The Drive-a-Toyota Act

But it's US subsidies do.

Jeff

 

Ha ha! But Toyota slipped up by uncluding in that article that it would
not even go a mile on battery only. That says that the battery is a
small factor in its overall economy. And in most driving situations,
regenerative braking probably barely (or doesn't quite) make up for the
extra weight of batteries and controls it is carrying around. (IOW -
the economy is from a small, optimized-for-efficiency IC engine.)

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

Toyota had the electric Rav 4 which ran only in plug-in mode, but its
limited range kept it from being very practical.

Toyota has found that there is demand for a hybrid drive with plug-in mode
and is in the process of developing one. Toyota faces the same physics that
GM has with its Vold concept, and that is that without a very large or
(expensive) efficient battery pack, the range from electric only mode is
very short. Keep in mind that Toyota is avoiding deeply discharging or
charging the battery to prolong its useful life. A larger battery pack
would reduce passenger or luggage space in the vehicle, so the practical
solution is a lithium ion battery with more storage capactiy.

I am merely dispelling the false notion that hybrid battery packs have a
short life span and need frequent and costly replacement. I am not
promoting hybrid vehicles as the solution for everyone on the road.

In my personal opinion, hybrids are close, but not quite at the point where
they are fuel-efficient and cost-effective enough to convince ME to buy one.
Another possible barrier to acquiring a hybrid for me is that they may be
too complex for me to diagnose without having to invest in a repair manual
and diagnostic computer. Current OBD II diagnostic systems are for the most
part very logically programmed and easy enough to figure out with an OBD II
code scanner and volt-ohm meter, but I don't know if this will be true with
a hybrid controller.

 

You know - I find it particularly and disgustingly dishonest for a
person to ask me specifically why I don't give some authoritative
information (in this case on NiMH battery life), and then when I do
exactly that, that same individual says I (therefore) am a know-it-all
and that his part in the discussion is essentially over.

I think I just won the war on that one.

Ah - liberal tactics and dishonesty - ain't they great!?

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

I'm sorry, I wasn't paying attention: what authoritative information
did you give?

And what authoritative sources did you cite?

 

Liberals ain't great at anything worth a hoot....

--
Scott in Florida

There ought to be one day-- just one--
when there is open season on senators.

Will Rogers (1879 - 1935)

 

Quite possibly. But you'd also lose the ability to run both power
plants when accelerating, so it would hurt performance. A fair test
would require putting in an engine that would give you the same
performance as the current hybrid power plant.

 

More dishonest tactics. The jig is up.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

More dishonest tactics. The jig is up.[/QUOTE]

WTF are you talking about?

I asked you an honest question. Do you have an honest answer?

 

Yeah, you've got that right.

You claimed that you cited authoritative sources, yet you can say what
they are.

Jeff

 

In this particular case, I'm one. But - I guess I'm damned if I do and
damned if I don't, as you already consider me a know-it-all. So you're
not going to accept what I say even though it is true. Care to argue
with the facts I stated? No - I don't suppose you would as your purpose
is not to bring out the facts but to discredit.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

WTF are you talking about?

I asked you an honest question. Do you have an honest answer?[/QUOTE]

I gave factual information on NiMH batteries germaine to the discussion.
What more do you want. Same question to you as to Jeff: Care to argue
the facts that I cited, or do you just want to discredit me?

Another thing - how about addressing the fact the batteries alone can't
take the car even a mile and that the fuel efficiency has to come
primarily from the IC engine itself.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

Considering that I don't think that you know what your talking about,
and that you started by comparing UPS batteries to hybrid car batteries,
I disagree.

Yet, you have the opportunity to provide cite references (e.g., good web
pages and even research articles an authority like you should be able to
find). Those I will believe.

You have stated opinions, not facts.

Actually, my purpose is two-fold:

1) To bring out the facts.
2) To discredit false information.

Sorry if you have a problem with that.

Jeff

 

There is some truth to that. Still, it might be interesting to see what
mileage the car gets in a controlled test (with the hybrid configuration
as a baseline) on the existing IC engine but with the weight and
complexity of the batteries and its control paraphernalia removed. OK -
and a second test with just an IC engine with the same efficiency
optimizations as the current one but with more power (scaled up/larger
displacement).

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

Thanks Ray, it was very interesting. I'd have to conclude it is sound
engineering and a reliable product. Well on its way to long term viability
in a car. If replacement gets down to $1000, it truly is in reach of
replacability for an older car.

 

Yes - I compared UPS batteries to hybrid car batteries as a general case
of *rechargeable* batteries. They are different technologies -
certainly. But anyone who knows anything about rechargeble batteries
knows that they *ALL* have finite lives in terms of charge/discharge
cycles (a statistical bell curve is involved of course). NiMH is a
specific example of a general case (of rechargeable batteries). So
whether you're talking about NiCad, NiMH, lead acid (flooded, gel, or
glass matt), Lithium ion, or whatever, they each have a finite number of
charge/discharge cycles. The fact that I originally stated
(rechargeables...somewhat predictable cycels) is true and applies.


You don't think that...
You disagree...

Sounds like *your* opinions. Oh - let me guess - when *you* have
opinions, they are facts. Yeah - I get it.

Go ahead - Google the subject of number of charge/discharge cycles of
NiMH batteries. If you find they are different than what I stated, I'd
like to know. Facts is, what I stated *ARE* accepted facts.

Yes - opinions of fellow experts. Find a true expert who disagrees with
the number oif charge/discharge cycles of NiMH batteries.

Only the ones you like to support your opinions, the rest of the FACTS
you will label as opinions - proved right here in this thread.

You haven't shown that to be genuine, but it sounds good.

I don't when it's the case, which it isn't.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

I've often wondered that, as I watch the car get 50mpg on long drives on
flat freeway with apparently zero help, or very very minimal help, from
the electric motors.

I bet that engine as it sits is a dog off the line, though.

 

I gave factual information on NiMH batteries germaine to the discussion.
OK.


What more do you want.[/QUOTE]

Dude, read what I said: I wasn't paying attention, and I asked you what
authoritative information did you give? You have at least partially
answered the question. You so far having fulfilled the "authoritative"
part of it, though.

Can you read? I didn't see your post, so I don't know what facts you
cited. Hence my question.

You are itching for an argument. You know that, don't you.

On a brand new Prius? I've had the batteries take me 2 miles on a flat
(no downhill, no uphill) surfaced roadway with no ICE running. Not sure
what you're talking about.

Um, on the surface that's a silly statement. The ICE is the only thing
that burns fuel, so of course the fuel efficiency comes from the engine.

The fact that the engine doesn't have to be tuned to do a wide variety
of tasks, the fact that the electric motors take over some of those
tasks, means the engine *can* be engineered and tuned for efficiency.
That is not the case on cars that don't have hybrid drivetrains. Those
engines have to be overkill in order to handle a very wide range of
duties.

Shoot, simply separating the air conditioner from the ICE is a big
savings.

 

In this particular case, I'm one.[/QUOTE]

Oh.

Well, then, I'm an authoritative source on Toyota's HSD, and I know for
a fact--based on authoritative sources--that you're full of shit.

 

Yes - opinions of fellow experts.[/QUOTE]

Great! Can you point to references? Web sites, books, articles?

If you can't, or if you won't...well, leave that as an exercise for the
reader to determine the validity of your statements.