledge have huge gaps, what EMS surge are you talking about ? ... there is no difference in putting out a fire in hybrid than a car with xenon lamps that uses a high voltage circuit - you just don't use water ...

Diesel_dyk wrote:

3. Batteries will only last 5 years... replacement is not likely to be covered under warranty AND who is going to pay to dispose of these batteries and where are they all going to go?????? that's an ecological disaster waiting to happen

Only 5 years and will not be covered by the warranty ? ... again your knowledge have huge gaps, Toyota have 8 years warranty on all hybrid parts including the battery witch as mentioned earlier in this thread produced about the same amount of waste as a std car battery ...

Diesel_dyk wrote:

4. Hybrids only make sense for military application where supplies can be reduced by 10 to 15% or supply lines can be stretched 10 to 15% further. The consumer is really paying for a product that has a military application, in other words you're paying to make the technology cheaper for the military.

I'm amazed ...

Diesel_dyk wrote:

With that all said I will say that I would be interested in a "plug in hybrid." with the ability to recharge the car at home, you should be able to get 100mpg or even alot better if you only make small trips to the store and the gas engine never has to turn on..... until they are available and reasonably priced I'm sticking with my VW 1.6 diesel that can burn anything I put in its tank.

Plug in hybrids are right around the corner, the Prius amongst other Toyotas will come as plugins from 2009 when the new Prius will be introduced ...

Hybrids are a joke.
They don't deliver the benefits they claim.
They are only useful in intercity driving at peak times, at almost all other times and places the electric engine isn't being used.
The need for 2 engines decreases the usable space in the car and also make the car heavier and therefore less fuel efficient.
They are too expensive. The 'expected life' is too short.
along with numerous other disadvantages already talked about. They may be a good idea in theory, but are pathetic in practice.

Full electric cars also do not and will not work. For numerous reasons, some of which I have expressed in a previous thread.

DrunkFace wrote:

1. The batteries take way too long to recharge, and if you run low on charge half way through a journey, most people wont want to sit at a 'service station' for 8 hours while their car recharges. The other alternative of changing the batteries is also unreasonable because they are so incredibly huge and heavy.

2. Many people have to park their cars on a street (even at home) and to recharge a car would require a cord to run from your residence out onto the footpath then up to where you managed to find a park (which could be hundreds of metres away). There would be power cords all over the place, it would be ridiculous.

3. In the case of a blackout (and lets face it, they do happen, if rarely), you not only have no power to your house but you also have no way to get anywhere because you car also has no way of charging.

Basically the logistics of 'fuelling' pure electric cars is fraught with problems. The ease and simplicity of petrol means the alternative needs to be something similar. (ie. hydrogen).

Spark wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Spark wrote:

An interesting future prospect. At the moment they aren't too flash, but give it a decade and I think we'll see them much more advanced.

I don't think shortsighted views such as above help, though.

How is looking at the actual pollution budget over the lifetime of the vehicle shortsighted? It's the opposite.

Because the factor that decides whether it is lesser or greater is about the production process, not the actual product. And as time goes on the production process will get more efficient and cleaner (due to better techniques, technologies). Thus saying it's bad now hence will be in the future for that reason is a bit short sighted.

But as a snapshot, hybrids aren't too flash. But then again, so was everything when it first came onto the market.

You don't know that the production processes will get more efficient or cleaner to an appreciable degree. The point being that one has to look at all aspects of the life cycle of the vehicle to properly gauge its environmental impact. If you look only at the post-production environmental impact and ignore the pre-production, production, and post-use impact, you get an unrealistically rosy picture of things...regardless of the vehicle (or technology) involved. By examining all aspects and quantifying the impact of each phase, you can focus your efforts and improvements. Otherwise, you're playing whack-a-mole, not really improving anything but making a great show and telling the public you are.

^^ Well, i got you a tad closer and will have to settle with that i guess

Varegg wrote:

I freakin give up ... the ignorance in this thread is pathetic ...

Not to pick at a bad sore BUT here are somethings I read on the net about hybrids.

In order to achieve high mileage with a hybrid it is suggested that
"Speed is your enemy. The ideal routes have long stretches without stops, and speed limits of 30 – 35 mph. (The sweet spot for most hybrids, in "steady state" testing, is between 40 and 45 mph."


