Fuel Economy & Emissions Talk about the mileage database, EPA, hypermiling, gas and driving strategy.

Non-hybrid fuel efficiency

  #21  
Old 03-20-2007, 04:10 PM
bwilson4web's Avatar
Engineering first
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 5,613
Default Re: Non-hybrid fuel efficiency

Originally Posted by lakedude View Post
Actually Bob his facts and data are exactly correct and yours is somewhat skewed.

First the reasons Rahman15 is not wrong:

He said: "Actually non hybrid cars can give you pretty good gas mileage." which is true.

Then he says: " Some of them give you 40+ highway mileage..." Which is also true of about on third of the cars on his link's list.

Then he says: " ....which is comparable to most hybrids." This may seem incorrect if you cherry pick only the best mileage hybrids but if you include ALL the hybrids including the Accord, Camery and the Trucks and SUVs, it is completely true.

Bob the reason your facts and data are skewed are because you cherry picked the hybrids you used as a comparison. You also assume that everybody wants an automatic which may be true most of the time but isn't always true. I prefer and own a manual because I like to be in control and because I don't have a wife insisting that we get an automatic.

The list is titled "Top Fuel-Efficient Non-Hybrid Cars in 2006" so pointing out what is going on in 2007 is a nice update but that does not make the list wrong for 2006.
Actually Rahman15 had copied his list from an earlier, out of date article. Also, he left the hybrid vehicle comparisons open and only specified the gas models. Having been in that web site to look at the new EPA numbers, I knew some of his vehicle numbers were inaccurate.

I simply went to the EPA listing to see what they claimed. In those cases where he had identified the car, I tried to use the exact make and model matching the hybrid. You've updated his copied list of non-gas cars and that is good but that was not what he'd posted.

Now when it comes to automatic vs. manual, we'll have to agree to disagree. My wife has knee problems and has already been advised to have knee replacement surgury. I've also had occasion to teach manual transmission to a young man who had always driven an automatic (famous quote, "So that is why the manuals leave me behind at a light!") For many folks, a manual transmission car is not in the cards.

Although individuals may prefer a manual transmission, the reality is there is one extra pedal in those cars and not everyone can drive one. However, automatics are universally drivable and that is what every current hybrid has.

BTW, I believe there were two manual transmission hybrids, the Insight and I thought some of the first generation Honda Hybrid Civics (not sure about this.) I would have no problem with comparing those manual transmission hybrids to a manual transmission gas-only car. It would at least be as close as possible to comparing similar cars.

Bob Wilson
 
  #22  
Old 03-20-2007, 09:55 PM
Super Moderator & Contributor ($)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,672
Default Re: Non-hybrid fuel efficiency

We seem to be having a communication problem. Maybe something was changed in this tread before I got involved? You say: "You've updated his copied list of non-gas cars and that is good but that was not what he'd posted." I've not done any such thing?? In fact I don't even see a local copy of any list, only an outside link to high mileage non-hybrid cars in 2006??

You got it right on the manual model cars. The Insight and gen 1 HCH were both available in manuals.
 
  #23  
Old 03-21-2007, 05:11 AM
brick's Avatar
Pretty Darn Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 441
Default Re: Non-hybrid fuel efficiency

The tricky part about comparing the manual transmission Insight and Civic to gas-only cars is that the transmission isn't the only thing about the drivetrain that's different. For reasons known only to Honda, the MT vehicles got lean-burn capability while the CVT versions did not. In my mind it is the inherent thermodynamic advantage within the ICE that is the real reason that the MT versions have so much higher FE capability. Unfortunately I can't prove it without data from a fleet of mule cars with lean burn ICEs and automatic transmissions. Or stoichiometric ICEs and manual transmissions. Both would be better.
 
