Last post on Sep 04, 2003 at 5:18 AM
You are in the Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions
This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Hybrids Host for directions! discussion.
What is this discussion about?
Toyota, Hybrid Cars, Fuel Efficiency (MPG)
#39 of 78 I'dsay Toyo's committment to introduce several new hybrids
Aug 01, 2003 (12:16 pm)
over the next few years is pretty gutsy for a conservative company.
I wonder if Honda's Acura DNX (nee Dualnote) is on target for an '05 entry? Real performance in a 40mpg car, that's for me.
#40 of 78 everyone keeps saying
Aug 01, 2003 (10:41 pm)
they cancelled the DNX...
Aug 02, 2003 (7:25 am)
Say it isn't so. Can you give me something more specific?
#42 of 78 What more do I want? ...................
Aug 04, 2003 (3:01 am)
Objectively measured, independenty verified FACTS, not conjecture. And no, manufacturer's data is not sufficient basis for a $20k+ expenditure, in my view.
And IF a 10.7sec 0-60 time is indeed "precise" and verifiable, it will be a welcome incremental improvement, but insufficient to win a space in my garage, particularly considering its lofty price. Even more important is whether suspension tuning has been improved to surpass the rather low dynamic limits of the present Prius.
Aug 04, 2003 (10:13 am)
> considering its lofty price
$20K for a midsize is fairly typical, close to average. So "lofty" seems inappropriate.
> rather low
That's a relative term, not a measurement or a reference to fulfilling need.
#44 of 78 Yes, it is relative ......................
Aug 04, 2003 (11:25 am)
and relative to contemporary cars, the Prius' dynamic limits ARE low. In fact, the present Prius handling limits are lower than some minivans of a more than a decade ago!
Aug 04, 2003 (11:33 am)
> are lower than some minivans
Unless you are actually competing with a minivan, what difference does that make?
If the car can avoid the obstacle, the need is fulfilled. More doesn't provide any benefit.
Aug 04, 2003 (12:23 pm)
In daily driving, you ARE "competing" with minivans, SUVs, sedans, sports cars and everything else on the road. It is this population of vehicles that defines the dynamic environment in which you must operate. Minivans as a class are but one notch above SUVs in the dynamic pecking order and below what one can expect of sedans, especially a $20k sedan.
#47 of 78 Believe what you want
Aug 04, 2003 (12:58 pm)
> you ARE "competing" with
Believe what you want. But in reality, there is a point of no gain, and we've reached it.
Here in Minnesota over the last 3 years, there simply is no benefit of 4-wheel drive on typical roads. My Prius hasn't ever had any problems while driving through 6 or less inches. And the ability to stop makes no difference either. Where's the benefit of your "superior" vehicle?
The same goes for highway handling. I swerved around a kayak that suddenly appeared while driving at 65 MPH with a bike on back and a full trunk. The Prius managed that without a lick of trouble. What more would I need?
You can only go so fast. The roads can only hold so many vehicles. Risk taking will only save you a few seconds.
Choosing a vehicle that is less likely to rollover and will provide better side-impact protection should be features that make purchase decisions, not squeezing out greater acceleration for driving where you can't (or shouldn't) use that ability anyway.
Believe what you want. The technology isn't intended to serve 100% of everyones requirements anyway. If it can fulfill the needs of a large majority, mission accomplished.
#48 of 78 Perhaps a significant minority, ......................
Aug 05, 2003 (2:26 am)
eventually, but a "large majority" is a pipedream. The Model T may be the only vehicle that ever served a majority of buyers and that was driven by low price, an attribute not shared by the hybrids.
And to limit lateral grip is a very poor approach to create "a vehicle that is less likely to rollover"! That was Ford's approach for their dismal handling Explorer and look what resulted.
To drive a vehicle of very low dynamic limits is more "risk taking" than I'm prepared to accept. Accident mitigation is nice, but collision AVOIDANCE is the first line of defense.