Dave Null Sr.

On Sun, 23 May 2004 21:32:13 GMT, "Charles Perry"
<pipesandtobacco@hotmail.com> wrote in news:2hcjj0FaujecU1@uni-berlin.de:

> You may have missed a few recent articles in US newspapers regarding
> hybrids. It seems they get MUCH worse mileage than their EPA ratings. The
> EPA tests do not accurately measure the true fuel consumption of a hybrid
> vehicle.

These are not EPA ratings.

Dave Null Sr.

On Sun, 23 May 2004 21:31:48 GMT, "Walt Kienzle" <wkienzle@iwic.net> wrote
in news:c8r58302eu1@enews1.newsguy.com:

[chop]
> his statement is very true. Here is why: Even with what are
> historically high prices for gasoline (in my area it is actually E-10
> fuel that is sold as regular petrol), it still is substantially lower
> priced than $0.91/liter. The recent "outrageously high" price would be
> about US$0.54/liter, and during bargain times it would be about half
> that price. With that low a price for fuel, even for what we consider
> high priced gas, it would likely take longer than the life of the car
> for the fuel cost savings to pay back the additional cost of a Hybrid or
> most any other alternate fuel vehicle.
[chop]

Of course all my numbers were local, including Canadian $ and ¢.
So our gas is approximately 66¢US/litre. Our taxes are higher
here.

Given the same size of vehicle, and that the Prius is actually
a chunk larger than the one gas-only Civic, the ~C$700 per year
will pay for batteries long after the warranty has expired.
It is also assumed that the Prius (or Civic) will have the same
bulletproof type reputation (or even better). Toyota or Honda
know that people are going to jump on the reliability statistics
and have probably spent more than 'normal' on quality control
and design.

Gas will only be going up in price. Maybe not as dramatically
as in the last couple of months, but given the world oil situation
and China's increasing rate of consumption, up is a given.

That means the C$700 number is likely very conservative in
the longer term.

Ed P

Fruit Pie the Magician wrote:
> In article <2hcjj0FaujecU1@uni-berlin.de>,
> "Charles Perry" <pipesandtobacco@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>You may have missed a few recent articles in US newspapers regarding
>>hybrids. It seems they get MUCH worse mileage than their EPA ratings. The
>>EPA tests do not accurately measure the true fuel consumption of a hybrid
>>vehicle.
>>
>>Charles Perry P.E.
>
>
> Note that they're still getting the best mileage overall. The big
> problem is that Toyota, et al, CANNOT use realistic numbers -- they are
> required by law to display and advertise the EPA numbers and as you
> note, the EPA's testing gives erroneous numbers for hybrids.
>
> -FPtM

I own a 2004 Toyota Prius hybrid, which now has close to 5000 miles on
it, and also follow the Prius-2G group on Yahoo Groups. The following
is my 2 cents on this whole hybrid thread and not specifically in
response to the above messages.

I can tell you that indeed Prius owner mileage varies and this has been
an active topic on the group. My wife commutes about 45 miles each way
to work on I-66 in Northern Virginia and averages about 55 mpg and has
seen one tank over 60 mpg. Others report from around 40 mpg to over 70 mpg!

If one buys a hybrid *solely* for gas mileage, they will find a
relatively long payback period of several years as compared to other
high-mpg cars that are not hybrid. However, hybrids -- and the Prius in
particular -- offer a variety of features; such as, very low emissions,
good overall driveability and size, interesting (indeed fascinating)
technology and features in addition to the high mpg. An important
feature for buyers in Norther Virginia is that the hybrids qualify for
special Clean Fuel license plates, which in turn permit (through June,
2006) the cars to be operated in High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes with
only the driver aboard.

Battery pack replacement expense is not the only issue. With all of the
high tech components and computers, it appears advisable to buy Toyota's
7yr/100k service contract and replace the car about the time the
contract runs out. Fortunately, history with the 2001-2003 Priuses
bodes well for the 2004 model's reliability and longevity.

What is *important* to understand is that hybrid technology appears to
be a viable alternative and that hybrids can and do drive with much of
the feel and performance that one would normally expect from a car. It
will be interesting to see how the Toyota Highlander, Lexus, Ford and
other brands of hybrid SUV's perform.

