Oil Perceptions

Montana · Post by **Montana** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 11:16 am

When you read things like this, you wonder how we (Homo sapiens) made it this far.
Such an inability to see how how the present affects the future no doubt leads to less of a future...
But I do like the roadside bulliten board; I want one to post somewhere around here...
http://www.oriononline.org/pages/oo/cur ... dgeon.html

BrassBlower · Post by **BrassBlower** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 12:24 pm

Jesus drove an SUV
Mohammad pumped his gas.
Reverend Moon had a big back yard
and Buddha mowed his grass.

Not being a millionaire is bad,
but being one is great.
Now if you really believe all this
I'll sell you the Golden Gate!

(Sorry, these things just come up every now and then.)

chas · Post by **chas** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:11 pm

The auto industry is bizarre, but at the same time, I think the author of this column is only stating his point of view. I've read a few columns on this year's auto shows that have come to the opposite conclusion -- that most of the interest has been in hybrid vehicles.

The auto companies MAY be coming to their senses. Toyota built a new plant just to produce Priuses. DaimlerChrysler has ditched their plan to introduce the Smart to the US in the form of an SUV, which was possibly the dumbest idea I've ever heard in my life.

OTOH, one thing I don't understand is the auto companies' assertion that they can only make hybrids that are top-of-the-line vehicles. Their reasoning is that the technology is expensive and people will only pay for it in cars that have all the whistles and bells. So, people will only pay a couple thousand extra on top of a $19k Civic instead of a $14k Civic. This excludes a lot of the granola set, who I think should be a large part of the target audience. I would love a Highlander hybrid based on their 4-cylinder engine. But they seem to be going after performance rather than fuel economy, plus, of course, it's all decked out in full regalia, with a bunch of stuff I don't want, so it's a bit more than I'm willing to pay for a vehicle that gets marginally better mileage than my current car.

Ah, rant mode off. Hope everybody had a good Earth Day.

bradhurley · Post by **bradhurley** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:47 pm

The other thing to consider is that several companies are making conventional (non-hybrid) cars whose fuel economy is very close to that of the actual fuel economy reported by hybrid owners. Here in Canada you can get the Toyota Echo Hatchback (called the Yaris in Europe), which gets as good or better fuel economy than the Prius for half the price. And the Matrix gets around 45 mpg in the city; it's about $10 grand less than the Prius. The standard Civic and several other models also get very good fuel economy for much less than you'd shell out for a hybrid.

So if you're looking for a fuel-efficient car, don't despair that you can't afford a hybrid. And if you CAN afford a hybrid, you might consider buying one of these cheaper conventional cars and donating the difference in cost to an environmental group or the Democratic party...it might end up making a bigger difference for the environment in the long run.

chas · Post by **chas** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 4:55 pm

bradhurley wrote:The other thing to consider is that several companies are making conventional (non-hybrid) cars whose fuel economy is very close to that of the actual fuel economy reported by hybrid owners. Here in Canada you can get the Toyota Echo Hatchback (called the Yaris in Europe), which gets as good or better fuel economy than the Prius for half the price. And the Matrix gets around 45 mpg in the city; it's about $10 grand less than the Prius. The standard Civic and several other models also get very good fuel economy for much less than you'd shell out for a hybrid.

Good point -- the (US) EPA rates the Prius at 61 mpg in the city, whereas everything I've read indicates that the real mileage is around 45 in the city. I've never heard of a Matrix/Vibe getting 45 mpg, but I haven't really investigated it. I was behind one today and thinking it might be my next car -- practical, versatile, and economical.

herbivore12 · Post by **herbivore12** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:12 pm

bradhurley wrote:And the Matrix gets around 45 mpg in the city . . .

Whence this figure?

My parents have a Matrix -- and like it, it's very functional -- but they get a bit under 30 mpg (a bit over 30 on the freeway, a bit under in the city). The manufacturer specs for the 2005 model say the fuel economy is 30 city/36 freeway for the manual transmission, 26/31 for the automatic 4WD version.

It's a nice car, though. I enjoyed driving it when I borrowed it for a few days; it's got great space for hauling stuff aorund. Almost bought one myself.

