Honda killing the Accord Hybrid

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Danny @ Jan 6 2007, 09:33 AM) [snapback]371728[/snapback]</div>

Agreed, Honda has a chronic habit of displeasing its marketing and sales personnel. They are good at it. After all, they've been doing it for at least 30 years. Unlike others, they are an engineering company and engineers (not product marketing specialists) know best. This is not a secret and also happens to be the good old Honda history.
So it is no surprise what you say about your conversations with your father in law.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Danny @ Jan 6 2007, 09:33 AM) [snapback]371728[/snapback]</div>

That is A reason but not the principal one. VW is the worst company to promote the "Diesel" cause. They consistently fail in the delivery of reliable technology and as a result they've tarnished themselves and their prospects into a "bottom of the stack" class.

As reasonably educated people we have to resist living in the past. Diesel was a particularly bad automotive technology that had no place in lightweight automotive applications - it was dirty and stinky. But, as it will soon be proven, it holds a much better future particularly in areas of alternative fuels and powertrains.

I have this eerie feeling that you sound exactly like the hybrid bashers did many years ago when they were first introduced. Unlike them, lets not resist a good effort (in fact lets aplaud it) when it leads us to the improvements in environmental responsibility and sustainability we all seek. For the more short-sighted, you cannot have a Diesel hybrid without a good diesel first. Agreed?

As a global company, the Accord Diesel will not be a flop for Honda. Only a myopic "North American-bound" interpretation of Honda (or Toyota's) image would render it so.


Cheers;

MSantos

 

I'lll weigh-in on what MSantos said.

It's too early to declare Honda is leaving the hybrid market - they are not pulling the hybrid Civic and have hybrid plans for the fit.

Yes - I'm a Honda guy, but acknowledge they have problems. Even with their hybrid challenges, they have the next largest share of the market and highest fleet fuel economy of any automaker. Whoever compared Honda to GM should be embarrassed. Mr. Honda made fuel economy a priority even in the 80's and 90's when nobody else cared - made sure the Acura MDX was more fuel efficient than the BMW X5, delayed entry into the truck market. I bet everybody here wish GM was trying to be green as hard as Honda. Futhermore, Honda is in a much better position - they are making a profit.

Tony, I have to agree - it would be nicer if the 2009 Accord was not only clean diesel, but clean diesel/hybrid. My take is time is of the essence and Honda is playing catchup football to offer something competive. I'd guess a clean-diesel/hybrid will follow in a couple of years. Thought I heard it takes around four years to bulid a new car from scratch.

Some of you need to read your posts. I hardly think PC is populated by neo-con monopolists, yet this thread has a few members (but not most of you) virtually suggesting Toyota is the only automaker that should be allowed to stay in business. I've been in numerous "my car is better than yours" threads - too many at various boards. A few dieselheads that think all hybrids should be crushed with the EV1s - a few here that seem to be saying - "no - crush the Honda hybrids and the diesels only" - a few Hondas enthusiasts that suggest crush the rest.... is that a true green mentality? Nooooooooo!!!!! Is allowing just the hybrid you drive going to delay Global Warming more? Remember that slogan from American History: "United we Stand - Divided we Fall?".

I think most people at PC and similar forums know only 1% of the vehicles in the US are hybird and are happy to see them regardless of who makes them - I do. When I see a Prius on the the road, this Insight driver waves and if there is a chance to chat - I do.

I think Honda is making an honest effort to be greener - unlike Detroit. They are having difficulties. I'm uncomfortable for ranting a bit, but those that seem to be celebrating Honda's difficulties need to reexamine themselves.

 

Just before heading here, I came across an announcement on Ford's new Powerstroke. It will reduce particulates by 90% and have emissions on par with gas engines. It will be available in the 2008 super duties. The trucks will be available in 2007, but the article didn't specify if the diesel would also be available that soon. I'm guessing it will be, which means it probably means the engine and emission systems isn't designed to take full advantage of the new clean diesel.

I'm hoping Ford is around long enough to introduce their diesel-electric hybrid. In concept vehicles it meets AT-PZEV.

I agree with Tony, Honda should put a baby IMA in not just their diesels, but all their vehicles for auto-stops during idling.

