Fascinating. Tell me more about the RAV4- EV. If I had known this car existed, I would have considered it for purchase.

well, i think the point is that hybrids, as a newer technology are still addressing a bit of a niche market. and, there are substantial ways yet to improves the existing technologies. for example, gm, daimler chrysler and probably toyota are all working on a variant of hsd where there are two planetary gear sets and not just one. the second one would be used for a lower gear ratio at highway speeds.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you and the general assertion in the article. If hybrids are going to succeed in Europe, they'd better have a few that can go fast. That's why BMW is taking the hydrosteamer route (I think that's what they call it). I just thought the article was stating the obvious. I mean, you don't hear a lot about how other economy cars can't handle the autobahn. Why should it be news-worthy that the Prius is any different?

*** Retired after 65,000 outstanding miles ***

This analogy doesn't follow, I'm sure the Prius could be even more efficient at 70mph+ than it currently is, without sacrificing its fuel economy at slower speeds. The article's point that is being made here is that the Prius transmission wastes a lot of energy at those faster speeds due to the fact it must continuously generate electricty then use it to run the motors just to achieve a certain gearing, a fairly wasteful process during steady cruising (analogous to old automatics with torque converters that didn't lock).

This could likely be improved by switching to a multi-speed transmission with true high and low gears, while still presevering the torque blending feature for CVT effect. Such a change should improve efficiency at all speeds actually, as a smaller portion of the power from the engine will need to be converted to electricity then deconverted back so as to simulate downshifting or upshifting the gear ratio. Offering an actual overdrive gear would have to help for steady highway cruising when the battery isn't offering help anyway, as the motors would not need to parasitically use engine power for torque blending.

To put it another way, HSD always primarily uses electric motors for propulsion, generating the electricity from the engine. It can run the engine at 76 HP in order to generate enough electricity to run the motors at 67 HP (due to inefficiency and losses) instead of just running the engine at 67 HP hooked up directly to the wheels. The reason it can't do that is because there's no real transmission from the engine to the wheels.

I don't know how significant that really is though.

CGameProgramer-I'm missing something here.I confess ,I haven't really eyeballed the Prius drivetrain very closely. It must use the ice directly+ the electric motor with battery power for acceleration because the 10.5 0-60 requires at least 100 rwhp with a 3000 lb vehicle.
Are you saying that at a steady 70 mph the ice drives and alternator equivalent which then drives the electric motor and the electric motor does the actual propulsion? I can see that the ice will have to drive whatever gear the electric motor has that attaches it to the main gear, but power being sent ice-alternator-electric motor at speed seems odd.
The Mercedes guy seemed to be saying that the ice on the Prius was having to drive the electric motor and its gears, but I got the impression that it was not actually providing juice to them-it was just having to push a depowered electric motor?This is a bad thing of course-spinning a dead motor and gears.
Is this the series vs parallel Honda-Toyota argument I have seen here?
Correct me on this?Thanks.Charlie

Charlie,

When flooring the gas pedal, the car uses the battery as well as the engine to power the motors, and from what I understand the engine is directly used on the wheels as well, but with basically a fixed gear. But when cruising, all the engine's power is used just to generate electricity for the motors and/or the battery, and the motors can adjust how much power they use to emulate a CVT (less power at slower speeds, more at faster speeds).

Tragically, it only exists as a used car. Toyota stopped making them in 2003. When our three year lease was up we bought it out and then immediately sold the car on eBay. We loved the car despite its limited range - about 100 miles on a full charge. But the economics were compelling. There is such a crazy market for these used cars that we had to sell it.

If you're curious, there's a RAV4-EV being offered on eBay right now.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=4633576306

2006 HCH Alabaster Silver w/Navi
2003 Honda Accord LX

I'm absolutely fascinated. Was this a limited availability car in California only? Did you ever run the numbers on cost of electricity per day to charge it? Sorry if you'd answered these already...

*** Retired after 65,000 outstanding miles ***

I think it was sold to individual owners only in California. Many of them were sold to businesses like electric utilities, municipalities, etc. I think those were also sold outside California. Altogether only 700 or so were built, IIRC, and 300 were sold to individuals. Toyota was going to take them all back at the end of their leases and crush them. Then they relented to public pressure and let people buy out the leases. EVs are a long and sad saga. A new movie has just come out called Who Killed the Electric Car? It's been shown in previews and should come out in theaters in June, I think.

Back when Gas cost $1.50 (remember those days?) the cost of electricity per mile on the EV was about half the cost of gas on a regular RAV4. If the RAV4 gets 25 MPG, it's as if the RAV4-EV gets 50 MPG. Nowadays the price of gas has gone up more than the price of electricity, so the gap is larger.

Overall, we got paid to drive the car for three years. Not only did it cost us nothing, we actually made money driving it. That's because the price new was $42,500. Never mind that we leased it, that only complicates the math but the bottom line is the same. We sold it in February for $45,000. Not only that, we got a cash grant of $9000 from the state of California. That's NOT a tax deduction or tax credit, it's a check mailed to our home. Finally, if you figure that the fuel cost less than half, we drove in the carpool lane, and didn't pay the $3 bridge toll on my wife's daily commute, we made out like bandits.

2006 HCH Alabaster Silver w/Navi
2003 Honda Accord LX