The Weekenders · Post by **The Weekenders** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:20 pm

Nice, Brad. I am already tired of the sanctimony surrounding hybrid ownership around here, especially when there are the ultra-thrifty internal combustion vehicles available. I guess paying the extra 6 to 8K entitles one to sneer at the filthy polluters. Yes, this did just happen to me yesterday.

No, not herbi. He's always been cool about it....

missy · Post by **missy** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:25 pm

herbivore wrote:
"The manufacturer specs for the 2005 model say the fuel economy is 30 city/36 freeway for the manual transmission, 26/31 for the automatic 4WD version."

Good gosh - my '98 Grand Am (V6) got 33mpg the last time I did a long highway trip! It probably gets only low 20's in the city however.
And it's long paid for!

I won't talk about the milage our conversion van gets.......

Missy

herbivore12 · Post by **herbivore12** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:32 pm

The Weekenders wrote:I guess paying the extra 6 to 8K entitles one to sneer at the filthy polluters. Yes, this did just happen to me yesterday. No, not herbi. He's always been cool about it....

Well, it was a bit less than $2000 difference between my car and the similar non-hybrid civic. But smug tree-huggers are as annoying as smug anybodies, aren't they?

I'm glad I happen to make enough money to be able to afford supporting greener technologies. Folks sneering at others who, for reasons of finance or profession or whatever (including -- gasp! -- personal choice) drive a less-fuel-efficient car . . . that's annoying. Tell them to go ride a bike. (Don't get me started on the "animal rights" protester I saw in Chinatown in SF, who was protesting the conditions of the animals in the live-animal markets there while himself munching on a chicken leg from KFC. Ugh.)

Though I *do* have a thing about all the unnecessary quasi-HumVees lumbering around town here . . . Just seems sort of silly and almost cavalierly wasteful (or brazenly self-aggrandizing; annoying in the same way smirking hybrid owners are).

Plus I can't see around them in my little Civic. Gawd they're huge.

bradhurley · Post by **bradhurley** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:37 pm

herbivore12 wrote:
bradhurley wrote:And the Matrix gets around 45 mpg in the city . . .
Whence this figure?

My parents have a Matrix -- and like it, it's very functional -- but they get a bit under 30 mpg (a bit over 30 on the freeway, a bit under in the city). The manufacturer specs for the 2005 model say the fuel economy is 30 city/36 freeway for the manual transmission, 26/31 for the automatic 4WD version.

It's a nice car, though. I enjoyed driving it when I borrowed it for a few days; it's got great space for hauling stuff aorund. Almost bought one myself.

Maybe the Canadian version of the Matrix is different from the US version: the Canadian model (which is what I'm shopping for at the moment) is rated at 37 mpg city, 47 mpg highway. The Echo Hatchback is rated at 55 mpg highway, which is definitely better than most people can get from a Prius (though of course the Echo hatchback is pretty tiny compared with the Prius so we're not comparing apples with apples).

herbivore12 · Post by **herbivore12** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:42 pm

bradhurley wrote:
Maybe the Canadian version of the Matrix is different from the US version: the Canadian model (which is what I'm shopping for at the moment) is rated at 37 mpg city, 47 mpg highway. The Echo Hatchback is rated at 55 mpg highway, which is definitely better than most people can get from a Prius (though of course the Echo hatchback is pretty tiny compared with the Prius so we're not comparing apples with apples).

Wow! Quite a difference.

Another reason for liberals to move north. I bet Weeks'd loan us all gas money to get up there, too.

(I wonder how the Toyota webpage I got those numbers from knows whether I'm in the U.S. or not? Or perhaps they just don't publicize the Canadian Matrix's numbers for some reason. . . Odd.)

Wormdiet · Post by **Wormdiet** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:47 pm

bradhurley wrote:The other thing to consider is that several companies are making conventional (non-hybrid) cars whose fuel economy is very close to that of the actual fuel economy reported by hybrid owners. Here in Canada you can get the Toyota Echo Hatchback (called the Yaris in Europe), which gets as good or better fuel economy than the Prius for half the price. And the Matrix gets around 45 mpg in the city; it's about $10 grand less than the Prius. The standard Civic and several other models also get very good fuel economy for much less than you'd shell out for a hybrid.

