Fuel Efficient Cars

[MisterMike]

What do you think of them? Hybrids, Electric or Conventional?

Any preferences? Do you think they will take off?

What type do you drive and what mileage does it get? Also, how many miles a year do you use it?

I have a 2001 Dodge Dakota 4.7L V8

It got 17 mpg when I got it but since put bigger tirez on and that droped it down to 15 mpg or so now. I drive about 100 miles 'round trip to work M-F.

Yes, I'd like to have my little Honda Civic as a standby sometimes.

I think I'd choose a Hybrid to keep some power and size in the car if I had my choice. And I'm glad the industry is looking at alternatives.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Mike,

The industry is looking into lots of possible solutions.

The Electric Cars or fuel cells or Natural Gas or solar or ..., etc, are considered strong hybrids.

The IC (* Internal Combustion *) Engine and some other source combined gives you the Mild Hybrid.

I had a work associate who had one of the Honda hybrids. The car worked just great ... until the first sensor failure around 20k miles. The vehicle dropped from 40+ MPG down to 19-22 MPG. No matter what was done with this vehicle it would migrate to this failed state.

These systems are very complicated, and as in complicated systems, they tend to have issues, until they become common systems.

Hybrids save on emissions at the tail pipe. And Save on Gasoline costs. This helps with inner city areas and heavy traffic zones.

The issues with Electric cars are the electricity. Where does it come from. Most of the energy in the USA comes from the bruning of Sulfur contaminated coal. This causes more emissions at the factory smoke stacks then the equal burning of gasoline to power the same vehicles. As this may help cities like LA or Detroit, or Oakland, it does not help the global ecology. It is not the right direction. Electricity also requires a recharge and therfore special equipment, you have limited range, and limited recharge capabilities. The recharge locations can be modified, yet the range cannot at this time. Also, unfortunately one of the best ways to store this energy are lead batteries, which require special handling and disposal. Once again not the right thing for the ecology. Also, in castrophic accidents, the acid now comes into play for damage to the occupants.

The issue with Natural is the range and refill locations. Like I Said the refill can be fixed, yet the range is no way going to match that of conventional IC engines today. Also there is the issue of explosion in accidents. It is Natural Gas.

Solar has the issues of storing the energy as well, Batteries (* Issues from above as well *), and also the lack of sunny days. The range is even less then those mentioned before.

Fuel Cells are a promissing alternative. The only problem is that like fusion for many years it took more energy to be put into the reaction then you get out of it. Yet, the research does look promising, and I am not talking about cold fusion either.

I expect that the mild hybrids will be much more popular and will be seen in the near future (* 3 to 5 years *). These hybrids will combine electric engines and IC engines in various designs. Unfortunately, I am not able to discuss more at this time.

Be excited, and watchful, of the new technology.

I recently sold my 1993 Grand Am that got 23-25 MPG and had a 3300 cc 90 Deg V6 with a three speed transmission. People would ask me why I bought my 2000 Firebird with the 3800 90 Deg V6 with a 5 Speed Manual Transmission. The same driving I woudl get 27-29 MPG. If I drove it nice I could get 26 out of my 93, and I get 31 out of 2000. Also note that the 93 was under older emission standards, and the 2000 was an early ultra low emission vehicle, which got GM Emission credits for building a sports car at this emission level. I recently bough a 2003 Z71 4x4 SLT Extended Cab Short Bed half ton truck. I get from 16 MPG to 18 MPG. Running in 4x4 causes you to lose about 1 to 2 MPG also.

Talk to you later.
:asian:

 

[michaeledward]

The 2004 Toyota Prius was named 'Motor Trend Car of the Year'. While there are many different awards given out annually by and or two the manufactures, this is, perhaps, the most prestigeous.

The 2004 Toyota Prius is already sold out at most locations. Toyota has announced that is going to increase its manufacturing numbers for U.S. consumption. The original plan was to produce some 37,000 vehicles. This was recently changed to 48,000 (approximately).

The new Prius is reported to get between 55 and 60 miles per gallon. It is an 'ultra-low emmission vehicle'. The original version (2001 model year) got better mileage in the city than it did on the highway; I'm not sure if that remains true for the new 2004 version.

The basic version of the Prius comes in at about $20,000. A fancy version runs as much as $26,000 (GPS onboard, bluetooth connection for your sell phone, etc). As an electric/gasoline hybrid, I believe there is still a $2,000.00 federal income tax deduction available in the year you purchase this vehicle. This tax break does 'phase out' in the next few years, unless changed by our lawmakers (unfortuenately, this tax break can not compare with the tax break available to small business owners who purchase a vehicle with greater than 6,000 lbs GVW - write off up to $100,000.00)

With these financial considerations, I find it difficult to contemplate that one will ever 'earn' back enough money in fuel savings to justify the expense of the vehicle (compared to, let's say a Toyota Echo - List approximatley $14,000+/- - fuel economy 33-39 mpg). The Prius gets 20 miles more per gallon, but costs some $5,000 to $10,000 dollars more (after tax break). Buying a Prius must therefore be considered a 'Statement'. One would purchase this vehicle to show off their environmental awareness, or tax savvy, or perhaps their anti-foreign-oil-dependancy.