Anyone interested in the hybrids should view the FAQ's at Yahoo
Groups/Prius-2G or http://www.vfaq.net.

Ed P
Reply To address munged.

Walt Kienzle

"Dave Null Sr." <lrowoy@ShNotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94F2D3F8B7620lrowoy@66.11.168.198...
> On Sun, 23 May 2004 21:31:48 GMT, "Walt Kienzle" <wkienzle@iwic.net> wrote
> in news:c8r58302eu1@enews1.newsguy.com:
[snip]
> Of course all my numbers were local, including Canadian $ and ¢.
> So our gas is approximately 66¢US/litre. Our taxes are higher
> here.

I don't see what your point is here. My point was that you can't say that
the previous poster was incorrect because of the cir***stances where you
live or how much you or some mythical "average person" drives. Your prices,
higher taxes included, may make what you say true for you, but please don't
claim that someone else is wrong because of that. BTW I noticed you
deleted, without comment, my text about fuel in my area that costs about
US$0.21/litre. No matter. Just as a basis of comparison, the last time I
fueled up (aside from the US$0.21/liter) I paid about US$0.41/liter.

I also question your price adjustment from CAN$ to US$ for the cost of gas.
Are your wages increased by 20% or so compared to someone working in the US
to make up for the lower value of the CAN$? Unlikely. Please correct me if
I am wrong, but I expect that a CAN$ being spent by you has the same impact
on the family finances as a US$ spent by me. As an example of how prices
are adjusted down to correspond to the lower value of the CAN$, I know that
many cars (Chrysler minivans come to mind) that are identicaly equipped to
the US conterparts and are sold for substantially less in Canada because of
this differential - so much so that US residents buy their cars in Canada
and import them themselves to save thousands of dollars. The problem has
gotten so bad that US dealers have been given approval to deny warranty
service for vehicles bought in Canada. Exceptions are made for Canadians
experiencing warranty issues while traveling in the US.

>
> Given the same size of vehicle, and that the Prius is actually
> a chunk larger than the one gas-only Civic, the ~C$700 per year
> will pay for batteries long after the warranty has expired.

Actually I dispute this number also, primarily because I only drive 12,000km
per year. Again, averages don't apply to everyone, so you can't shoot down
someone else's claim because of cir***stances applicable to you but not to
them. Even if the number is accurate and the savings will pay for the $2000
batteries, it wouldn't have also fully paid for the extra $5,000 to $10,000
initial purchase price (compared to a similarly sized conventional car, plus
the markup above list price that many dealers are charging for these limited
supply hybrids) and the extra insurance costs for a car more expensive to
buy and repair.

> It is also assumed that the Prius (or Civic) will have the same
> bulletproof type reputation (or even better). Toyota or Honda
> know that people are going to jump on the reliability statistics
> and have probably spent more than 'normal' on quality control
> and design.

Probably not a good thing to assume with new technology like this. I expect
that the extra quality control and testing will make the quality ratings
break even with the normal vehicles at best, particluarly with the low
volume hybrid cars. Do you realize that Toyota only sold about 4,000 Prius'
last year?

>
> Gas will only be going up in price.

People have been saying this for the past 30 years, and I don't believe this
any more now than I did last year, or the year before, or the year before
that, etc. Adjusted for inflation, gas in the US is still less expensive
than it was 20 years ago. Sure, we will run out eventually, but by that
time I expect to be dead, my Subaru will be an antique, and technological
advancements will have a replacement solution fully implemented. Crude oil
prices are dropping already from $42/barrel to 40.50/barrel, but that is
only a small part of why prices are high. The cost of gasoline is high in
the US because of a drop in the number of refineries over the past 30
years - not a single new refinery has been built in the US since the early
1970's, but many refineries have been closed since then because of age, lack
of profitability, or inability or lack of cost effectiveness to make
improvements required by regulations (environmental, safety, etc). That,
combined with with governmental requirements for different blends of fuel in
various regions which change twice a year is causing a supply shortage in
gasoline that causes a temporary shortage during the transition from winter
to summer fuels that happens each Spring, and to lesser extent each Autumn.
When supply finally catches up with demand, I fully expect prices to drop by
20% from their current levels. I have been doing my part - I haven't bought
gasoline since the end of April.

