Ho-Hum For Hybrids

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Jul 20 2007, 04:06 PM) [snapback]482406[/snapback]</div>

It's simple. They're measuring different things --- measuring a car's footprint (length x width) versus measuring a car's useful capacity. The Prius does have a footprint typical of today's compact cars, but has the useful capacity of today's medium size cars. In fact, the Prius has a smaller footprint than the Corolla. Here are the footprints of Camry, Corolla and Prius:

CAMRY: 189.2" x 71.7"

COROLLA: 178.3" x 66.9"

PRIUS: 175.0" x 67.9"

--- Boo Radley

 

HTTP 404 Not Found

 

I thought they used the styrofoam under the bumper for the same reason they used it to pack computers. It's a lightweight, energy absorbing material that will help protect the contents from impact.

But I prefer to feel the driving experience. So let's bring back designs that will transfer all the energy of a crash to me, the driver.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(catgic @ Jul 24 2007, 06:44 AM) [snapback]484049[/snapback]</div>

Nowhere near as far left as you might think.

I ride a motorcycle, so I'm not a safety nut, either.

I just don't see the point of making cars with no regard for pedestrian safety, with sharp leading edges, with styling doodads that do nothing but severely injure pedestrians needlessly.

I'd like the average motorist to pull his head out of his arse and practice safe driving, to look out for vulnerable road users like pedestrians and motorcyclists, but I guess I'm dreaming a bit...

Harry

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Jul 23 2007, 04:44 PM) [snapback]483766[/snapback]</div>

The HCH has a tachometer for the same reason that every car should have one, so you know what RPM the engine is running. For the record, the HCH does not have a B mode like the the Prius but instead relies on the the driver to shift the transaxle to a lower "gear" manually when the RPM gets too high.

Having a tachometer is very handy when driving in the mountains, particularity when descending steep grades. Please see my previous post for my rant about why the Prius should have a tachometer and my experiences with the engine RPM's "bouncing" like I'm hitting the rev limiter but having no way of knowing for sure. So then I have to use the brakes and end up with cooked and smoking brakes at the bottom of of a 3 mile grade. This is a grade I drive at least 30 times a year.

 

Hobbit et al have actually installed tachs in the prius so that it's much easier to keep the ICE in ideal RPM range. I wish it had one, along with an easy way to monitor engine temp.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Jul 24 2007, 08:56 AM) [snapback]484150[/snapback]</div>

Check out the Scangauge II to see if it will fill your needs (it will!).

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Jul 23 2007, 03:44 PM) [snapback]483766[/snapback]</div>

Ahhh... diversity of backgrounds and experiences is what makes these types of venues great.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Jul 23 2007, 03:44 PM) [snapback]483766[/snapback]</div>

Pardon my ignorance, but I do not recall a press release, a channel document or even a news transcript that indicated that Honda stated "Diesel technology will eclipse hybrids". Quite the opposite: They are very focused on what they believe in - whether it is done incorrectly in our eyes or not - that each interim technology (diesel and hybrid) has a corresponding set of optimums.

Perhaps you'd be kind enough to direct me to that info. If you can't, then I would be happy to produce many press releases (many dating back a few years) to prove my assertion.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Jul 23 2007, 03:44 PM) [snapback]483766[/snapback]</div>

The tach, issue was already answered quite well in previous posts. Furthermore, I added a scangauge to my Prius simply because the tachometer is a feature I miss dearly. We can't possibly tap into the higher potential of the Prius without knowing what the gas engine is up to. I envy the Camry for this reason. I personally think it was a poor design decision not to have a tach gauge (on any kind) in the Prius.

The evaluation of the interior is always highly subjective. I can find many people who love it (myself) included, and people who hate it (my wife). What else can I add to this? Nothing.
Whichever interior design decision is taken, it alone does not define the suitability and potential of a hybrid vehicle (at least for some people). I even wonder if it is not a waste of time to even regard it as deterministic.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Jul 23 2007, 03:44 PM) [snapback]483766[/snapback]</div>

And judging from the latest investor reports, selling they do. The rest is history, and depending on which side of the fence we're in, history can be written differently by different people. Would you say it is bad if I choose to be and live on both sides of the fence?

Take care;

MSantos

 

HTTP 404 Not Found

 

Hi Catgic,

I think the Prius slanted front would be better for pedetrians. Think about what happens when a pedestrian is hit by a upright windshield car. The pedestrian's feet are swept out from underneath him/her, and then his/her body is up in free space, with enough momentum to drive his/her head through the windsheild. The consequences are a cut throat, or decapitation.

In the Prius, the hips hit the slanted hood, giving an upward motion to the body which reduces the impact of the head with the windshield. Result, less decapitations.

 

HTTP 404 Not Found

 

Yeah, a little bit of snark.
I'm getting the impression that you are decrying the flimsiness of modern vehicles. Yet that flimsiness serves a purpose. There is a photo on the boards of a Prius with a smashed in front and rear. The driver walked away. A land boat may be less damaged under the same forces, but the driver may not be walking away.

If they don't increase safety, then they are reducing weight. Would you be able to get 62mpg in a Prius with thicker body panels and a full metal bumper?

Full frames are not the pinnacle of auto engineering. Why stop building them if they were? They are cheaper to make. I'm many of the improvements developed with unibodies could applied to them.

If it weren't for all the idiots on the road, I might have gotten a motorcycle. Even considered a scooter instead of a Prius.

 

HTTP 404 Not Found

 

I realize the discussion has turned away from this, but as a train aficionado I wanted to mention that all that energy typically is recovered through dynamic braking, a close cousin of regenerative braking (Wiki the phrases for particulars). And while complete stops are becoming less common for freight trains as US railroads expand double-track capacity, it's still a country of mountains and hills and there's ample opportunity for dynamic braking to help slow tonnage on the descent.