Those who have seen some of my rantings in 'The Study' might realize this is the car for me .... and, boy oh boy, do I find the urge difficult to compete with. However, my househould currently has 3 vehicles for two licensed drivers; two of which are owned free and clear; one of those gets 30+ mpg. I am still debating if I should trade in these two vehicles to acquire a Prius. But I do think that $25 grand is a lot of money to make a statement.

Also, look for more Gas/Electric hybrids this coming model year. I think Ford is about ready to market a 'Hybrid Escape' compact SUV.

Happy Motoring - Mike
http://www.prius.com
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/hybrid_news.shtml

 

[Makalakumu]

Give me the car with the "secret carburator" and I'll be happy. I know they are hiding it!!!!!

 

[MisterMike]

I agree with Mike. They are expen$ive. I guess only the upper middle class will be able to save the environment for now.

(JK!)

 

[Touch Of Death]

I'm still hung up on the fact that your work is 50 miles away from your home. Good Lord. Your work should pay you in gas cards.
Sean

 

[Rich Parsons]

michaeledward,

A couple of quick notes, if I may.

First, the Motor Trend Car (* Fill in the blank *) of the Year is a nice thing to have. And many of the public believes it to be the best award. Yet, those of us in the industry Sile and laugh at this award even when the company they work for get it. The award is almost directly proportional to the amount of money spent on advertising. (* Yes, everyone there is no Santa Claus, and the big corporations can be bad *) The vehicle in questions does have to stand up to the laugh test, and is usually a new model, yet it also will have lots of ads or has lots of ads in the magizine.


Emissions:

2000 Ultra Low Emissions are not the same as 2004 Ultra Low Emissions. The name changes the regulations changes.

ZEV: Zero Emission Vehicle at the tail pipe (* See previous rant about sulfur coal *)

ULEV: Ultra Low Emission Vehicle is usually the next step up in strict requriements.

LEV: Low Emission Vehicle

There is a term PLEV: Partial Low Emission Vehicle. This is in between LEV and ULEV. This is not always used, yet sometimes is to classify vehicles.

Also Trucks as classified by the NHTSB also face different requirements the cars for emissions. They are usually worse.


As to saving the ecology and enviroment, if the vehicle is a mild hybrid where the energy is gathered from the vehicle in braking and from the IC engine, then this would help the ecology and enviroment. If it comes from the power/energy company then it really does not help the ecology or enviroment.

As to the additional cost(s), yes adding stuff like sensors and extra motors and pumps for pressure and et al, all cost money. To produce and manufacture. Yet over time these cost will reduce. The technology in your $14,000 Echo would have cost you about $40,000 or more in 1983. The technology was just not available or way too expensive at that time. (* Yes I took a swag at the number myself, just from experience of being in the business *)

I applaud you idea of trying to be health conscious and also enviromentally aware and safe. The market for these vehicles are exactly as you stated. To those who are trying to make a statement just because they can.



:asian:

 

[DoxN4cer]

That's a lot of good info, Rich.

Hey, are you he guy that programs the chip that makes a new car crap out as soon as the warranty expires?

Tim Kashino

What, no Santa?

 

[TheRustyOne]

Oh, I'd love a fuel efficient car! Not only because of the whole environmental/spend WAY less money on gas thing but also because to get to my home from the college where I'm a resident, it's about 144 miles.

My current car is a 1987 Toyota Camry. If I could duplicate it, I would! It gets about 40 MPG highway on a 11/12 gallon tank. I can go the whole trip and use less than a quarter of a tank. It's wonderful. Sadly, it's nearing the end of it's life (maybe...do Toyota's even die??) cuz it's got about 164, 300 miles on it. And this car has only been seriously driven since fall of 2001 (t'was a totalled wreck when my dad bought it and re-built it)

I've looked at the prices of some of the hybrids, and they're out of the price range of the single parent w/ kid in college. I really think they're cute! I've seen a couple on campus, but then again, I've seen an H2 on campus *shudder*
m'friend saw a great liscense plate for an H2. It was 8 MPG and was on Nature Conservancy plates :rofl:

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by upnorthkyosa
Give me the car with the "secret carburator" and I'll be happy. I know they are hiding it!!!!!

