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
Hybrid Vehicles Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid 
163 messages, Last post on Dec 04, 2008 at 4:53 AM
You are in the Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Hybrids Host for directions! discussion.
|
Replying to: aspesisteve (Jan 31, 2008 10:15 am) If a Chevy Suburban can go from 18 mpg to 20; that is more important than a compact going from 30 mpg to 45? How do you figure? Every bit helps, but to say that a truck hybrid does more for the environment than the Prius is hard to accept. " where do you get the numbers, Tahoe goes from 14/20 to 20/21, 30 to 45 is local, percentage wise it is the same as Tahoe goes from 14/20. Now, do you understand which is more important? "Sure the Suburban can do more when it's fully loaded, but that's about 3% of the time it's being used. For 97% of your daily driving, the Prius will suffice. But it takes a change in attitude to get people to realize that many truck owners are driving much more than they need." You need to convince big suv buyers to abandon this segment, you do not even need a hybrid, live closer to where you work, and ride a bicycle, that is good for you health too |
|
|
Replying to: scortch (Jan 31, 2008 8:54 am) I assume average person drive 50% local and 50% highway, you may be different you never drive on highway. The rest of the statement is just repeating what you said before, and we are arguing in a loop. Relax my friend, and have a nice day. |
|
|
Replying to: aspesisteve (Jan 31, 2008 10:15 am) First off let's use real figures. The Honda Civic gets an epa average of 29 mpg. The Civic Hybrid gets 42 mpg. So over 15,000 miles the Civic owner could save 160 gallons by switching to the hybrid version. The Chevy Tahoe gets 16 mpg, the Tahoe Hybrid gets 21. Over this same 15,000 miles the hybrid version will save 223 gallons. An additional 39% fuel savings over the Civic. I can be argued that the Tahoe driver could save even more by transitioning to a smaller vehicle. I think we need to live in the real world. The Tahoe driver was not cross shopping this vehicle with Civics, Camrys, Accords, etc.. It is far more likely that he could be induced into purchasing a Tahoe Hybrid than a Camry or Civic hybrid. And the trucks/SUVs in this country use over 60% of the fuel while the passenger fleet uses less than 40%. If your goal is to save the most fuel, which group would you target first? However going from 29 to 42 mpg sounds much more impressive than going from 16 to 21 mpg and for a mathematically challenged populus it probably also makes for an easier sale.
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Jan 31, 2008 11:10 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: jnt (Jan 31, 2008 6:44 pm) Let's look at this totally independent of fuel prices. I believe that the biggest advantage of hybrid technology is the ability to recapture kinetic energy lost due to braking. That being the case there will always be more energy lost on vehicles with more mass. So that's where there is the most energy to recapture, i.e. the biggest benefit. In terms of fuel savings the absolue best application of hybrid technology would be in transit buses and delivery trucks. The least benefit would be in vehicles with small mass. The problem is that no one's impressed by a metro bus that has increased its fuel efficiency from 3 mpg to 5 mpg but they are impressed by a Prius that gets 50 mpg. Again, while Toyota's hybrid technology may be impressive their choice of application is driven by how it will affect their image. I don't give them credit for being "greener" than GM but I do give them credit for realizing the value of image and how it affects their bottom line. I think that GM has also realized this and have tipped their hat to Toyota's insight into how the consumer's mind works. I think that GM might have actually given the consumer too much credit. While Toyota took a page from P. T. Barnum and subscribed to the philosophy, "you'll never go broke underestimating the stupidity of the American people". |
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Jan 31, 2008 11:10 am) |
|
| actually talk about the Malibu Hybrid, instead of "GM sucks", "no it doesn't", "yes it does" over and over and over? | |
|
|
|
Actually, since the new Vue two-mode uses the 3.6l (if I remember what I read?), it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to see this making its way into the passenger cars in the not-to-distant future. The Vue uses a transverse mounted engine, and I think the new two-mode is front-drive only. So the transmission and engine layout are there. The only question is whether the package would fit under the Aura / 'bu hood, and possibly where to put the batteries.. And for all the griping about 'only 2 mpg'- 10% better without changing your driving habits and locale isn't anything to sneeze at. Sure, I can (and routinely do) get 10-15% better than most people in similar vehicles on the same route I drive, but that's driving the speed limit, anticipating slowdowns / speedups (egg-under the accelerator method), etc. Add another 2 mpg for the mild-hybrid at very little up front cost, and things look pretty good. All without the relatively large compromises being made for the competition's full hybrids (lost trunk space- Camry, lurching- Camry, weird packaging- Prius, heavy dependence on the batteries for overall results- both Camry and Prius). Don't get me wrong here, those compromises are fine if the end result of the maximum fuel savings is your goal, but most of us out here would like to not pay an arm and a leg for the car, or give up space (it's a PASSENGER car for a reason), or be able to carry 4 folks and their luggage on a trip, or even deal with strange drivetrain feel daily. To each his own. The mild hybrid is a good way to maximize existing powertrain efficiency without extreme expense or any real sacrifice in the capability of the platform in question. |
|
|
Regarding the 2008 Malibu mild hybrid, there's a bit more to the "why bother?" question than the EPA estimated 2 mpg increase. Caveat: I've never owned a GM product nor work for any car industry concern. + Mild hybrids like the design in the Malibu and Aura are relatively simple when compared to dual-mode hybrids. The reduced system complexity and small size of mild-hybrid components (its electric motor-generator (MG) fits in the ICE-only Malibu's alternator position) means that many car models could add the mild-hybrid feature. + The main fuel-saving strategy is to cut fuel supply when the engine is not powering motion, i.e. at rest (auto-stop) and deceleration (regenerative braking). + A minor benefit to regenerative braking is decreased use of brakes, thereby promising a maintenance savings for those components. + The MG is used for power assist during acceleration. While it is nothing like a performance hybrid Lexus or Accord, the mild hybrid should have equivalent pick-up to its ICE-only cousin despite a bit more weight. If the stars align, it could have marginally better acceleration or improved fuel economy during acceleration, or both. Here's a link to an SAE article about the GM mild hybrid system as included in the 2007 VUE. From what I've read about the Aura and Malibu mild hybrids, they are very similar. http://home.rochester.rr.com/ebay342/saturn%20hybrid.pdf Happy reading!
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone know the count of Malibu Hybrids sold? I'll bet not much. meanwhile the Toyot Prius and Camry Hybrid are selling pretty well.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Hybrid Vehicles - Archived Discussions Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
