Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Hybrids & Diesels - Deals or Duds? 
5196 messages, Last post on Oct 16, 2006 at 6:55 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: john1701a (Mar 15, 2006 6:14 pm) You have generally said that hybrids of the Prius design are the only solution to the fuel economy/emissions problem(s). In discussions between us, you have stated that diesels are not even clean enough and have even poo-pooed MB's Bluetec solution in this or another forum. What I and and I believe many others take issue with is your single pronged solution to these problems. You have made statements/comments to this effect. You have made these comments. When I have time, I will find them and put the post numbers in a reply/posting.
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Mar 15, 2006 9:07 pm) I do not have an issue with that point. Maybe a crime would be a push. My issue is the "Green" image they would like us to believe. You cannot convince me that if they wanted to they could not build more Prii than they have so far. All I have seen from the Pro hybrid camp for the last 2.5 years is they are ramping up production to a million cars per year. I firmly believe they only want to build enough hybrids to maintain that PHONY Green image. If they were, what you seem to believe they are, they would be building trucks and SUVs with higher FE than the other automakers. They are not. If you compare Toyota trucks and SUVs with GM. Most of the GM vehicles have better FE. GM also offers E85 in most of the larger vehicles that Toyota has not done so far. If given the chance Toyota would sell as many big trucks and SUVs as Ford & GM. If any automaker should have a green image it would be Honda, not Toyota. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Mar 16, 2006 7:10 am) However the technology and its precurser investments and post investments are wearing a hole in folks' investment pocket. This is vis a vie Honda putting out a press release on the topic of SUB 13,000 dollar, 84 mpg gasser hybrids. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Mar 16, 2006 7:10 am) If any of you think Toyota has any other motivation than "shareholder profits" and "corporate profits", you are mistaken. Why is Toyota producing as many hybrids as they do, and no more or no less? Wake up and smell the CAFE regulations.
|
|
|
Replying to: zodiac2004 (Mar 16, 2006 8:38 am) Again another good point! This is also in line with (my) a prior posting about the CAFE regulations actually inhibiting more massive offerings of the hybrids. (or whatever for that matter) I am not privy to the penalties or the rules, but I am sure the oems would be penallized if they produce too many hybrids. (or whatever else for that matter) !!!?? So it only makes sense to get the best possible price per unit for the longest possible time. Of course the beans have long since been spilled on how the SUV's etc were to be the UAW's in GM, Ford and DCB contracts, life time and live long benefits plan.  
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Mar 16, 2006 7:10 am) Auto's IMO are on track to offer hybrid options one by one by one. The Sienna is next, then likely the Corolla and a Celica/supra sports car. If the Corolla does come in 2-3 yrs then one could buy a hybrid from Toyota in every $1000 increment from $18000 to $50000+ the choice would be yours. You and I will continue to disagree about whether they should increase production ( i believe that they are but in a very astute manner ) thereby flood the market in one vehicle. From a profit perspective why do that. It's the detroiters strategy and it doesnt work. Keep the supply and demand in balance and try to obtain sticker for everyone you sell. That's good business. Rather than 1 Million Prius' why not 10 or 15 separate hybrid vehicles each selling 50-100K units at different price levels to appeal to a wider market. Every manufacturer is moving to the 'dark side'. Honda is much less 'green' now with it's SUV's/trucks than it was 15 yrs ago when it was only the Civic/Accord. It's just business, everyone is following the money. Toyota's trucks.... diesel. Again the plodding methodical route may annoy lots of people but neither they nor Nissan nor Ford are going to get into diesels here in a big way until every state allows the use of diesel completely widespread and free. At that point Texas, Tenn and all the Thai imports of diesel will likely wash away gassers and increase the FE of the truck fleets dramatically. But not until all the states permit diesels freely. In addition to Hino building here and in Canada I would bet a clean crisp $5 bill that the new TX plant is being designed to convert part of it's production to diesel in a blink of an eye. Methodical, at the proper moment flip a switch and BLAM.. 100,000 diesel Tundras.
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Mar 15, 2006 7:57 pm) I suppose "trucks not moving well" is why the Ford F-150 has been the best selling vehicle (not truck - vehicle) in America - for the past 29 years straight?
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Mar 16, 2006 9:13 am) However, over the long term, the hybrid really does not solve the fuel consumption issue, if for no other reason that it continues to use the stuff we are trying to get away from; "FOREIGN OIL". With a slow long lead in, it literary affects/effects,does nothing. It also creates another problem and that is higher costs. These higher costs outweighs the gains or under correct circumstances take far longer to B/E. Emissions mitigation for diesels will literally leapfrogand continue to advance. It also offers a 37% advantage over any like gasser product. It also takes less upstream resources to refine: translation? It ACTUALLY uses less oil!! HELLO!!?? . It also can be grown from domestic RENEWABLE resources!!. Unleaded regular is literally a one trick pony in comparison. The caveat is unless of course the environmentalists see Nirvana and Nirvana is defined as unleashed domestic exploration and drilling for oil (aka unleaded regular) . My own take here: a miracle is NOT likely here. In closing, the one's advocating NOT using unleaded regular, incredulously do not see the logic that it is illogical to demand folks use alternative fuels when they outlaw or make literally impossible to improbable the use of alternative fuels !!!!!! ??????? |
|
|
Replying to: stevedebi (Mar 16, 2006 9:40 am) |
|
|
Replying to: winter2 (Mar 16, 2006 6:51 am) Constructive means: "not personal". Commentary about a person isn't the slightest bit helpful. Instead of attempting to discredit, stick to the facts. And try being objective. FACT #1 - Clean Emissions means the vehicle achieves a rating of at least SULEV. Percentage of improvement is not appropriate, since that is only a relative measure. The rating is a precise ppm quantity, and using that is the truly objective approach. FACT #2 - Stop & Slow traffic is a common problem a majority of the population has to deal with. So MPG data must include this requirement. The exclusion of that is an obvious attempt to mislead. It must be included to be objective. FACT #3 - Automatic Transmissions are what over 90 percent of the drivers in the United States have purchased. That makes the “not required to shift” type the undeniable preferred choice. Yet the discussions here quote MPG values from the Manual Transmission instead but fail to point the efficiency difference out. That is not objective, it is deceptive. FACT #4 - Full Hybrid technology can be implemented in a very wide range of vehicle types using a variety of engine & motor sizes. The flexibility of configuration is astonishing; however, responses dismiss this inferring that isn’t actually possible. But it is, and will be expanded upon as the years progress. Being objective means not ignoring that. JOHN
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Hybrids & Diesels - Deals or Duds?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