Yes "The Secret Carburator"

This special device that cost nothing, just a few dollars more, and only needing to be installed just like the old carburator, and you will get a factor of ten better gas mileage.

As the Federal Governement started putting requirements on emissions at the tail pipe, in the late 1970's and kept getting more strict as time went by. As the car companies in the world tried to meet thses standards, they would add in new technology and this would cost money and drive up the cost fo the vehicle. Yet, the side effect of this was that with better control of the vehicle and the closed loop control, allowed the car manufacturers to get better gas mileage in the vehicle. Now our foreign competitors all went out and tried to meet or exceed these standards to get in good with our governement and also for marketing. They also spent their money on developing good 4 cylinder engines. Most of those domestic car companies spent their money on their real money makers, the V8's and some V6's. And very little money was spent on the 4 cylinders. Then as the market woudl turn down, as it always does, the demans for 4 cylinders would rise yet, there was no money to put into the technology. A very poor short sighted view.

Usually the new technology for the general market came from teh racing industry to the public. Starting in the 1980's this went the other way. The general public vehicles were offering up technology to the race cars. Now people might not think that this is very important, yet it is so important. This menas in effect the teh industry now losts it R&D areas and now had to come up with R&R themselves, This means to get something really proven you have to find a customer to put your technology into a vehicle and from there mass produce it to get the bugs worked out. Yes LAdies and Gentlemen, this means that you now are buying the new technology and testnig it. Yes the car companies due hace DUE Care Tests and durability test, yet the public does so mcuh more than we can imagaine . This makes it tough to get new technology into the field or market, unless regulations drive it.

:asian:

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
I'm still hung up on the fact that your work is 50 miles away from your home. Good Lord. Your work should pay you in gas cards.
Sean

I drive 32 miles one way, and twice a week I have to drive another 35 miles to another location for meetings.

And Yes Gas Cards would be nice

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by DoxN4cer
That's a lot of good info, Rich.

Hey, are you he guy that programs the chip that makes a new car crap out as soon as the warranty expires?

Tim Kashino

What, no Santa?

Tim,

I do work in the field and I do work on the 'Brains" for your Engine/Transmission. SOme are compined into a PCM, Powertrain control mudule, some are separate, ECM & TCM, Engine Control Module or Transmission Control Module. (* NOTE: if you have a Manual you no dot, repeat do not have a transmission control module other than the driver. So, if someone says it must be the TCM in a maual they are saying it is a driver erroe *)

In general they are all called ECU's or Electronic Control Units. This term also works for the ABS module, the Door Module, the BCM (* Body Control Mudule, usually runs the HVAC, Heater Vacuum Air Conditioner *), and lots more of those little things all through your car doing things for you and all of them are talking to each other.

And Tim, there is a Santa, but only for those who Believe
:asian:

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by TheRustyOne
Oh, I'd love a fuel efficient car! Not only because of the whole environmental/spend WAY less money on gas thing but also because to get to my home from the college where I'm a resident, it's about 144 miles.

My current car is a 1987 Toyota Camry. If I could duplicate it, I would! It gets about 40 MPG highway on a 11/12 gallon tank. I can go the whole trip and use less than a quarter of a tank. It's wonderful. Sadly, it's nearing the end of it's life (maybe...do Toyota's even die??) cuz it's got about 164, 300 miles on it. And this car has only been seriously driven since fall of 2001 (t'was a totalled wreck when my dad bought it and re-built it)

I've looked at the prices of some of the hybrids, and they're out of the price range of the single parent w/ kid in college. I really think they're cute! I've seen a couple on campus, but then again, I've seen an H2 on campus *shudder*
m'friend saw a great liscense plate for an H2. It was 8 MPG and was on Nature Conservancy plates :rofl:

Rusty,

I just let my 1993 Grand Am go to some friends who needed a car. It had 190,000 miles on it. No rebuilds on the engine or transmision. People do not beleive in the maintenance of their powertrain. If you take care of it, it will last a long time. Now changing the oil in the engine every 3,000 miles might be soon, so watch your oil and when it gets gritty or worn or has any smell then you have gone too far. Remember that mileage and back up some and change from there at the very least.

There are two theories on Transmissions, never change the oil and change every 15,000 miles. This depends upon who makes the transmission, so I cannot give you help here.

As to your Dad rebuilding the car, unless the car is rusting away, this car could last you a long time to come. If the poertrain was rebuilt, you shoudl be abel to get lots of miles out of that car. IT is a good car.

:asian:

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by MisterMike
I agree with Mike. They are expen$ive. I guess only the upper middle class will be able to save the environment for now.

(JK!)

