Posted by Jeff DeWitt on July 23, 2007, 11:09 pm
Mike Rosenberg wrote:
>
>> I am, however, far from convinced that the purchase of a hybrid can
>> actually be justified NOW on purely rational grounds.
>
> In September, 2004, I bought a Prius for about the same price as a
> comparably equipped Camry would have cost, and I've averaged 46 MPG
> since then. Let's assume the Camry would have gotten 30 MPG. I've
> driven 72,000 miles and have used about 1565 gallons of gas, whereas the
> Camry would have used about 2400 gallons. Is that rational enough?
>
What is it going to cost to replace the batteries when they go bad? How
about those two motor/generators?
Some of us keep our cars for a really long time, I've got well over
300,000 miles on my little Cherokee and have no plans to replace it.
What is going to happen to a Prius as it gets really high mileage?
Those cars are a lot more complected then a conventional car.
http://www.cleangreencar.co.nz/page/prius-technical-info
There is a lot to be said for the KISS principal.
I think the current hybrid technology is very much a transitional
technology, much as the turboprop was. Technologies like GM is
developing for the Chevy Volt are going to become a lot more common than
current hybrid technology.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/01/07/detroit-auto-show-its-here-gms-plug-in-hybrid-is-the-chevy-v/
Jeff DeWitt
Posted by Michelle Steiner on July 23, 2007, 11:41 pm
> What is it going to cost to replace the batteries when they go bad?
> How about those two motor/generators?
What makes you assume that they're going to go bad?
> I think the current hybrid technology is very much a transitional
> technology, much as the turboprop was. Technologies like GM is
> developing for the Chevy Volt are going to become a lot more common
> than current hybrid technology.
*Any* technology is transitional technology. But I'd rather have a
hybrid now than have a gas guzzler now. It's like computers; no matter
when you buy one, a better model will be coming along sooner or later.
--
Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.
Posted by Jeff DeWitt on July 24, 2007, 12:04 am
Michelle Steiner wrote:
>
>> What is it going to cost to replace the batteries when they go bad?
>> How about those two motor/generators?
>
> What makes you assume that they're going to go bad?
What makes you think they won't? EVERYTHING wears out eventually. That
isn't a dig against Toyota, that's real life/
>
>> I think the current hybrid technology is very much a transitional
>> technology, much as the turboprop was. Technologies like GM is
>> developing for the Chevy Volt are going to become a lot more common
>> than current hybrid technology.
>
> *Any* technology is transitional technology. But I'd rather have a
> hybrid now than have a gas guzzler now. It's like computers; no matter
> when you buy one, a better model will be coming along sooner or later.
Well to a point, but basic automotive technology hasn't changed that
much in over 50 years... the engine and drivetrain in my 1960 Studebaker
Champ isn't much different than the engine and drivetrain in a new
F150... V8, stick, driving the real wheels.
The Prius is very different, and when things settle down again the
drivetrain in a mainstream car may be quite different from today, but it
won't be much like a Prius either.
Jeff DeWitt
>
Posted by Michelle Steiner on July 24, 2007, 2:19 am
> >> What is it going to cost to replace the batteries when they go
> >> bad? How about those two motor/generators?
> >
> > What makes you assume that they're going to go bad?
>
> What makes you think they won't? EVERYTHING wears out eventually.
> That isn't a dig against Toyota, that's real life/
That doesn't mean that they will go bad before the internal combustion
engine goes bad. That doesn't mean they will go bad before the body
rusts out. They have fewer moving parts than the ICE, so I'd expect the
ICE to go bad before either of them do.
> The Prius is very different, and when things settle down again the
> drivetrain in a mainstream car may be quite different from today, but
> it won't be much like a Prius either.
And that's a reason not to buy a Prius today?
--
Support the troops: Bring them home ASAP.
Posted by Jeff DeWitt on July 24, 2007, 4:14 am
Michelle Steiner wrote:
>
>>>> What is it going to cost to replace the batteries when they go
>>>> bad? How about those two motor/generators?
>>> What makes you assume that they're going to go bad?
>> What makes you think they won't? EVERYTHING wears out eventually.
>> That isn't a dig against Toyota, that's real life/
>
> That doesn't mean that they will go bad before the internal combustion
> engine goes bad. That doesn't mean they will go bad before the body
> rusts out. They have fewer moving parts than the ICE, so I'd expect the
> ICE to go bad before either of them do.
BATTERIES?!? If that engine is anything like most modern engines it
should be good for 10 years and 150,000 miles or so, are the batteries
going to last that long? And those motor/generators, does anyone really
know how long they are going to last? I've heard they had real problems
with them in first generation Prius's.
>
>> The Prius is very different, and when things settle down again the
>> drivetrain in a mainstream car may be quite different from today, but
>> it won't be much like a Prius either.
>
> And that's a reason not to buy a Prius today?
Well yes. Oddball technology is harder to get fixed when it starts
aging. It may be (will probably be) that hardly anyone except the
dealer will be able to work on the things, and when it gets to be 10 to
20 years old the dealer may not be able (or willing) to either.
Jeff DeWitt
XML site map
>> I am, however, far from convinced that the purchase of a hybrid can
>> actually be justified NOW on purely rational grounds.
>
> In September, 2004, I bought a Prius for about the same price as a
> comparably equipped Camry would have cost, and I've averaged 46 MPG
> since then. Let's assume the Camry would have gotten 30 MPG. I've
> driven 72,000 miles and have used about 1565 gallons of gas, whereas the
> Camry would have used about 2400 gallons. Is that rational enough?
>