Google testing plug-in hybrids in real-world situations

[Thorin]

So Google decided to run tests to see how plug-in hybrid cars compare to non-plug-in hybrid cars.  And they're publishing their data for free as they go:

http://www.google.org/recharge/dashboard

Today, the numbers are:
Ford Escape Hybrid: 28.6 MPG
Ford Escape Plugin Hybrid: 40.4 MPG, 138.5 Wh/M
Toyota Prius Hybrid: 49.0 MPG
Toyota Prius Plugin Hybrid: 69.2 MPG, 129.7 Wh/M

So I did the math on it.

Ford Escape Hybrid
28.6 MPG = 12.1058 km/L = 8.2605 L/100km * $1.219 / L = $10.0695
$10.07 to go 100km

Ford Escape Plugin Hybrid
40.4 MPG = 17.1005 km/L = 5.8478 L/100km * $1.219 / L = $7.1285
138.5 Wh/M = 86.5625 Wh/km * 100km = 8.6563 kWh/100km * $0.10 / kWh = $0.8656
$7.1285 + $0.8656 = 7.9941
$7.99 to go 100km

Saves per year on 20,000kms: $416

Toyota Prius Hybrid
49.0 MPG = 20.7407 km/L = 4.8214 L/100km * $1.219 / L = $5.8773
$5.88 to go 100km

Toyota Prius Plugin Hybrid
69.2 MPG = 29.2910 km/L = 3.4140 L/100km * $1.219 / L = $4.1616
129.7 Wh/M = 81.0625 Wh/km * 100km = 8.1063 kWh/100km * $0.10 / kWh = $0.8106
$4.1616 + $0.8106 = 4.9722
$4.97 to go 100km

Saves per year on 20,000kms: $182

The question, of course, is if we switch to electric, whether the price of a kiloWatt-hour of electricity will increase significantly, and if the price of a liter of gas will drop due to a reduction in demand.

Still, kudos to Google for setting up a proper real-world test rather than just talking theory.

[Lazybones]

If they are just doing Plugin conversions on the existing units that seems to make sense. However the new factory plugin hybrids are supposed to be designed to run on on charge until depleted with a range of 40 Miles or so. This makes it possible to commute with 0 gas used if you live close enough to work or shop, this is the BIG thing I am interested in as it would make the cost of short common trips VERY cheap.

Current hybrids often only use electricity mode as low speeds, the savings from the conversion kits comes from starting the trip with a full charge unless the modified units have also had the computer altered.

[Mr. Analog]

I almost got hit by a hybrid yesterday.

Me and three other people were crossing 100 Ave and 107 Street at about 08:30 and some tard thought he could make a quick right turn without letting pedestrians pass, trouble was that none of us could hear his damn car as it didn't stop. Close call for all of us, that guys insurance would have gone up lol

[Thorin]

Yeah, I've been indoctrinating my kids on the danger of not looking now that there are cars that don't make a sound while they're driving.

[Lazybones]

They are talking about adding FAKE engine sounds. This seems like an OK idea till you think about what the kids to with mufflers and loud stereos these days. Can't wait to hear a Hybrid Civic that sounds like a monster truck.

[Darren Dirt]

So I did the math on it.

Ford Escape Hybrid
28.6 MPG = 12.1058 km/L = 8.2605 L/100km * $1.219 / L = $10.0695
$10.07 to go 100km

Ford Escape Plugin Hybrid
40.4 MPG = 17.1005 km/L = 5.8478 L/100km * $1.219 / L = $7.1285
138.5 Wh/M = 86.5625 Wh/km * 100km = 8.6563 kWh/100km * $0.10 / kWh = $0.8656
$7.1285 + $0.8656 = 7.9941
$7.99 to go 100km

Toyota Prius Hybrid
49.0 MPG = 20.7407 km/L = 4.8214 L/100km * $1.219 / L = $5.8773
$5.88 to go 100km

Toyota Prius Plugin Hybrid
69.2 MPG = 29.2910 km/L = 3.4140 L/100km * $1.219 / L = $4.1616
129.7 Wh/M = 81.0625 Wh/km * 100km = 8.1063 kWh/100km * $0.10 / kWh = $0.8106
$4.1616 + $0.8106 = 4.9722
$4.97 to go 100km

I was curious, since with my 1998 Protege I am still getting around 11km/L...
= 11 km/L = 9.091 L/100km * $1.219 / L
= $11.08 to go 100km

Sure it doesn't come close to the Prius, but gives the Ford "hybrid" a run for its money, but wow -- gotta love the small engines

They are talking about adding FAKE engine sounds. This seems like an OK idea till you think about what the kids to with mufflers and loud stereos these days. Can't wait to hear a Hybrid Civic that sounds like a monster truck.