  #24  
Old 03-21-2007, 08:14 AM
bwilson4web's Avatar
Engineering first
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 5,613
Default Re: Non-hybrid fuel efficiency

Originally Posted by lakedude View Post
We seem to be having a communication problem. Maybe something was changed in this tread before I got involved? You say: "You've updated his copied list of non-gas cars and that is good but that was not what he'd posted." I've not done any such thing?? In fact I don't even see a local copy of any list, only an outside link to high mileage non-hybrid cars in 2006??
He'd cited a specific web site:
http://www.whybuyhybrid.com/top-fuel...d-cars-in-2006

It lists these cars having any 40 MPG or better ratings:
Volkswagen Golf TDI Compact 37/44
Volkswagen New Beetle TDI Sub-Compact 37/44
Volkswagen Jetta TDI Compact 36/41
Toyota Corolla Compact 32/41
Toyota Yaris/Vitz Sub-Compact 34/40
Honda Civic Sub-Compact 30/40

Noticing the article was from 2006, I went to the current, 2007, fuel economy ratings site for US cars:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm

I selected the gas cars as functionally close to our current hybrids and that means automatics. Anything else is an apples-to-oranges comparison because we have a large number of USA drivers who do not know how to drive a manual and others with physical problems that prevent them driving a manual.

Finally, the original article did not specify a hybrid so I picked one that is close to the Compact/Sub-Compact rating. In the case of the Honda Civic, I used the Honda Civic hybrid. I didn't choose a green Saturn SUV or Silverado hybrid because none of the cars claiming to have a 40 MPG rating are either SUVs or pickup trucks.

Bob Wilson
 
  #25  
Old 08-24-2007, 04:57 AM
bwilson4web's Avatar
Engineering first
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 5,613
Wink Re: Non-hybrid fuel efficiency

Hi,

Originally Posted by Saabsurt View Post
Awhile back I read a post by a Prius driver who did run out of gas. He reported that he was able to continue driving for about half a mile to the nearest gas station on battery power, but said that if he had to go any farther he would not have made it.
I've run out of gas several times as part of my fuel studies and the furtherest distance traveled on the battery was less than half a mile. I slow down and drive to the first safe place to refuel from the 1 gallon, spare can.

Running the tank dry is important to getting accurate gasoline performance data. The gas sample testing, each starting with running the tank dry, includes:
  • Shell 87 #1 - best, spring
  • Texaco 87 - spring
  • Citgo 87 - spring
  • BP 87 #1 - spring
  • Conoco 87 - spring
  • Shell 87 #2 - best, spring
  • Shell 93 #1 - spring
  • Texaco 93 - spring
  • Exxon 87 - best, summer
  • Chevron 87 - best, summer
  • Shell 87 #3 - best, summer
  • BP 87 #2 - summer
  • Shell 93 #2 - summer
Around December and January, I will repeat the testing the best gasolines from the above list.

I retested Shell 93 because of interest in highway performance on hilly roads. Preliminary data suggests higher octane gas works well at ICE speeds from 3,800-4,500 rpm. However, at these rpm ranges, there are very high fuel burn rates for both 87 and 93 octane fuel. Easier on the engine with less 'pre-knock,' 93 octane fuel has a marginal impact on high power performance, which is a fairly rare event at speeds under 70 miles per hour.

Originally Posted by Saabsurt View Post
Toyota warns that you should never do this, because if the battery pack is so deeply discharged, it is likely to reduce the life of the batteries.
The best approach is to reduce speed as soon as practical and drive directly to a safe place to refuel. The maximum range speed in normal hybrid mode is 18-20 miles per hour and in EV mode, slower will go much, much further.

The most frequent threat to the 2001-03, NHW11 Prius battery is to climb a 6% grade hill at speeds above 70 miles per hour or faster. Actually, a Prius can sustain 55-60 miles per hour until the hill runs out. A speed of 65 miles per hour is marginal and faster speeds drain the battery.

The 2004, NHW20 model should be able to handle hills faster but I don't have hill climb data to document the critical speeds.