So if you're looking for a fuel-efficient car, don't despair that you can't afford a hybrid. And if you CAN afford a hybrid, you might consider buying one of these cheaper conventional cars and donating the difference in cost to an environmental group or the Democratic party...it might end up making a bigger difference for the environment in the long run.

On the fuel estimates, be careful not to confuse your "real" (IE reported) and "nominal" (Ie EPA estimated) variables.

My civic hybrid gets 45-50 on the highway depending on which way the wind is blowing (Literally), more like 35 in town. I figure that's an avg. of 5-10 MPH over what my '95 civic got. Enough to offset the cost? Probably not. But that wasn;t the point.

BUT - I knew going into it that it's a losing proposition financially. Unless you drive an insane amount and gas prices hit $3.00 tomorrow, you lose money on a hybrid. I bought it because I wanted to create deamnd for truly fuel efficient vehicles, and this seemed like the most effective way to do it. (And. . . it's just a fun car

)

bradhurley · Post by **bradhurley** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:59 pm

herbivore12 wrote: (I wonder how the Toyota webpage I got those numbers from knows whether I'm in the U.S. or not? Or perhaps they just don't publicize the Canadian Matrix's numbers for some reason. . . Odd.)

There's a totally separate site for Toyota Canada (www.toyota.ca).

Oops, when I said the Matrix gets 45 mpg in the city, I meant 45 mpg in the highway. Wouldn't it be nice to get 45 mpg in the city

, that's wishful thinking!

Yes, I know that the rated fuel economy is not the same as the actual, but the rated fuel economy for the Canadian Matrix is about 10 mpg better than the rated fuel economy of the US model. That could be due to real differences between the two or methodological differences between the US and Canadian governments' fuel economy estimates.

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/transportation/p ... s-2005.pdf

The Matrix sold here is actually made in Canada.

If I get one (which seems likely), I'll monitor the actual fuel economy and see how it stacks up to the estimate. I'd really prefer to get the Echo hatchback instead, as it's quite possibly the cutest car on the planet and it gets rave reviews, but I need a bit more cargo space. I fit into the Echo hatchback pretty well, which is surprising given that I'm 6'4."

Lorenzo · Post by **Lorenzo** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 6:22 pm

60-mpg in the city and 66-mpg on the highway?

The 2005 Honda Insight is a 2-door, 2-passenger family coupe, available in 3 trims, ranging from the 5-Spd MT to the CVT w/ AC. Upon introduction, the 5-Spd MT is equipped with a standard 1.0-liter, I3, 67-horsepower, hybrid engine that achieves 60-mpg in the city and 66-mpg on the highway. A 5-speed manual transmission with overdrive is standard. The CVT w/ AC is equipped with a standard 1.0-liter, I3, 65-horsepower, hybrid engine that achieves 57-mpg in the city and 56-mpg on the highway. A variable speed automatic transmission with overdrive is standard. The 2005 Honda Insight is a carryover from 2004. source of information

OutOfBreath · Post by **OutOfBreath** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 6:43 pm

One thing to keep in mind is that fuel mileage ratings are for easy driving with the AC off, slow acceleration, etc. Furthermore, if you typically drive with the AC on and often have to accelerate hard to merge with traffic and such that will have a much more drastic impact on the most fuel efficient cars than it will on other vehicles.

Not that I'm recommending gas-guzzlers or anything, but often a mid-sized vehicle with a V6 will get much better actual mileage in real-world driving than the same vehicle with a smaller four-cylinder engine. Never, ever, buy a mini-van with a small four-banger and an automatic transmission, except maybe one of the new ones with five or six speed automatics. The darn things won't get out of their own way and if you have to drive them in real-world traffic you'll find you get terrible mileage.

I used to travel quite a bit on business and always had to rent mini-vans for my tools and equipment. I've driven Chevy Astros that should have had an "on off switch" instead of a gas pedal. The only way to drive them in city traffic was to mash the accelerator to the floor and hold it there, praying all the while that the cars around you wouldn't decide to "assist" you with a push. On the other hand, I often (as in, every time I had a choice) rented Dodge Grand Caravans with V6s that were larger and heavier, accelerated well, would cruize at 110MPH on the highway (don't you love rental cars) and got better mileage in real-world driving than did the underpowered Astros.