Who in the REAL WORLD wants to be limited to 45 mph. Here where I live the speed limit on the freeway is 65, everyone does 70 to 75 mph. In the REAL WORLD, a hybrid is lucky to get 10 to 15% more than the gas engine alone. Its sad that with all the technology a hybrid has it can't beat a diesel. And here is a little math for you, if you take for example 1997 Nissan Sentra with a 1.6 liter gas engine (Prius is 1.5L) which gets 44 mpg at 70 mph and times that by 1.15 you get 50 mpg which is what a hybrid is supposed to get. Wow you know that can't be right, (sarcasm) - lets try that again 44 x 1.15 = 50mpg. yup its right alright.... I guess hybrids do only get 10 to 15% better than the gas engine. gesh my ignorance at simple math underwhelms me. Not to mention the fact that you are going to be in the 40 mpg range with a hybrid if you drive 70 on the freeway. Hybrid mileage is very sensitive to the speed that you go. Their mileage is overrated for the real world conditions.

Oh yah, and the point about the danger hybrids pose to first responders, here is one thing I found on the net
"it's essential that our first responders to crash sites know how to handle the potential dangers of.... high-voltage vehicle battery systems," says Bill Whitfield with the Missouri Highway Safety Division. [...] " I heard that rescue from a hybrid is complicated by dangers posed to first responders. See that is what I heard and I went out and found the information on the internet, sorry but I am not about to write a paper and footnote the documentation for you... so you can fill in those gaps that you have between your ears yourself, its called learning.

and you didn't even address the issue about explosive off gassing of the batteries and the potential hazard they pose is an accident. More batteries means more risk.

Maybe before you go calling people ignorant you should check your facts (theories) with the real world. I would like to have all the things they say about hybrids to be true, who doesn't want the EPA rating of 80 mpg that was originally given to hybrids. but it isn't true and I guess that I'm just to pessimistic to fool myself into believing that it is true. sorry

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Varegg wrote:

I freakin give up ... the ignorance in this thread is pathetic ...

Not to pick at a bad sore BUT here are somethings I read on the net about hybrids.

In order to achieve high mileage with a hybrid it is suggested that
"Speed is your enemy. The ideal routes have long stretches without stops, and speed limits of 30 – 35 mph. (The sweet spot for most hybrids, in "steady state" testing, is between 40 and 45 mph."


Who in the REAL WORLD wants to be limited to 45 mph. Here where I live the speed limit on the freeway is 65, everyone does 70 to 75 mph. In the REAL WORLD, a hybrid is lucky to get 10 to 15% more than the gas engine alone. Its sad that with all the technology a hybrid has it can't beat a diesel. And here is a little math for you, if you take for example 1997 Nissan Sentra with a 1.6 liter gas engine (Prius is 1.5L) which gets 44 mpg at 70 mph and times that by 1.15 you get 50 mpg which is what a hybrid is supposed to get. Wow you know that can't be right, (sarcasm) - lets try that again 44 x 1.15 = 50mpg. yup its right alright.... I guess hybrids do only get 10 to 15% better than the gas engine. gesh my ignorance at simple math underwhelms me. Not to mention the fact that you are going to be in the 40 mpg range with a hybrid if you drive 70 on the freeway. Hybrid mileage is very sensitive to the speed that you go. Their mileage is overrated for the real world conditions.

Oh yah, and the point about the danger hybrids pose to first responders, here is one thing I found on the net
"it's essential that our first responders to crash sites know how to handle the potential dangers of.... high-voltage vehicle battery systems," says Bill Whitfield with the Missouri Highway Safety Division. [...] " I heard that rescue from a hybrid is complicated by dangers posed to first responders. See that is what I heard and I went out and found the information on the internet, sorry but I am not about to write a paper and footnote the documentation for you... so you can fill in those gaps that you have between your ears yourself, its called learning.

and you didn't even address the issue about explosive off gassing of the batteries and the potential hazard they pose is an accident. More batteries means more risk.

Maybe before you go calling people ignorant you should check your facts (theories) with the real world. I would like to have all the things they say about hybrids to be true, who doesn't want the EPA rating of 80 mpg that was originally given to hybrids. but it isn't true and I guess that I'm just to pessimistic to fool myself into believing that it is true. sorry

If you wan't to take part in a debate make sure your claims are valid and can be backed up, if not be sure the people you debate with know you have a history of knowing what you are talking about ... so if you can't be arsed to back up your thesis you really disqualify yourself from the debate ...

Reading an article or two on the internet hardly qualifies for expert knowledge ... the tech is fairly new and yes it has some flaws but it is the future and the best possible solution as of now ...

You may have noticed that i'm not defending all hybrids in general but specifically are talking about the range provided by Toyota in witch i have indebt knowledge ... the Prius is thoroughly crash tested and have received the highest standard in Europe, the highvoltage equipment in the front of the car have plenty of safety mechanisms that cut those functions if the car collides and certain sensors are damaged to prevent danger for passangers and possible rescue workers ... and yes training is important like it is in any line of work ...

you wrote:

so you can fill in those gaps that you have between your ears yourself, its called learning.

This is uncalled for, keep a level head - sneak in another insult and lets see what happends ...