Originally Posted by Saabsurt View Post
I believe that you could not run the Honda hybrids on battery power alone as they use a mild hybrid system that requires running the gas engine.So as a car owner I take this warning by heart never want my Saab parts esp.my Saab heater core to have some defect...
---Hope this story gives some better idea...
I have no experience with HCH and Saab. However, I fixed your link. <GRINS>

Bob Wilson
 

Last edited by bwilson4web; 08-24-2007 at 05:43 AM. Reason: Adding list of fuels tested
  #26  
Old 08-24-2007, 05:13 AM
msantos's Avatar
Eco Accelerometrist
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Posts: 1,191
Default Re: Non-hybrid fuel efficiency

Originally Posted by Saabsurt View Post
... I believe that you could not run the Honda hybrids on battery power alone as they use a mild hybrid system that requires running the gas engine....
That is certainly true for most of the Honda hybrids prior to the 2006 Civic Hybrid (HCH-II).

There have been reports of owners who have run out of gas and managed to power their way to the gas station on electric only (search the HCH-II forum). I am sure that in those instances, it was likely to have been an EV powered glide only since the electric motor only provides 20 hp. An EV powered glide can be sustained for a couple of miles at most.

MSantos
 
  #27  
Old 10-10-2007, 05:42 AM
Pretty Darn Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 467
Default Re: Non-hybrid fuel efficiency

I previously owned a 2005 smart fortwo cdi (common-rail diesel injection) which netted a lifetime average of 4.7L/100km (50 MPG US). This was in mostly city driving with about 20% freeway. Although it was a little more efficient than my current Honda Civic Hybrid (petrol, 5.2L/100km, or 45 MPG US), it used a dirtier fuel and produced more noxious emissions in quantity. Certainly my CO2/km rating is on par between then and now.

Any car can produce reasonably good numbers on the freeway, but few can make a real difference in city driving, and the above two are examples of the latter.
 
  #28  
Old 10-10-2007, 07:01 AM
bwilson4web's Avatar
Engineering first
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 5,613
Default Re: Non-hybrid fuel efficiency

Originally Posted by spinner View Post
. . . my current Honda Civic Hybrid (petrol, 5.2L/100km, or 45 MPG US), . . .
Do you have a block heater for the Civic? Does this include last winter's driving?

Bob Wilson
 
  #29  
Old 10-10-2007, 07:19 AM
Pretty Darn Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 467
Default Re: Non-hybrid fuel efficiency

Originally Posted by bwilson4web View Post
Do you have a block heater for the Civic? Does this include last winter's driving?
No, it doesn't have a block heater and it hasn't gone through a Winter or full year cycle yet. In my situation, the car is garaged at home and at work in semi-heated group parking conditions. In Winter, Toronto roads will be cold but bare most of the time.

Another qualification: I use the auto climate control, and on one occasion of favourable, steady driving in the Summer heat I still got 4.3L/100km (55 MPG US). I'm assuming that that should be the worst of the fuel-impacting load that it will see. The Canadian import of the HCH-II has heated side-mirrors but no navigation option.

When I had the smart fortwo, my fuel economy in Winter was affected by using snow tires and the winterized diesel. I really don't anticipate much difference on the hybrid during Winter except for cool batteries.
 
  #30  
Old 10-11-2007, 10:32 AM
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 955
Default Re: Non-hybrid fuel efficiency

I think you will find that the opposite is true. The HCH has much better numbers in warm weather than it does in winter, and that's absent any effect for snow tires. Instead of contrasting the relative amounts of energy used by auto climate control to cool or to heat, or analyzing the exact differences between summer and winter fuel additives, which I'm sure others can do, let me just say that I can tell you anecdotally and from my own experience and that of the other posters here and the data in our database, the HCH likes warm weather. Ambient temperature is the top indicator, in my experience, of overall fuel efficiency for the HCH, on the same order as (and sometimes even more so than) the driving techniques that many people use to be efficient drivers. Hot is good, cold is bad.
 
Related Topics
Thread
Topic Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Jason
Hybrid & Related News
3
11-22-2006 02:41 PM
wallpad
Toyota Camry Hybrid
8
07-29-2006 07:44 AM
tigerhonaker
Journalism & The Media
0
01-05-2006 08:45 PM
Jason
Hybrid & Related News
1
05-24-2005 05:25 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Non-hybrid fuel efficiency


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.