 

Hi All,

I think Honda is going away from Hybrids because there approach is a "tack-it-on" design. The problem with this, is that your tacking it on to everything else that is still there. And that is expensive and less reliable. Take the reliability of the standard car, and tack on other stuff, which is not perfect, of course, and the result is less reliable. And by tacking on the IMA , they are still paying for the transmission, starter and alternator, besides a battery and the IMA motor.

Toyota/TRW beat these guys to the winning hybrid concept, and Honda is acepting this, probably for the next 7 years (until the patents runout).

Diesel Hybrid's do not offer much bang. People dream about 80 mpg Diesel Hybrids, but I am not so sure its a possiblity. Bigger engines are more efficient. Bigger Diesel engines especially. This is due to the internal aerodynamics - bigger pipes, better reynolds number, dramatically less intake drag. Diesels do not have throttles, so no partial-power problem. They idle with very low consumption, so the on/off starting is not a big payoff with Diesels. Efficient Diesels need turbo-charging and/or compounding. Diesels require thicker cylinder walls, which make a smaller engine heavier per unit enclosed combustion volume. The hybrid battery allows a smaller engine, as the battery delivers the accelleration punch. But, if the smaller engine is not the same efficiency, or proportionally lighter, the advantage is not as big.

Another thing, turn off a Turbo-Diesel, and the turbo spins down. Leaving it not ready for efficient accelleration power.

Hybridisation of gasoline engine vehicle results in a dramatic efficiency improvment because the gas engine is very inefficient in a vehicle application. The Diesel is not nearly so inefficient in a vehicle application - so the the available improvement is not nearly the same for hybridizing a Diesel.

On the small engine thing, it probably makes sense to maket he Prius a three cylinder with bigger pistons. This should improve the intake aerodynamic losses with the larger pistons for the needed displacment. The Prius does not use high engine RPM anyway. Although the perfect primary balance of the inline four cylinder engine would be lost.

 

I have a big problem with people tacking on the word "Clean" to Diesel, and automatically assuming that diesel technology is comparable to hybrid technology in "clean."

Clean diesel technology like VW's for 2008 and Mercedes, and this Accord diesel means fewer emissions than diesels historically, but not compared to gasoline burning automobiles.

Diesel still has a fundamental problem with particulates, and NOx. Even with better filter technology and things like urea injection to reign in the NOx, the so called "clean" diesels of 2008 and later will likely only be on par with the average new gasoline car... In terms of emissions standards in states like California and the New England states, LEV II.

This is a far cry from the SULEV II and AT-PZEV that hybrid cars like the Prius have been able to achieve for the past 8 years.

Diesels represent better fuel economy, yes, and fewer hydrocarbons per mile driven than a conventional gasoline burning vehicle, but in terms of NOx and particulates, they are much worse right now, and 2008, they will only be average.

I'd be curious to see if a diesel-electric-hybrid can really reign in the NOx and particulates. If Honda or Toyota or Ford can make a diesel-hybrid that achieves SULEV or AT-PZEV, then i'd be all for it... but that is looking like it may be many years away.

One further caveat about diesel technology though : it's not going to be a golden bullet in terms of a cheap solution that also provides great fuel economy and great emissions. Diesel cars cost more than gasoline burners right now, and in 2008, when diesel cars return to the US with advanced emission control systems like urea injection, they'll be more expensive still..

People blast hybrid technology for having a big premium on the initial cost of the car, but who's to say that Diesel + Blutec or other emissions control won't be as bad or worse than the "premium" for hybrid drive?

This is part of the reason why diesel-electric hybrids in an car or SUV is impractical right now... it would be prohibitively expensive to pair an expensive diesel engine with an expensive hybrid drive system, and also because of the technical problem of idle-starting and stopping a diesel engine like the Prius HSD does with the gasoline.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ShellyT @ Jan 6 2007, 12:02 PM) [snapback]371758[/snapback]</div>

That's no longer good enough.

When I hear diesel all I think of is dirty and smelly. As good as a gas engine is no longer good enough.

Nothing I've read here has changed my mind.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(donee @ Jan 6 2007, 11:41 AM) [snapback]371780[/snapback]</div>

Humm.. I don't know what to say... :blink:

I think I understand what you mean on the first statement. The statements that follow it are not only foreign to me, but I am having trouble knowing what you are referring to? Are you sure you meant what you said ?

