Hybrid Out, Diesel In

[Shayne]

I totally agree Thorin, I'm however not looking at the Escalade, Yukon, Pathfinder type area, nothing of that size.  I'm looking at the smaller size.  The Honda CRV, Toyota Rav4, Jeep Liberty perhaps the Xterra type area.

A mini-van simply isn't practical for me (7 passengers?  We are never having kids), and some rough Googling shows me that Toyota offers a AWD version and its $37k (to start)! A wagon still suffers from the brutal ground clearance, lower driving position, ugly styling, and I can't think of a AWD Wagon outside of Subaru  (does the Focus come in AWD?).

My lifestyle and my personally lead me towards either a sports car or a sporty SUV, since I can't have a sports car (ever tried to pack in a long weekends worth of camping gear into one?), I'm going towards a small sporty SUV.  BTW when I say bigger, i mean bigger then my Cobalt

I really expected you, Thorin, to have tons of input on this whole hybrid vs. gas vs. diesel vs. electric.  I also disagree with you on the gas engine to create electricity to power motors to turn the wheels (look at how many inefficiencies you created in the form of constant energy transfer and conversion).  Long term, i think that Diesel will be the way to go.  I'm not convinced of our Hydrogen ways yet (rotory for the win!), and electric means large, heavy, and expendable batteries.

[TheDruid]

I'd be interested in seeing what you end up buying Shayne. Since my wife and i are thinking in the same direction within the next year or two. The Saturn is just to small, especially on those long weekend camping trips. I?m tired of my eyesight sitting lower then the back bumper of most vehicles on the road. And we need to start thinking of space for maybe 2-3 children in the future. I was looking at more of the North American brands. But maybe I should be paying more attention to the foreign scene.

The old Saturn's days are numbered, 1993 with over 260k km on it. The repair bills are starting to rack up. It will make a good second vehicle though.

[Thorin]

I really expected you, Thorin, to have tons of input on this whole hybrid vs. gas vs. diesel vs. electric.

Heh, sorry, I've been busy with the family lately

A mini-van simply isn't practical for me (7 passengers?  We are never having kids), and some rough Googling shows me that Toyota offers a AWD version and its $37k (to start)!

I consider a minivan to be nearly-equivalent to a large SUV.  You'll be hard-pressed to find one of those for $37k MSRP from a company with a reputation like Toyota (the other half of the premium-charge equation; car companies typically charge more if it's called an "SUV" and/or if they have a "quality reputation").  So if you loook at a minivan, then compare it to a seven-passenger SUV with enough room behind the rear seat to put four suitcases (something like the Dodge Durango doesn't really fit this bill; yes, it has seating for seven, but you can barely fit a couple of handbags in the trunk).

A wagon still suffers from the brutal ground clearance, lower driving position, ugly styling, and I can't think of a AWD Wagon outside of Subaru  (does the Focus come in AWD?).

Up until 2007, Toyota Matrix had an AWD version around $23k.
Up until 2007, Suzuki Aerio had an AWD version (can't find an MSRP for it, but it was in the $23k to $25k range).
Dodge Caliber has an AWD version at $24k.
Honda Element has 4WD for $31k.
Audi A3 has Quattro AWD for $34k (starting to get expensive, I know).
All the Subarus are AWD these days.
Volvo V50 T5 has AWD for $42k, V70 2.5T has AWD for $48k (err, but it's fun to drive and really safe?), XC70 for $48k as well (with 7.75" of ground clearance, almost as much as a Ford Explorer).
VW has a Passat Wagon with 4Motion, but it's $48k, gah!
Mazda has a CX-7, but they officially call that an SUV (although it looks much more like a wagon to me).

Audi, Subaru, and Volvo all have a lot of luxury goodies in them.  The VW I would hope to be the same, although I don't know.

