View Single Post
Old 03-08-2015, 09:46 PM   #121 (permalink)
oldtamiyaphile
Master EcoModder
 
oldtamiyaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,510

UFI - '12 Fiat 500 Twinair
Team Turbocharged!
90 day: 40.3 mpg (US)

Jeep - '05 Jeep Wrangler Renegade
90 day: 18.09 mpg (US)

R32 - '89 Nissan Skyline

STiG - '16 Renault Trafic 140dCi Energy
90 day: 30.12 mpg (US)

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius
Team Toyota
90 day: 50.25 mpg (US)

Premodded - '49 Ford Freighter
90 day: 13.48 mpg (US)

F-117 - '10 Proton Arena GLSi
Pickups
Mitsubishi
90 day: 37.82 mpg (US)

Ralica - '85 Toyota Celica ST
90 day: 25.23 mpg (US)

Sx4 - '07 Suzuki Sx4
90 day: 32.21 mpg (US)

F-117 (2) - '03 Citroen Xsara VTS
90 day: 30.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 325
Thanked 452 Times in 319 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by IamIan View Post
J

#C> Efficiency / Performance ICE vs Electric Motor.

If you can have the ICE run 100% of the time only at it's peak efficiency point it's no contest the ICE-Only wins ...

(1B)
Regenerative braking is 100% gain for the HEV .. a ICE-Only vehicle will throw 100% of that energy away.

In heavy stop and go traffic this adds up quickly to large amount of energy.

In other types of driving it adds up slower ... I've read the 'average' US commute burns up ~6% of the fuel energy to braking alone .. Link.
I P&G/ EOC at BSFC close to 90% of the time so I guess the ICE wins. The question was whether a hybrid does anything that an optimised ICE can't and the answer is really, not much.

Regen braking, my Fiat only runs the alternator on overrun/ braking so it does recapture lost energy (a lot of European cars have 'intelligent' alternators). How much? Well let's say I can drive at least 200km of country roads without the alt kicking in. Mazda's capacitor system lets it regen/ store even more energy.

Of course, the regen argument doesn't really apply to hypermilers who don't brake anyway. See thread: Coasting more efficient than regen - Audi

There was talk of VW releasing a manual ICE car with an auto EOC feature. Team this with a regen alternator and a driver who understands BSFC and you're on a winner.

PS we all know 1st gen Insights are efficient, but they're also small, alloy bodied, aerodynamic and cost new nearly three times as much as a 1.0 Suzuki (with four seats). That means they still haven't reached the break even point cost wise (and like early Prius models, they were likely sold at a loss). We also know that a aeromodded Suzuki/Metro can match an Insight in the right hands.

Suzuki Swift 1.0 cost in 2000 $14k (locally).
Gen 1 Insight cost $40K (locally).

Fuel cost (using a deliberately high local cost of $1.50/ litre (or $6.60/ gallon!), means the Insight needs to travel 577,000 trouble free km to break even with the Suzuki. So no Insight owner I'm aware of has a car that's actually reached the break even point yet! Now if you're paying around $1/gallon (so I hear), you'd need to travel nearly 4 million km to break even with the Suzuki - let alone if you hypermiled the Suzuki. Like I said, 1st Gen owners have a really skewed perspective on this issue.

__________________






  Reply With Quote