...need a new derogatory acronym along the lines of "RICE", perhaps?




Interesting that the "first" hybrid was a Porsche, innit?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_hybrid#History
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vehicles#Hybrid_vehicle_engines_and_how_they_work

[Lazybones]

Funny, my car is about par with the Escape Hybrid at about 12L /100 km. Then again it is a BIG car with a V6 in it.

[Thorin]

Ford Escape Hybrid
28.6 MPG = 12.1058 km/L = 8.2605 L/100km * $1.219 / L = $10.0695

Funny, my car is about par with the Escape Hybrid at about 12L /100 km.

No, your car is using about 12 liters for 100 kms while the Escape Hybrid is using about 8 liters.  That makes your car 50% less fuel-efficient than the Escape Hybrid.

[Lazybones]

oops you are right, I read that wrong.

From a strictly cash point of view the gap for the cost of a new car to fuel savings isn't there yet since I take transit to work.

[Thorin]

I hear ya.  My commute from the bedroom to the computer area in my house uses no gas   I need to get a second vehicle on the road for all the hockey going on these days, though.  The problem is all the hybrids cost so much.  Better to buy a cheap car and use a little more fuel.

Now if only I could actually afford that second car.

[Mr. Analog]

I hear ya.  My commute from the bedroom to the computer area in my house uses no gas   I need to get a second vehicle on the road for all the hockey going on these days, though.  The problem is all the hybrids cost so much.  Better to buy a cheap car and use a little more fuel.

Now if only I could actually afford that second car.

Hockey is increasing your carbon footprint lol

[Thorin]

I hear ya.  My commute from the bedroom to the computer area in my house uses no gas   I need to get a second vehicle on the road for all the hockey going on these days, though.  The problem is all the hybrids cost so much.  Better to buy a cheap car and use a little more fuel.

Now if only I could actually afford that second car.

Hockey is increasing your carbon footprint lol

Yeah.  And having a second car would actually decrease my carbon footprint, because instead of
  driving to rink A, dropping off kid 1,
  then driving to rink B, dropping off kid 2,
  then driving back to rink A, picking up kid 1,
  then driving back to rink B, picking up kid 2,
  then driving home
I could
  drive to rink A, watch kid 1 play, then drive home
while my wife
  drives to rink B, watches kid 2 play, then drives home.

I just can't afford the initial outlay required to eventually reduce my carbon footprint.  So I'll keep the big boots on while I make my footprints in the carbon.

[Lazybones]

Don't forget the increased insurance costs.

[Darren Dirt]

So Google decided to run tests to see how plug-in hybrid cars compare to non-plug-in hybrid cars.  And they're publishing their data for free as they go:

http://www.google.org/recharge/dashboard

Today, the numbers are:
Ford Escape Hybrid: 28.6 MPG
Ford Escape Plugin Hybrid: 40.4 MPG, 138.5 Wh/M
Toyota Prius Hybrid: 49.0 MPG
Toyota Prius Plugin Hybrid: 69.2 MPG, 129.7 Wh/M

compare to this "fuel-efficiemt cars" list...

Prius FTW!

[Thorin]

compare to this "fuel-efficiemt cars" list...

Prius FTW!

If you're only comparing fuel economy ratings, the Prius is high on the list.  If you're looking at total cost of ownership, the Focus is about $8,000 cheaper for a similarly-equipped car.  And that's comparing MSRP.  Ford dealers are notorious for lowering prices on their cars to get you to buy them, while Toyota sells Priuses at MSRP or higher.  There's also insurance costs and maintenance costs, but I really don't know them for these cars.

[Melbosa]

If you're only comparing fuel economy ratings, the Prius is high on the list.  If you're looking at total cost of ownership, the Focus is about $8,000 cheaper for a similarly-equipped car.  And that's comparing MSRP.  Ford dealers are notorious for lowering prices on their cars to get you to buy them, while Toyota sells Priuses at MSRP or higher.  There's also insurance costs and maintenance costs, but I really don't know them for these cars.

For reliability, I'd put my money on Toyota.

For cost of maintenance (if something breaks what would be the parts + labour), I would say Ford would be cheaper.  But how many times you are in the shop for repairs, I think Toyota would be less.

For longevity, well going with track records, I'd have to say Toyota again.

[Darren Dirt]

http://cars.about.com/od/ford/fr/08_focus.htm
http://cars.about.com/od/toyota/fr/09_corolla.htm

nice reviews; too bad I'm not crazy enough to buy a "new" car... maybe in 3 years this'll be my set o' wheels.