No AWD wagons from GM, Ford, Nissan, Kia, Hyundai; yeah, there aren't a lot of AWD wagons available.  If you drop the requirement for AWD, a more wagons become available (for cheaper prices).
Cheaper versions of the Matrix (and its twin the Pontiac Vibe), the Caliber (and its twin the fugly Jeep Compass), the Element, the V50 and V70, and the Passat Wagon.
Also Ford Focus, Mazda3 Wagon, Mazda5, Mazda 6 SportWagon, Chevrolet HHR and Malibu MAXX, Dodge PT Cruiser, and Saab 9-3 and 9-5 SportCombi.  I might've missed some, as I haven't been keeping up with news on wagons.  I can tell you *lots* about minivans, though

A wagon still suffers from [...] ugly styling

My lifestyle and my personally lead me towards either a sports car or a sporty SUV, since I can't have a sports car (ever tried to pack in a long weekends worth of camping gear into one?), I'm going towards a small sporty SUV.

The three major factors in buying a vehicle are usability, price, and image.  Usability includes what the vehicle can hold and how easy it is to drive.  Price includes initial cost and maintenance costs for repairs (aka reliability).  Image includes the impression you're trying to make on others with your vehicle (such as wanting something called "sporty" or "SUV" or "family-oriented"), as well as your own like/dislike of the styling of particular vehicles.

Different people will prioritize these factors in different order, but everyone will consider each factor at least a little bit.  From your posts, I would guess that you prioritize them as such: 1. usability, 2. image, 3. price.  Mine are 1. price, 2. usability, 3. image.  Not diametrically opposed, but different enough that we probably won't see eye-to-eye on what vehicle to buy; when you say you want a RAV4, I immediately think, "Why not save a few thousand and buy a Mazda3 Wagon?".

Back on-topic to the electric/hybrid/diesel/gasoline engine debate...

I [...] disagree with you on the gas engine to create electricity to power motors to turn the wheels (look at how many inefficiencies you created in the form of constant energy transfer and conversion).  Long term, i think that Diesel will be the way to go.  I'm not convinced of our Hydrogen ways yet (rotory for the win!), and electric means large, heavy, and expendable batteries.

1. A 100cc or 200cc gas engine optimized to run at a certain speed can create lots of electricity, especially if there's gearing between the motor and the alternator - alternators spin at the same speed as car engines now, but why not make the alternator spin 10x as fast as the motor and produce however much more electricity that would be?
2. If there's a self-powered electricity generator, the battery array can be much smaller.
3. Electric motors are highly-efficient at low RPM.  With proper gearing (or even better, a CVT transmission) they can be kept at low RPM even at highway speed.
4. The problem with hybrids (besides the price) is that either the two motors spin at slow speed so that the electric motor is highly efficient, or they spin at high speed so that the gas motor is highly efficient.  If they unmarry the two and just use the electric motor to move the car, this becomes much less complicated.
5. If the motors are separated and only the electric motor provides forward motion, the process will become cheaper and the technology will become cheaper.
6. Electric engines provide highly-advantageous power-to-weight ratios over gasoline or diesel engines, even when including a small generator.  The biggest problem they face is running out of steam at higher RPMs.  Again, I think finding the right gearing will solve this problem.

Now if only the car execs would read this post and realize that GM's EV1 and EV2 concepts were great cars in need of a small generator that recharged the batteries!

[Adams]

There are lots in the Cross over category... the one I have had my eye on is the Suzuki SX4 I am quite impressed with most of the features... everything that I have read gives me the impression they are heading in the correct direction, AWD Fully Loaded approx 24K. Too bad Vibe/Matrix no longer have AWD.

[Lazybones]

The 6 Speed was the best Matrix from what I understand.. The AWD only came with one engine option and it wasn't as powerful.

The Matrix is still one of my favorites in the market based on function. With everything folded down there is lots of cargo room, there is head room for me even with the sunroof option, and the leg room passes my driver test where I sit in front, set the seat and crawl in the back.

[Shayne]

I'd take the Vibe over the Matrix, built in the same plant, GM kick ass 0% financing deals, and personally the styling is better

[Lazybones]

I'd take the Vibe over the Matrix, built in the same plant, GM kick ass 0% financing deals, and personally the styling is better

I would rather have the Toyota engines, from what I recall the only features that differ on the Pontiac version are the paneling, interior and engines.

Hard to pass on the financing deals though.