I'll tell you what... help me figure it out and I will be gentlemanly enough to agree. OK?


Cheers;

MSantos

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(donee @ Jan 6 2007, 11:41 AM) [snapback]371780[/snapback]</div>

Agreed on fewer cylinders in any hybrid system. The electric side of the hybrid should be able to steady the operation of the ICE. An ICE with fewer cylinders would be simpler and lighter. Someone will probably say this would put more reliance on the electric side, but the technology is improving enough that it could be done.

Let see where clean diesel technology is in 2-3 years. It's too early to declare it absolutely will work or fail.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MSantos @ Jan 6 2007, 11:48 PM) [snapback]371910[/snapback]</div>

Hi MSantos,

What I am trying to say is that Honda did not start with a clean sheet of paper. They built there Hybrid system on top of the existing design. Whereas Toyota was able to get rid of much of the standard car by elegant multi-functionalism of various parts in the Hybrid Synergy Drive design. As a result Toyota has a design that is allot cheaper, and allot more reliable (fewer parts).

 

to say that hybrids fit small cars and diesels fit big cars???

hmmm. that is an interesting observation... big rig diesels sure they abound but that "little car not good for diesel" philosophy isnt nearly as prevalent. but what is even more rare is the diesel that does not idle when sitting in traffic.

until we can solve the traffic problem, a car that idles is not a solution. gas mileage is not the only issue here. GW is a problem. cars sitting in traffic idling away, puffing away... even puffing a little is WAAAAY more than nothing.

that is what a hybrid gives you, ZERO pollution while "idling".

that is huge... that is why i think honda is making a mistake

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DaveinOlyWA @ Jan 7 2007, 12:37 AM) [snapback]371918[/snapback]</div>

Not sure if that directly follows. The big rigs use Diesels, because they run a million miles a year, and that is allot of fuel. Also, they like the turbo's because they have to cross the continental divide, where supercharging is of great value. I drove a gasoline engine 26 foot truck from Denver to Phoenix, and the first third (upslope around 10000 feet) of the trip we were full throttle at 25 mph. And our load was not that heavy. The big rigs were flying by us at 35 to 45 mph!


You are right from a polution standpoint, but if they are going to market on fuel economy, the idle stop is not of great value in a diesel due to the very low idle fuel consumption. That is related to the throttle in a gas engine. At idle the gas engine has to suck some air around the throttle plate, and that is part of the reason a gas engine idles at high consumtion.

Is there even any idling in the EPA test ?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(donee @ Jan 6 2007, 07:52 PM) [snapback]371928[/snapback]</div>

Are you talking about the EPA mileage test? If so, yes, there is in the city test, 18% of the time. See http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml and http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MSantos @ Jan 6 2007, 06:48 PM) [snapback]371910[/snapback]</div>

I can't speak for everything donee said, but I think he's talking about Honda's IMA (Integrated Motor Assist) system along w/the extra parts. The Prius has no starter, no alternator, and an apparently simple CVT/power split device instead of a transmission. The Accord Hybrid has 2 air conditioning compressors too (one driven by the gas engine and the other that's electrically driven when the gas engine is off) vs. the current gen Prius' single electrically driven one.

From http://wikicars.org/en/Integrated_Motor_Assist_(IMA) (not sure how accurate this is), it seems the IMA equipped cars have a conventional starter too but eliminated the alternator.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Jan 6 2007, 02:11 AM) [snapback]371701[/snapback]</div>

I hope you didn't mean the above to be taken seriously.

Locomotives are series hybrids because it isn't practical to build a transmission and clutch that is strong enough to accelerate a mile long train from a standstill.

And as far as diesels being better suited for larger vehicles - have you ever noticed how much torque diesel engines produce compared to the same size gasoline engines? Why do you think they're an added-cost option for heavy-duty (three-quarter and full ton) pickups, positioned above the largest gasoline engines?

It hasn't been mentioned in this thread yet, but the European E-class Bluetec Mercedes-Benz is very impressive in it's performance and economy. Actually, I guess this car is available in the US, just not in CA (where I live) or the other four states that use our emissions standards. 0-60 in 6.6 seconds, 400 lb-ft of torque, and 37mpg freeway.