PS: sweetest mileage converter ever!*
http://www.1728.com/convmlge.htm



*horribly confusing JS code that makes it work, but hey it works really nicely...

[Thorin]

For reliability, I'd put my money on Toyota.

Generally I'd agree with you.  The Focus has bucked Ford's low-reliability trend, although that probably has to do with Opel and Mazda engineers working on the platform (they don't advertise it, but the Mazda 3 and Ford Focus and Opel something-or-other all share a platform).  So when thinking about a Focus versus a Corolla, the reliability's not as far apart as you'd think.

In fact, if Consumer Reports is to be believed, most of Ford's products are average or better in reliability these days (source: http://www.wheels.ca/article/32205).  Then again, some people think Consumer Reports is a biased publication that doesn't properly publish its test data: http://www.allpar.com/cr.html.

No matter what brand you buy, though, even the highest-rated have an average of 1.01 major problems per car every 10 years (wish I could find that article back, it was eye-opening).

For cost of maintenance (if something breaks what would be the parts + labour), I would say Ford would be cheaper.  But how many times you are in the shop for repairs, I think Toyota would be less.

Toyota parts for the Corolla are mostly made in the US these days.  Ford and Toyota parts aren't necessarily far apart in cost, because a major component of parts cost is the cost of shipping it from far away (like Bimmer parts from Germany, or Mitsu parts from Japan).

For longevity, well going with track records, I'd have to say Toyota again.

If we were comparing Focuses and Corollas, I'd agree with you.  But we were comparing Focuses and Priuses, and Priuses have had some problems that Toyota has been quick to fix as part of "regular maintenance".  And to be honest, the kind of person who buys a Prius is probably more conscientious and probably maintains their vehicle better than average.  And that has a lot of influence on the lifespan of the vehicle.

[Melbosa]

Sorry I should have been more clear: I was comparing not models but companies in my statements.  There is always exceptions to the norm.

As for parts, being someone who works with mechanics regularly on part replacements, domestics vs foreigns, on average your foreign manufacturers are more expensive per part + installation (flat rate) than are your domestics.  Granted not all the time, but on average.

[Darren Dirt]

Remember Austin Powers: Goldmember?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corbin_Sparrow

Michael Corbin sold the company to "Myers Motors"
http://www.myersmotors.com/faq.html

Corbin Motors managed to put out the Sparrow, as well as the "Raven" (see http://www.youtube.com/user/RavenCar )

Seems like a nice alternative to a normal gas powered vehicle, for those thinking of buying "new". Especially if you have an enviro-friendly power generation in your own home (as an increasing # of folks do, often putting juice back INTO the power grid).

[Thorin]

Owning a single-seat vehicle means that you either have to have a second vehicle with more seats or never take anyone with you.  Most people take someone along at least occasionally, so that means you need a second vehicle with more seats.  But now you have to plan ahead for every trip you take - do you take the cheaper car, or the car with more seats?

So you have to own two cars (more expensive than owning one) and you have to think ahead of every trip you take whether you might need to take a passenger.

I'll stick to 2+ seats in my car, thanks.

[Darren Dirt]

Owning a single-seat vehicle means that you either have to have a second vehicle with more seats or never take anyone with you.  Most people take someone along at least occasionally, so that means you need a second vehicle with more seats.  But now you have to plan ahead for every trip you take - do you take the cheaper car, or the car with more seats?

So you have to own two cars (more expensive than owning one) and you have to think ahead of every trip you take whether you might need to take a passenger.

I'll stick to 2+ seats in my car, thanks.

Agreed, except #1) a lot of these cars have been and are presently geared towards commuters, and #2) some of them mini-cars are in fact 2-seaters (especially the ones from the 1960s and 1970s), rare though since it would be a tight squeeze (and today's average overweight person X 2 = not gonna happen).

[Thorin]

#1) I used to commute.  Sometimes I went to a friend's house after work, rather than home.  On those days I gave my friend a ride.  On those days I needed more than one seat in my car.  So I would need to own two cars.  The cost of fuel saved versus having to buy a single-seat vehicle and a multi-seat vehicle certainly wouldn't offset the cost of a $30,000 Sparrow, nor even it's monthly insurance cost.

#2) Yes, I know there are commuter-centric cars with 2+ seats (Smart, for instance).  I was commenting on the Sparrow, which you had specifically linked to and discussed in the post before mine.  And the Sparrow is most certainly a single-seat car, thus not a car I would ever consider.