 

Catgic, this is the quote that stuck in my mind, and which led to my mis-impression.

More air bags will make us safer, but thinner metal and plastics didn't make cars less safe. By giving under lesser forces, they probably made the car safer that the full-framed cars of yesteryear.

As for art and engineering, some of those yesteryear cars looked about the same as cars do today. There were some real works of art, but there are some of those today.

Dynamic braking is just regenerative braking without a battery to capture the electricity. It's used alot to spare wear on the friction brakes.
I think GE is putting batteries into their next gen of locomotive. Their new engine is 3% more efficient than the previous one. Not much, but it means saving something like 10,000 gallons of diesel a year.

 

HTTP 404 Not Found

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(catgic @ Jul 24 2007, 06:44 AM) [snapback]484049[/snapback]</div>

Yes, I only pop in to be contrary, no need to post when I agree

The most heavily government-regulated hard engineering design I know of is that of airliners - do you consider modern airliners "poorly engineered"? The dumbest engineering decision on them are the windows, and that's entirely free market driven. The government does pretty well regulation-wise. Remember the plane that skidded off the runway into a gully in Canada, where no one died? The 100% survival rate is a direct result of government interference (the 90 second evacuation requirement). The free market would NEVER waste money on the extra wing exits driven by that requirement.

Government has proven unparalleled at providing roadways, and the US public higher education system (yeah, K-12 is babysitting) is the best in the world, bar none. Traffic fatalities per mile driven have nosedived in response to government mandates, which have been imposed in a manner that gave the free market flexibility (for example, notice how air bags have completely replaced those loathsome automatic shoulder belts that dangled from a track over the door?).

Seatbelts, seatbelts!, were fought tooth and nail by the auto companies and only forced in by government regulation.

The government has funded the basic research that has driven America's economy - everything from the last technological revolution (the foundations of semiconductor research were done by the government during the war) to IMHO the next (the DOE was the driver behind mapping the human genome) was funded by the government.

In regards to Europe, remember it was the obnoxiously stodgy FDA that prevented the sale of Thalidomide in the US, even after it was in use in Europe. And it is the US government which has provided an open door for the implementation of GMO crops, which hold such incredible promise to improved agricultural efficiency (as they did decades ago, when grain genetically modified by nuclear exposure essentially saved India from massive starvation).

Dismissing government makes one appear breathtakingly ignorant of basic history. Just because it's proven fashionable for both parties to denigrate it (if the moderate voters are all too disgusted to vote they only have to pander to their respective simplistic, single-issue "cores"), if you do a critical analysis and think for yourself you'll see government is an incredible machine that just needs regular maintenance to continue being the single greatest improver of human life and happiness in history (we're talking it beats agriculture here, nevermind the Prius).

 

Yellow Ribbon-On-Oak-Tree pinning, Tree-hugging drivers choose to “Do Commuter Battle†on the freeways, toll ways, highways and byways of the U.S. in their “Chariots-Of-Choice.†During your daily commute, if you take on a Hummer or other lumbering SUV on in a Frontal Crash with your air bag equipped, silently gliding Prius, or one takes you on, the IIHS says you have a “Good Performer’s†chance, but not a “Top Safety Pick†chance of surviving the encounter.

Now let me beam you over to the highways and byways of Iraq; have you put on some Camoes and “saddle up†to make the “Patrol†commute from the Baghdad to Fallujah and back. Unfortunately, there was no room for your Prius in the C-17 “Globemaster III,†so it cannot make the trip with you. Therefore, you will have to make the daily “commute†in a HVMMR “Hummer†without air bags, without the "Green-Zone Touring Package," without Bluetooth®, without JBL® AM/FM 6-disc in-dash CD changer w/ nine speakers, but with plenty of IED “Crush Zones.â€

What is you view of highway and personal safety now? Are you longing for your 2.8-4.1 mm thick, high-strength steel skinned, Styrofoam-Stuffed, 2921 lb “Green†60-MPG Prius people mover, or would you rather stick with the Up-Armored, 5,200 lb “Green†8-MPG Gas/Diesel-Guzzling HMMWV “Hummer†that weighs the same as my 1974, “Body-On-Frame†Thunderbird “War-Wagon, Land Yacht†with 5-MPH bumpers did?

My vehicle safety point is, many folks here in PriusChat talk disparaging about the “Hummer†because it is big, lumbering and has very poor fuel efficiency. However, these same “Green†tree-hugging folks would the first to scramble and run up your back to grab the “shotgun†seat to ride in the dreaded “Hummer,†if they had to make the roundtrip commute between Baghdad to Fallujah and return, rather than make it in a “Green and Safe†Prius.

What folks want in “Vehicle Safety,†is relative to their particular transportation scenario.
[/quote]Wow dude, thought that some of my posts were out there! You seem to have a problem with styrofoam "covering" a bumper, not the absence of a bumper, because the hardened part of the bumper is "covered" in styrofoam to soften the impact against a soft target. The hard bumper is in behind the styrofoam, unlike the old cars that had really heavy steel and chrome bumpers that had almost no "give" to them and failed to absorb enough energy, by deforming to keep pedestrians or passengers from being turned to jelly. If I were in Iraq, my choice would be to fly an F-15, way above the danger and dropping bombs on the ground pounders below. Trying to make up for 35 years of lost time in vehicle design because babyboomers were stuck living in the glory days of the past, fighting battles in their heads that happened in the past or imagined to prepare for the worst case possible, makes the transition to vehicles based on needs, not wants or fantasy, so much more difficult.

 

HTTP 404 Not Found