Do Hybrids Really Make Sense?

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by oldtamiyaphile

Problem is there aren't enough first gen Insights with just replaced IMA batteries to go around.

Who needs a just-replaced IMA battery? I bought my 2000 Insight in '03 or '04, paid $8500, and have driven it about 140K miles since, at an average 71.2 mpg. So that's 1966 gallons of gas, or (figuring an average $3/gal over the period) $5899. Few other cars would have gotten even half that mpg, so figure I've saved at least $5K, and I'm still driving the car, with the original IMA battery.

[Occasionally6]

Originally Posted by oldtamiyaphile

I too went with the first example that came to mind. I don't know that Mercedes built the hybrid to improve performance, it's improved acceleration comes from having an extra motor to power it along, given the same ICE, it's impossible for it not to outperform the ICE only version. I maintain that it's the most valid comparison posted so far, same engine, same ECO tyres and aero tweaks etc. If you can find something as close, post it.

That's the point though; it's the same engine. Hybrid, at least in strong form, allows a downsized engine that can be loaded harder, operating at higher BSFC, while maintaining similar performance to the comparable larger engine when the electric motor is used.

Another way to view hybrid is as power averaging. The average power requirement for a vehicle, including idle where the only power requirement is for HVAC, in car entertainment and maybe lighting, is much lower than the peak power requirement - acceleration, climbing hills etc. With hybrid the engine can be sized to more closely match the average power to its most efficient power.

We don't get the Fusion, but you're comparing two very different engines. Small capacity turbos are not known for economy.

Maybe. An alternative to hybrid, with less effect, is to use a smaller engine, with forced induction for when high power is wanted.

One example is in the Australian Ford Falcon where a 2.0l turbo (same engine family as the Fusion I think) was offered as an alternative to a 4.0l engine. The performance was all but identical, with a significant fuel economy benefit.

[oldtamiyaphile]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

Who needs a just-replaced IMA battery? I bought my 2000 Insight in '03 or '04, paid $8500, and have driven it about 140K miles since, at an average 71.2 mpg. So that's 1966 gallons of gas, or (figuring an average $3/gal over the period) $5899. Few other cars would have gotten even half that mpg, so figure I've saved at least $5K, and I'm still driving the car, with the original IMA battery.

Cowmeat's did apparently.

IMO 1st gen Insights don't belong in the debate, as there are no alloy bodied, streamlined, two seat sub compact ICE cars to compare it to. It's probably closest to an Elio trike which gets (should it actually be built) similar numbers.

All that said, if I did find a first gen manual Insight (at a guess they number since digits in my state), I'd buy it

[oldtamiyaphile]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

Most hybrids don't use lithium but NiMH batteries, like mine.
Now some earlier hybrids do have battery trouble, others don't.
It is entirely possible to make a hybrid with the battery lasting for 300 K miles or more, as several Prius and 2nd gen Insight owners have experienced.

The wear on the ICE should be less, just like brakes etc so less maintenance on those.

If I was buying a hybrid, I'd spring for the PHEV type.

I know some hybrids have gone very long distances on the original batteries, but these long distance cruisers are probably more gentle on their batteries then people who drive shorter distances, and paradoxically, hybrids are more suited to shorter distance stop start use, on the highway, ICE's can do as well and sometimes better.

Although there's going to be less wear on many of the mechanical parts of a hybrid, in my experience with low mileage cars, it becomes more critical to ensure things like fluid changes are done on time.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by oldtamiyaphile

...paradoxically, hybrids are more suited to shorter distance stop start use, on the highway, ICE's can do as well and sometimes better.

Again, just not true. Providing, of course, that the hybrid vehicle is properly designed and sized, rather than just being tacked on as an afterthought. It's all down to right-sizing the engine to be efficient at cruise, while using the electric motor for acceleration.

[3-Wheeler]

Several years ago, we had a summer intern college student here, that participated in his school's super-high mileage program.

He indicated that his entry in the field got well over 600 mpg by using a Briggs engine, which was operated under normal P&G methods.

Now picture a hybrid vehicle running steady state on the highway, and running off electric power. The gas engine is cycled on/off, and only run in it's BSFC mode of operation, with optimum thermal efficiency.

Throttle plate is probably set to 80% and engine rpm's are kept within a narrow range for minimum fuel consumption, with the sole purpose of charging the battery backup again when needed.

The above is why a properly designed hybrid will alway beat an ICE in similar driving conditions, especially when the ICE is continuously run at normal road load, i.e. with the throttle plate almost closed, and rpm's out of the BSFC regime.

Jim.

[Gasoline Fumes]

I think a hybrid makes a lot of sense for regular drivers, especially in city driving. My parents are looking for a newer car, and I'm convinced the 2nd gen ('04-'09) Prius is the best option. They do a lot of city driving and don't hypermile. No non-hybrid will get even close to the Prius city MPG. Especially with an automatic. And at least around here, a used Prius doesn't seem more expensive than a similar-sized non-hybrid.

For hypermilers, I think most of the hybrid advantage doesn't apply. I averaged over 70 MPG last Summer in a '91 Civic Wagon. I don't think a Prius could do much better. But I'll try to prove myself wrong every chance I get!

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by 3-Wheeler

Throttle plate is probably set to 80% and engine rpm's are kept within a narrow range for minimum fuel consumption, with the sole purpose of charging the battery backup again when needed.

The above is why a properly designed hybrid will alway beat an ICE in similar driving conditions, especially when the ICE is continuously run at normal road load, i.e. with the throttle plate almost closed, and rpm's out of the BSFC regime.

Or imagine a mild hybrid setup going down the highway with a long cruising gear, throttle mostly open, with electric ponies ready to kick in when you need a boost. No losses from powering a generator, and charging the battery (~85% or less efficient process). No need to pulse and glide, which frankly gets a bit tiring on flat roads.

[gone-ot]

Lookup efficiency of electric motor versus internal combustion engine...there's the answer.

[Hersbird]

Modern direct injection can eliminate the throttle then add cylinder deactivation and variable cam profiles to that. A non-hybrid can also be optimized to have just enough power for cruising speed and the ability to add more power when needed.
What is missing on current cars with cylinder deactivation is the ability to lock it in and then add more throttle to put the motor in a more efficient throttle/rpm as soon as you add just a little throttle the computer kicks you out of cylinder deactivation.
The 2015 Chevy trucks now have direct injection and cylinder deactivation. I am interested in how well they might do in real world but would also like to see new engines built from the ground up with this in mind rather then add-ons to old motors which is what Chevy has done.