Quote:
Originally Posted by roflwaffle
There won't be a 100% improvement for a ~$3000-$4000 premium over a BE hybrid AFAIK.  The BE hybrids have already proven to be successful. UPS ordered 200 of 'em, so the proof is in the pudding IMO. I've been hearing about hydraulic hybrids since 2006, and UPS is supposedly testing them too, but they haven't caught on like the BEs have AFAIK. Time will tell I suppose, but if UPS ordered 200 BE hybrids after testing, but no hydraulic hybrids after testing, I have a feeling the BE hybrid is a better deal. Barring of course UPS not being done w/ the hydraulic hybrids or something else preventing them from getting good data to compare both. |
A horse is proven to be effective, same logic was used against the first cars.
I guess the grass to hoof comparison has been long forgotten, along with the statement that if man was meant to fly he would have wings.
In the UPS comparison you draw a conclusion without data, just assumptions based on the number of vehicles purchased.
The HH versions supposedly saved 800 gallons of fuel per year on average, while never needing a battery replacement, which would destroy the comparison, and is an inevitable cost.