Honda To Challenge Prius With a Dedicated Hybrid Model

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ACD @ Jun 28 2007, 02:59 PM) [snapback]469614[/snapback]</div>

What about the regenerative braking and the CVT? A lot of them advertise the regenerative braking but I think the CVT is also an integral part of the hybrid system, allowing for better fuel economy. So it's more than the ICE and the MFD.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarinJohn @ Jun 28 2007, 11:21 AM) [snapback]469396[/snapback]</div>

Facetious or serious?

Actually from the time they announced the new plant in Indiana last year it was always planned to be the site of the 'smaller-than-Civic-hybrid'. It makes perfect sense for their IMA. It might reach Prius levels of fuel economy well into the 50's. In addition if it's priced in the $18000-$20000 range it will be a great competitor against the Hyundai's, the new Versa/Sentra, the new Yaris/Corolla...and it also might cannabilize some Civic ICE sales.

Toyota's new Prius A will probably be a competitor I'd guess.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ACD @ Jun 28 2007, 03:59 PM) [snapback]469614[/snapback]</div>

I disagree. Many hybrid buyers do a lot of research. They are aware of the benefits in terms of better fuel economy, lower emission, instantaneous power response, regen braking, ICE shutoff, quiet and smooth electric drive, etc...

Hybrid car buyers buy with a purpose or statement on top of those revolutionary benefits. It is VERY important that the car was imagined, designed, engineered, built and market with the same purpose. I believe this is what made Prius successful.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jun 28 2007, 04:15 PM) [snapback]469657[/snapback]</div>

OK look, Hybrid, check its definition.

The design of the car itself does not make it a hybrid. The technology that makes the car move is what makes a hybrid. Any vehicle that has hybrid technology is a hybrid, whether it was designed as such from the ground up or had the hybrid technology slapped into it, it is still a hybrid. Compared to its non hybrid partner, it will be the lowest emissions, most efficient vehicle in that line, it doesn't matter if the body/chassis was not designed for it, it is still a hybrid. IE a hybrid is a hybrid is a hybrid, doesn't matter what skin it has, it is a hybrid. The Camry and Highlander use the exact same hybrid technology, Hybrid Synergy Drive, the only difference between the Camry/Highlander and the Prius is the size of the engine. Everything from the intake to the tailpipe is the same technology, the electrical systems are the same, the transmissions are the same, the only difference is what they are mounted in. The difference in economy numbers is due to the fact that a V6 is used and the vehicles themselves are heavier. DC of the vehicle plays an insignificant part in this mainly due to the speeds they drive, with the exception of the highlander, a brick is still a brick, but between the Camry and the Prius, the differences between the two isn't enough to factor in, IOW, if you dropped that same V6 into the Prius, the FE numbers would be so close between the two that there would be little comparisons, but the Prius would be one quick little bugger. When you get over a certain MPH, say 85 or better, that is where the DC kicks in, the lowest DC will be able to move faster though the air, but at normal highway speeds, when the difference is a mere .02%, you really wont see much difference, maybe 1 to 2 MPG difference, which when you get over 40 MPG is not much at all.

If you take the Prius, and slap an regular drive train into it, it is no longer a hybrid, it may be more fuel efficient than another car design with the same engine class, but it will not be a hybrid.

Ford uses CVT transmissions in the Freestyle and Five Hundred, but they are no considered Hybrids due to the fact they only use a gasoline engine. A CVT transmission is a more efficient means of transmitting the power from the engine to the wheels due to less parasitic losses through gears, their drawback was the design of the CVT, it costs more to build a strong CVT transmission that can handle HP and torque, so the Freestyle and Five Hundred were sorely underpowered, but they were fuel efficient, getting the best fuel mileage in their class.