> Maybe not as dramatically
> as in the last couple of months, but given the world oil situation
> and China's increasing rate of consumption, up is a given.
>
> That means the C$700 number is likely very conservative in
> the longer term.
>
>
According to my figures, I didn't even buy $700 worth of gas for all of my
driving last year -- or any other year. My credit card company reports that
I have bought $252 of gasoline so far this year (that doesn't include the
$20 in fuel rebates I received from BP/Amoco recently). Even adjusting that
amount to make it comparable with the CAN$, it would be impossible for me to
save $700 unless I didn't drive at all. No hybrid needed for that.

oothlagre

I agree. My brother has a '92 Saturn sedan. 35/40 mileage. Then again, the
car is made mostly out of fiberglass.

"TG" <ab7rs@arrl.netnospam> wrote in message
news:10b2gfkaehp6saf@corp.supernews.com...
> The Toyota Echo can be had for under $10,000 at 38 MPG combined.
> The Volkswagen Golf and Jetta TDI models get 32/41 respectively (combined
> city and hwy) and cost thousands less than the hybrids. Hybrids are
getting
> better and I like the development of new choices but they are certainly
not
> answer for the vast majority of consumers at this point. TG
>
> "Fruit Pie the Magician" <no.email.address@email.blows.com> wrote in
message
> news:no.email.address-75CB10.14543623052004@news-60.giganews.com...
> > In article <2hcjj0FaujecU1@uni-berlin.de>,
> > "Charles Perry" <pipesandtobacco@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > You may have missed a few recent articles in US newspapers regarding
> > > hybrids. It seems they get MUCH worse mileage than their EPA ratings.
> The
> > > EPA tests do not accurately measure the true fuel consumption of a
> hybrid
> > > vehicle.
> > >
> > > Charles Perry P.E.
> >
> > Note that they're still getting the best mileage overall. The big
> > problem is that Toyota, et al, CANNOT use realistic numbers -- they are
> > required by law to display and advertise the EPA numbers and as you
> > note, the EPA's testing gives erroneous numbers for hybrids.
> >
> > -FPtM
>
>

Dave Null Sr.

On Mon, 24 May 2004 03:57:24 GMT, "Walt Kienzle" <wkienzle@iwic.net> wrote
in news:c8rrr302lkq@enews4.newsguy.com:

> "Dave Null Sr." <lrowoy@ShNotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns94F2D3F8B7620lrowoy@66.11.168.198...
>> On Sun, 23 May 2004 21:31:48 GMT, "Walt Kienzle" <wkienzle@iwic.net>
>> wrote in news:c8r58302eu1@enews1.newsguy.com:
> [snip]
>> Of course all my numbers were local, including Canadian $ and ¢.
>> So our gas is approximately 66¢US/litre. Our taxes are higher
>> here.
>
> I don't see what your point is here. My point was that you can't say
> that the previous poster was incorrect because of the cir***stances
> where you live or how much you or some mythical "average person" drives.
> Your prices, higher taxes included, may make what you say true for you,
> but please don't claim that someone else is wrong because of that. BTW
> I noticed you deleted, without comment, my text about fuel in my area
> that costs about US$0.21/litre. No matter. Just as a basis of
> comparison, the last time I fueled up (aside from the US$0.21/liter) I
> paid about US$0.41/liter.

Nowhere did I say anybody was wrong. I just stated that for a typical
driver here a hybrid can make economic sense. I also didn't mention
that Venezuelans rioted a few years ago when gas went from 5¢ to 10¢ a
gallon.

> I also question your price adjustment from CAN$ to US$ for the cost of
> gas. Are your wages increased by 20% or so compared to someone working
> in the US to make up for the lower value of the CAN$? Unlikely. Please
> correct me if I am wrong, but I expect that a CAN$ being spent by you
> has the same impact on the family finances as a US$ spent by me. As an
> example of how prices are adjusted down to correspond to the lower value
> of the CAN$, I know that many cars (Chrysler minivans come to mind) that
> are identicaly equipped to the US conterparts and are sold for
> substantially less in Canada because of this differential - so much so
> that US residents buy their cars in Canada and import them themselves to
> save thousands of dollars. The problem has gotten so bad that US
> dealers have been given approval to deny warranty service for vehicles
> bought in Canada. Exceptions are made for Canadians experiencing
> warranty issues while traveling in the US.