[Thorin]

The Vibe and Matrix both have the same 1.8L I4 engine in them that is also found in higher-power form in the Toyota Celica.  There's basically no difference between Vibe and Matrix, unless you get the Matrix XRS where the engine has been tuned to put out more power, or the Matrix AWD (because AWD isn't offered in the Vibe).  In fact, if you're driving a Vibe you can use Celica performance parts on your motor - it's all the same block, head, etc.

We seem to be drifting from the original topic again

[Shayne]

Sorry dude, same engine too.  The Pontiac has a Toyota power plant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_ZZ_engine

[Lazybones]

I still say that the way to go (as a car manufacturer) is to build cars with big electric motors that can be geared so that even at highway speeds the motor's turning slow enough to provide lots of power (electric motors lose torque as their RPM increases), and to use a gasoline or diesel motor *just to generate electricity*.  This combining two types of motors makes the vehicles more expensive than they need to be.

Well then you should take a look at the new Chevy Volt

[Thorin]

Nice find.  Too bad they're relying on battery technology that they think will take five to ten years before it's available...  But yes, the Chevrolet Volt is precisely what I had in mind, a PHEV ("Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle").  I've seen some numbers bandied about there...  Looks like the gas motor gets 4.7l/100km ( = 21.28km/l, = 59.84mpg); that still seems sorta high, especially if you never plugged it in.  I would've thought they'd get better mpg than that.  As an example, I used to drive a Suzuki Swift 1.3L 4cyl, and the best fuel economy I got was 806 km on 38.45 litres (20.96km/l or 58.95mpg).

The idea of a gas or diesel motor generating electricity for an electric motor that then moves the vehicle isn't new, by the way.  That's how diesel locomotives have worked for years and years.

I'm surprised to see that GM went with a turbocharged 1.0L motor, too.  Can't they build anything smaller with better fuel economy?  Suzuki makes cars in Europe with 600cc engines that can go 150km/h, I'm sure GM could make a 200cc engine that creates enough electricity for this motor.

[Shayne]

While it does seem rather low for an electric vehicle, its also doing 0-96 km/h in 8 seconds and a top speed of 193 km/h, something I think your little 1.3L Swift might have trouble keeping up with.  This would be a performance vehicle.  I'd like to see the same technology but with more of a generic commuter car design and implementation.

Smart Car does 20.83 km/L or 49 mpg.  Also has a 0-100 km/h of 19.8 seconds

[Lazybones]

Well the electric only range isn't that far, it is enough to get your to work and maybe back for some people.

They also stated that they power source is modular. Right now it is a gass engine, but it could easily be changed out for a fuel cell down the road.

Seems like a well performing compromise to me. Also probably a good platform to experiment on.

[Thorin]

While it does seem rather low for an electric vehicle, its also doing 0-96 km/h in 8 seconds and a top speed of 193 km/h, something I think your little 1.3L Swift might have trouble keeping up with.  This would be a performance vehicle.  I'd like to see the same technology but with more of a generic commuter car design and implementation.

Smart Car does 20.83 km/L or 49 mpg.  Also has a 0-100 km/h of 19.8 seconds

Good point - my Swift did 0-96km/h in 12.2 (I must've measured it a hundred times!), with a top speed higher than the speedometer-that-only-went-to-140, but 156km/h according to a friend who helped me measure my top speed on the highway.

According to Smart, the Smart Car gets 4.6L/100km city ( = 21.74km/L, = 61.14mpg), 3.7L/100km highway ( = 27.03km/L, = 76.01mpg), with a top speed of 135km/h and 0-96km/ time of 19.8.  That's better than the gas engine used to generate electricity for the Volt, and as far as I understand how motors and electrical energy work, generating a couple hundred kilowatts is a lot less work than pushing a car along at highway speed.

This is why I'm surprised they're using such a big gas engine just to generate electricity, and why I'm so surprised it uses so much fuel to generate the electrical energy.  I would've thought they could make the engine more efficient, especially as they can pick the sweet spot for the motor (i.e. most efficient RPM).

But hey, the Volt is still years away; they'll probably make the powertrain more efficient before then.  Kudos to GM for at least pursuing this path, as it will turn out to be cheaper and more fuel-efficient than the dual-motor systems currently available.

[Shayne]

Could also demand premium fuel which would increase the efficency.  The Smart Car is also a diesel which accounts for the better milage.