EDIT: Correction, the Camry has a 4 Cylinder, but it is a 2.4 L 4 banger, the Highlander has the V6, but still putting the 2.4 in the Prius would yield basically the same results. In addition the Drag Coefficient of the Toyota Camry Hybrid is 0.27, the Prius is 0.26. Based on 2007 MY comparisons. WIKI



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(usbseawolf2000 @ Jun 28 2007, 06:08 PM) [snapback]469706[/snapback]</div>

I disagree. What makes the Prius successful is it will seat 4 adults, or two adults and three children and get 50 MPG, That is what makes the Prius successful. Look at sales trends, when gas is cheap sales go down, when gas goes up so did the sales of the Prius. If you were to poll Prius owners, you will find the majority of them bought it to save on fuel costs, a small percentage would be environmental reasons, but mostly to save on fuel. That right there is the selling force behind the Prius. When I was at the dealer getting the MFD repaired, I asked a few people there who were buying or bought a Prius, and they all said to save on gas, not one claimed environment, when I asked about the environment, they said, oh thats a plus, but not why I bought it.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Earthling @ Jun 28 2007, 03:50 PM) [snapback]469645[/snapback]</div>

I'll add another data point. Honda Civic Hybrid Cd - 0.27. The shape of the Prius is about marketing. It is instantly recognizable as a hybrid. For a lot of hybrid buyers that statement, "I drive a hybrid" is important.

If Toyota was designing based on aerodynamics the prius would have a much smaller grill. I would say that my driving with the entire lower grill taped over and blocked proves that that area is not needed for airflow but is there for looks. This is in stop and go traffic, with the AC on, and the ambient temperature about 95 to 98 F. No overheating, no problems.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jun 28 2007, 04:15 PM) [snapback]469657[/snapback]</div>

I disagree about the CVT. A CVT is more efficient that a standard automatic transaxle, but not a manual. If you look at cars that are offered the option of CVT or manual transaxles the manual always gets better mileage that the CVT. The 2005 Honda Insight is an excellent example of this:

CVT: 45/47/49
5 Speed: 48/52/58

Notice the manual is only a 5 speed, a 6 speed would do even better. A CVT allows lazy American drivers to get better mileage than they would get with torque-converter automatics, but are not superior to a competent driver with a manual.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ Jun 29 2007, 09:37 AM) [snapback]470018[/snapback]</div>

The Prius design is not based on marketing. The Prius was based on aerodynamics from the engineering department. The designers had to work within those restraints. I know because I went to a lecture given by one of the design team.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ Jun 29 2007, 09:53 AM) [snapback]470030[/snapback]</div>

That is if the driver is very good with a manual transmission. I imagine it's also pretty easy to get lower than the CVT if you're careless, wasteful or just not concerned with getting the best fuel economy you can. Like the Prius that doesn't really get EPA but some can who are very good at pulse and glide.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ Jun 29 2007, 09:53 AM) [snapback]470030[/snapback]</div>

If you look at some of the automatics these days, you will find they get the same EPA numbers as a stick does. Transmissions have come a long way since the old days when sticks were prevalent. It is the final ratio where the economy comes into play the most, getting through the gears smoothly and efficiently is beyond most drivers skills, get behind some of them at a stop and you will see what I mean. I drove an Insight with the stick and it was a royal PITA in traffic. On the highway it was even worse, if you needed power you had to go down two gears to pass. It takes a long time to learn how to drive a stick efficiently, I used to drive a semi with a 13 speed, and trucks do not have synchros like cars do, and unless you have driven a non synchro trans, you never really drove stick! In a truck you learn where your power band is and how to stay in it for the most efficient fuel use, not as easy to do in a hybrid due to the combination of motors. To know where your power band is, you keep the rpm's between a certain range, but when your engine is off and on, you have no set power band, so the CVT is actually the best type of transmission to use, especially when it is part of the braking system, not many people can efficiently down shift to utilize the most out of the braking system.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jun 29 2007, 10:17 AM) [snapback]470037[/snapback]</div>

If the shape of the Prius was designed based on aerodynamics is is a dismal failure. It is 2% better than the conventional Camry, MB C-Class, and Saab 9-3. It is 1% better than the Civic. It is 1% worse than the Audi A2. It is 5% worse than the Tatro T77, a production car built in 1935 before computer aided design and wind tunnels! The Prius was STYLED to LOOK aerodynamic.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jun 29 2007, 10:17 AM) [snapback]470037[/snapback]</div>

Yes, it takes less skill to get good economy with a CVT. You can also drive a eat breakfast at the same time. I happen to believe that driving requires skill and one should learn these skills.

It doesn't change the fact that with a good driver the manual will outperform the CVT. The manual will also always change gear and rpm when the driver wants it to because the driver is in control. There is nothing more annoying than driving an automatic on a nice winding road and having the transmission shift just has you are setting up for a corner. :angry:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ACD @ Jun 29 2007, 10:58 AM) [snapback]470061[/snapback]</div>

Yes, automatics are getting better. The automatics you are referring too usually have 5 or 6 speed and a final ratio that is quite high. The manual equipped car is usually the "sporty" version and has a lower final drive ration for better acceleration. So yes the EPA numbers are similar but the cars are not. The manual with the "economy" final drive would get better fuel economy.