And I have virtually free health care. It's a different country with
different tax structures.
All I said was that hybrids make sense here.

Since the mini-van you're talking about is made here, there are cost
advantages for us.

>> Given the same size of vehicle, and that the Prius is actually
>> a chunk larger than the one gas-only Civic, the ~C$700 per year
>> will pay for batteries long after the warranty has expired.
>
> Actually I dispute this number also, primarily because I only drive
> 12,000km per year. Again, averages don't apply to everyone, so you
> can't shoot down someone else's claim because of cir***stances
> applicable to you but not to them. Even if the number is accurate and
> the savings will pay for the $2000 batteries, it wouldn't have also
> fully paid for the extra $5,000 to $10,000 initial purchase price
> (compared to a similarly sized conventional car, plus the markup above
> list price that many dealers are charging for these limited supply
> hybrids) and the extra insurance costs for a car more expensive to buy
> and repair.

And I drive less than 5,000 kms per year so a hybrid is not cost effective
for me. People need to do their own comparisons. Some people value clean
air. As soon as the tax system is reformed to penalize polluting vehicles
here, the hybrids will have major economic advantages.

>> It is also assumed that the Prius (or Civic) will have the same
>> bulletproof type reputation (or even better). Toyota or Honda
>> know that people are going to jump on the reliability statistics
>> and have probably spent more than 'normal' on quality control
>> and design.
>
> Probably not a good thing to assume with new technology like this. I
> expect that the extra quality control and testing will make the quality
> ratings break even with the normal vehicles at best, particluarly with
> the low volume hybrid cars. Do you realize that Toyota only sold about
> 4,000 Prius' last year?

Likely because they're limiting their quality control costs.

>> Gas will only be going up in price.
>
> People have been saying this for the past 30 years, and I don't believe
> this any more now than I did last year, or the year before, or the year
> before that, etc. . . .

Which is why SUV and truck sales continue.

>> Maybe not as dramatically
>> as in the last couple of months, but given the world oil situation
>> and China's increasing rate of consumption, up is a given.
>>
>> That means the C$700 number is likely very conservative in
>> the longer term.
>>
> According to my figures, I didn't even buy $700 worth of gas for all of
> my driving last year -- or any other year. My credit card company
> reports that I have bought $252 of gasoline so far this year (that
> doesn't include the $20 in fuel rebates I received from BP/Amoco
> recently). Even adjusting that amount to make it comparable with the
> CAN$, it would be impossible for me to save $700 unless I didn't drive
> at all. No hybrid needed for that.

Which is why I always promote lowering consumption as a tool to keep
your costs down - it is very effective.

Dan Duncan

Todd H. <subaru@toddh.net> wrote:
> > those in place since 1985), a highway full of automobiles is causing less
> > pollution than a herd of cows. Nobody is protesting this existence of cows
> > or asking for the development of hybrid cows.

> Rightly so cus cows aren't manufactured goods.

They aren't?

When did herefords thunder across the Serengeti?

> It's embarassing from an engineering perspective that average mileage
> is little changed over the past 15 years. With the SUV boom, average
> mileage I believe has in fact gone down.

Ford gets a lower average MPG now than they did in their
Model T days. That's downright disgusting. (I'm not
knocking the Model T, but you'd think a century of refinement
could improve the efficiency.)

> If Subaru made a natural gas fired outback, I'd buy one. Nothing out
> the tailipe but water vapor.

And CO2.

If you want water vapor as your only byproduct, you have to
burn pure hydrogen.

Any CxHy (hydrocarbon) fuel is going to produce both CO2 and H2O,
unless you fail to burn the carbon at all.

-DanD

--
# Dan Duncan (kd4igw) dand@pcisys.net http://pcisys.net/~dand
# Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company. -Mark Twain