CURB WEIGHT for Hybrids & BEVs

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by alexshock

Official data is that NiMH battery is 99 lbs, so transmission should be heavier (btw, there are 2 motors).

Probably so. It's handling a higher transmitted power and torque.
And that said, the hybrid will statistically have 48% higher mpg, so the enormous net gain overshadows any and all penalties due to increased mass.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Piotrsko

187 lbs minus 99 lb battery is 88 lbs. Divide that by two for two motors AND you still get a motor that weighs less than 50lbs

While a 44lb motor is impressive, it isn't going to make a large amount of hp for long periods of time before something gets too hot

I'm not familiar with either car, but if the hybrid has a CVT, it would help keep an Atkinson-cycle engine in it's sweet-spot, while the motor is providing 100% torque under all map conditions, plus providing the regenerative braking, capturing 81.1% of the available wheel power back from the insult of each acceleration, something the ICE can't do.
I've experimented with various driving behavior in the Prius, and have never been able to overwhelm it's engineering.
Power transistors, diodes, motor, and pack appear to be able to handle anything you can throw at it.
The Teslas which attend race camp at Laguna Seca Raceway, are software-programmed to just power-down if necessary, in order to protect critical hardware.
'ESTO' ( equipment smarter than operator )

[JSH]

Originally Posted by alexshock

Official data is that NiMH battery is 99 lbs, so transmission should be heavier (btw, there are 2 motors).

Every ICE vehicle has two motors - an Alternator and a Starter. For two-motor hybrids those are larger and more powerful.

[alexshock]

Originally Posted by JSH

Every ICE vehicle has two motors - an Alternator and a Starter. For two-motor hybrids those are larger and more powerful.

And serve for different purpose

[JSH]

Originally Posted by alexshock

And serve for different purpose

Yes and no. 2 motor hybrid cars like those used by Toyota and Honda do not have alternators or starters. The hybrid motors cover starting and generating power in addition to providing regenerative braking and forward motion.

In an standard diesel or gasoline car the motors are single function. In hybrids they provide multiple functions and allow simplification in other parts of the vehicle.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by aerohead

I'm not familiar with either car...

Toyota USA calls these cars the Corolla Hatch today.

We don't have a Corolla Hatch hybrid in the USA. We do have a sedan versions with and without hybrid. If we compare the same trim level (LE)

2850 lbs = Corolla LE (1.8L CVT)
2955 lbs = Corolla Hybrid LE (1.8L eCVT)

So if we compare apples to apples the Toyota's 1.8L hybrid drivetrain adds 105 lbs.

The standard gas version is rated at 33 mpg while the hybrid is 52 mpg. In more useful units that is 4.5 l/100km for the hybrid and 7.1 l/100km for the gas version.

The hybrid cost $3,125 more than the gas version.

[freebeard]

And serve for different purpose

Using the same fungible resource -- electricity.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JSH

Toyota USA calls these cars the Corolla Hatch today.

We don't have a Corolla Hatch hybrid in the USA. We do have a sedan versions with and without hybrid. If we compare the same trim level (LE)

2850 lbs = Corolla LE (1.8L CVT)
2955 lbs = Corolla Hybrid LE (1.8L eCVT)

So if we compare apples to apples the Toyota's 1.8L hybrid drivetrain adds 105 lbs.

The standard gas version is rated at 33 mpg while the hybrid is 52 mpg. In more useful units that is 4.5 l/100km for the hybrid and 7.1 l/100km for the gas version.

The hybrid cost $3,125 more than the gas version.

I suppose that different folks will have different motivations when purchasing.
Looks like the hybrid gets 57.5% higher mpg.
If they do the 'Click and Clack' reasoning,'purchase a car you like and drive it until it falls apart', then they're looking at 12-years, at a 57.5% fuel cost advantage, weighed against all other economic realities.
At $ 29.76-pound, the hybrid drive is currently cheaper than the price of brisket
You'd have something for twelve years with the hybrid. The brisket would be at the waste treatment facility withing 48-hours, and wouldn't benefit a person really any better than peanut butter, at $ 3.5 a jar.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by aerohead

I suppose that different folks will have different motivations when purchasing.
Looks like the hybrid gets 57.5% higher mpg.
If they do the 'Click and Clack' reasoning,'purchase a car you like and drive it until it falls apart', then they're looking at 12-years, at a 57.5% fuel cost advantage, weighed against all other economic realities.
At $ 29.76-pound, the hybrid drive is currently cheaper than the price of brisket
You'd have something for twelve years with the hybrid. The brisket would be at the waste treatment facility withing 48-hours, and wouldn't benefit a person really any better than peanut butter, at $ 3.5 a jar.

57.5% better mpg does not equal 57.5% fuel savings. The hybrid only lowers your fuel bill by 36.5%. This is why I like l/100km (or g/100 miles for those that hate the metric system) it is more directly related to the goal - saving fuel instead of being the inverse.


36.5% is still a hefty savings and pays for the extra upfront cost after 5 years even at cheap USA fuel prices. Economically there is no reason to purchase conventional gas cars anymore.

I'd say your 12 years of life is quite pessimistic. I would expect a Ni-MH hybrid battery to last 15 to 20 years for most people.

[alexshock]

Originally Posted by JSH

36.5% is still a hefty savings and pays for the extra upfront cost after 5 years even at cheap USA fuel prices. Economically there is no reason to purchase conventional gas cars anymore.

I'd say your 12 years of life is quite pessimistic. I would expect a Ni-MH hybrid battery to last 15 to 20 years for most people.

Also less maintenance-repair costs. Prius was recognized as the lowest TCO over lifetime car even comparing to electric cars.