I've not driven cars without synchros' but I do ride motorcycles. Yes, it takes lots of practice to match RPM's and get a good, smooth shift, especially when downshifting quickly. AGAIN, I don't dispute it takes skill to properly drive a manual.

 

Yep, the Ford hybrid design was close .. so close that if you open up the engine compartments of hybrids from the two companies, they look identical !

Just because you red it on the innernet, does not make it true, folks. And for the record, Toyota has been very diplomatic during the Ford proclomations of in-house development.

 

On further thought, after scrutinizing how the Toyota hybrid drive is designed, you cannot use a manual transmission with it since the electric motors are an integral part of the drive train. I highly doubt that this setup can be beat with how it is designed, especially since there are no parasitic losses at the main drive motor, the only actual loss is at the differential where the power is distributed to the wheels, in addition since there are very few moving parts, there is very little frictional loss, the main friction loss being the planetary gear set, and the chain drive itself to a lessor degree.

The insight OTOH, since the main propulsion is through the ICE, with the electric only acting as assist and braking, a manual fits quite well. CVT technology has advanced a bit since the introduction of the Insight, so performance wise I believe the CVT can match the numbers of a manual.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ Jun 29 2007, 12:53 PM) [snapback]470096[/snapback]</div>

.28/.26 is a 7.7% improvement.

That is a HUGE improvement. This adds 2 - 3 mpg at highway speeds all by itself. Toyota made major internal design changes that added less than 0.5% to energy efficiency, knowing that many small things added up.

BTW, The general outlines of the Prius have been around for years: sloped front, chopped back. The Honda CRx and minivans paved the way.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EricGo @ Jun 29 2007, 12:09 PM) [snapback]470139[/snapback]</div>

I was actually told it by a Toyota employee. So where did you read that?

This stuff ain't rocket science. Most of the concepts that Toyota incorporated have been around for decades. HSD was the result of Argonne labs critiques of THS. Toyota should be commended for their vision and, to a lesser degree, their engineering. There's no doubt that they build excellent cars (from a practical/reliability standpoint) but they don't own the patent on ingenuity.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EricGo @ Jun 29 2007, 01:19 PM) [snapback]470148[/snapback]</div>

I was looking at it from the prospective of 1.0 being the flat board and 0.0 being theoretical perfection. We can look at it your way though.

The Prius is 4% worse than the Audi A2.
The Prius is 22.6% worse than the Tatra, a production car from 1935!
The Prius is 62.5% worse than the GM Precept concept, a vehicle that used aerodynamics in radical ways to increase efficiency.

The large grill and lack of a smooth undertray is proof enough to me that Toyota was not serious about aerodynamics when they designed the Prius. Look at the Audi A2 vs the Audi A2 TDI. The TDI has a Cd that is 0.02 lower due to smaller grill openings, an undertray under the engine (for noise reasons), and slightly narrower tires.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ Jun 29 2007, 02:14 PM) [snapback]470199[/snapback]</div>

But looking at it that way, Toyota was thinking aerodynamics with the Camry Hybrid as it has a lower cd than the non hybrid model. It is at 0.27 which is .01 above the Prius. The non hybrid is at 0.28

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ACD @ Jun 29 2007, 02:36 PM) [snapback]470212[/snapback]</div>

That's fine for the Camry Hybrid. Since it is based on an existing platform, Toyota was limited with what it could do to improve aerodynamics. The Prius is not limited in that way. The Prius is a stand-alone model that could have had radical changes to improve aerodynamics. One such change would be to eliminate the forward facing grill altogether like GM did with the Precept. Toyota did not do this because big grills are very fashionable right now so the Prius has the Toyota corporate grill just like every other Toyota car. The stylists trumped the engineers.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jun 29 2007, 11:17 AM) [snapback]470037[/snapback]</div>

I get EPA without P&G no problem, I drive mostly (nearly all) highway and rarely get less than the 51 EPA.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ Jun 29 2007, 01:26 PM) [snapback]470246[/snapback]</div>

Oh! I don't remember the GM Precept. When did they produce that?