There are certain aspects of diesel engines where they are far superior to gasoline engines. For instance, diesels have less pumping losses than gasoline engines (since air isn't throttled), which means much higher efficiency at partial throttle openings. Since highway driving is at partial throttle, I'd expect a diesel Prius to absolutely destroy a gasoline Prius at highway mpg. Diesels are so efficient at partial throttle that they unlike gasoline engines, they never overheat when idling for long periods in hot climates (lost energy as a result of inefficiency escapes as heat). Ok, yeah, you're right, my Prius won't overheat at a stop if I leve the engine running either. I was really trying to emphasize the efficiency of diesels at partial throttle.

Unless you've got at least an MS in ME, I'd say you don't know enough to be second guessing Honda. I don't, and I won't.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(donee @ Jan 6 2007, 09:36 PM) [snapback]371917[/snapback]</div>

That is exactly what I hoped you would say. What information would you have that proves the HSD is more reliable and alot cheaper?

Last time I checked, the HSD system was definitely not more reliable... at least not enough to warrant the unique dictinction you seem to alude to. I agree, that in principle the HSD is supposed to be more reliable, and for that plus other good reasons, is why I love the HSD system. But love can be blind if not supported by some form of evidence. My evidence not only has a practical overtone in that I actually owned and still own an IMA equipped vehicle, but also is supported by what the industry seems to report. Perhaps the latest Consumer Reports reliability ratings should help a little if you do not believe me.

Cheaper? I am not sure of that either (I'm trying to be nice here). In fact, hybrid integration via Honda's method has always been identified as more cost effective which has indeed allowed Honda to be the first to hybridize their more popular legacy models.

When comparing both vehicles via their respective service manuals I cannot say that Toyota's HSD is simpler than Honda's. In fact, I find them BOTH a veritable work of art, and I simply do not understand where a Prius only perspective such as that of some folks on this forum can allow them to state otherwise.


Cheers;

MSantos

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jan 6 2007, 02:54 PM) [snapback]371817[/snapback]</div>

Consider towing 10000 lbs with the gas and Powerstroke powered trucks. The Powerstroke has less CO2 output, better pulling power, and PM and NOx as good as a gas engine. This is one area where diesels will continue to excel until a decent hybrid powered HD pickup is available. Even the hybrid masters at Toyota are reportedly having difficulties making an HSD powered half ton. I hope they decide to do a D-CAT Tundra as well.

Regarding idle stop on a diesel the Peugeot and Citroen diesel-electric hybrids will use a start-stop function so it is presumably beneficial to some degree. A 1.9L TDI supposedly burns 0.4L/hr (0.11 US gal per hr) when idling.

Nice to see another Friendly Manitoban on the message boards.

 

well it's that just great.

whatever happened to their promise to go all hybrid by 2008?

 

Tideland,

You continue to impress me. You have a very balanced and fairly knowledgeable interpretation of HSD and IMA - and I am willing to bet - it is folks like you that actually make a difference in helping the hybrid cause. Because for a moment there, I thought the following was true:

"If owning a Prius means having to subscribe to (or even be associated with) the narrow perspectives some folks here at PC have, then I made a mistake - time to sell the stupid car. At the least I get to prove to myself that the resale value thing is true."

Fortunately, I am not that precocious and like some, I like to make choices based on technical merit. Buying a Prius is not one I regret. Frequenting and recommending this site is one that I sometimes do.

Thank you for showing how to do it right.


Cheers;

MSantos

 

Hi All,

I think a few of you and MSantos in particular is being blinded by economics. Just because one has economies of scale in legacy parts, does not mean they will be cheaper forever.

The Honda Accord Hybrid legacy parts were never apparently sufficiently economic from the start. As it cost more than a Prius, a car that accomplishes almost all of the customer driving requirement that is expected of the Accord.

The HSD is more expensive than the IMA, but its not more expensive than the IMA plus starter, plus alternator, plus larger engine, plus the extra parts in the Accord automatic transmission (even with the economies of scale). Otherwise they could have sold the Accord Hybrid for $25K rather than $30K.

There was a link on PC here of a american Toyota engineer admiting in public that the add-on cost of the Camry HSD system cost $2K. This, even though the battery probably cost more than $2K itself. Prius batteries cost $2500. The Camry battery is a little smaller. The elegance of the HSD design and the multi-functionalism of its components results in the add-on cost being actually cheaper than battery cost!