MisterMike,

Your comment is not far off. See my previous posts

Yes, they cost, and jsut liek the first DVD player and CD players, the peopel who like new technology and being in the IN crowd will buy them. I support this. With this, over time the cost comes down and becomes affordable to more people.

So, if you can afford it, and you like the ideas behind it, then go ahead and buy one. No matter the manufacturer, it helps to lower the technology of the vehicle costs.

:asian:

 

[Cryozombie]

I agree with Mike. They are expen$ive. I guess only the upper middle class will be able to save the environment for now.

Any you know... on the subject of "Better Emissions"

Emission Controll in Illinois now has nothing to do with emissions, (well, I wont say NOTHING as you still have to pass that portion) but as of Jan 2, 2004 you will be required to pass a "Control Computer" test as well.

The Emissions control personell will test your control computer, and if they determine that your car has any "failures" (Including, apparently, a Low Battery) regarding the quality of the engine you will automatically fail the emissions test.

SO... the gist of it is if your car is not in the IMMACULATE condition that it came off the assembly line you cannot have a drivers licence in the State of Illinios. (If you fail emissions you lose your licence)

So maybe aving a Hybrid may only be plausable for the Upper Middle Class or higher, but, here at least, the alternate may be no licence at all, if you cannot afford to maintain a "Like New" car.

 

[Makalakumu]

More technology abolished by the "free market"

Fuel Ionization utilizes magnetic fields inside fuel injectors to scatter gasoline at an atomic level as it enters the piston. When the piston fires, there are no fuel globules that do remain uncombusted, hereby increasing fuel efficiency of the internal combustion engine sometimes more then 20 percent. There is no sacrifice in horsepower. Why is this not standard equipment on our auto fleet? The technology is patented and hidden. The engineers who invented it are very rich men.
Meanwhile, we argue about drilling.

For those of you who think the above is hogwash, here is how it works. Every molecule has an electrostatic charge, even the non-polar ones like hydrocarbons. This static is caused by quantum shifts in electrons and by the natural gain/loss of electrons inherit in fluid mechanics. If a small pulse of fuel is sprayed through a coil with a strong magnetic field at the correct velocity, it will atomize at or close to the molecular level. This pulse of fuel is substantially less then what is normally sprayed into the piston and the waste is almost cut down to nill. The amount of VOC and raw fuel lost out of the tail pipe would be almost nothing.

All of this is based off of the principals James Clerck Maxwell set in his four equations that unified electromagnetism? The devil is in the details. This cylinder I described above, in order to generate a magnetic field, would have to be comprised of micro-coils of wire. Really, really small stuff, yet strong enough to handle enough current to generate the field.

The strength and direction of the field itself is very important. If it’s too weak, the field won't scatter the droplets. If it’s too strong, it actually concentrates the droplets. A good way to visualize this is to think of adjusting the nozzle on a spray bottle, except in this case you are adjusting the flow (amperes) of current in the coil.

The shape of the device is also very important. It would have to have a cone shape with the tip connecting to the fuel injector. This would ensure that as the magnetic field rotates around the wire, its lines of force would all be traveling in the same direction as the fuel - except they would be traveling at c. The cone shape would give the magnetic field a cumulative AND differential effect that would break up fuel droplets like a bullet hitting a grape.
Lastly, the field is constantly being adjusted to accommodate more or less fuel - this requires a computer.

This type of technology is used in chemical engineering in order to get high yield in chemical reactions. The applications for the oxidation of fuel in this manner are obvious. It has already been patented – yet as you can see, it would not be an easy process to research and develop. Why is this a secret? Don’t you think that in a “Free Market”, if we knew about something like this, we would demand it? Are free markets free if information is controlled?

 

[MisterMike]

Originally posted by Touch'O'Death
I'm still hung up on the fact that your work is 50 miles away from your home. Good Lord. Your work should pay you in gas cards.
Sean

I wish they'd just let me work from home. Heck, I'd even take a pay cut for the opportunity

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by Technopunk
Any you know... on the subject of "Better Emissions"

Emission Controll in Illinois now has nothing to do with emissions, (well, I wont say NOTHING as you still have to pass that portion) but as of Jan 2, 2004 you will be required to pass a "Control Computer" test as well.

The Emissions control personell will test your control computer, and if they determine that your car has any "failures" (Including, apparently, a Low Battery) regarding the quality of the engine you will automatically fail the emissions test.

SO... the gist of it is if your car is not in the IMMACULATE condition that it came off the assembly line you cannot have a drivers licence in the State of Illinios. (If you fail emissions you lose your licence)

So maybe aving a Hybrid may only be plausable for the Upper Middle Class or higher, but, here at least, the alternate may be no licence at all, if you cannot afford to maintain a "Like New" car.

Technopunk,

Do not think you are the first to see these types of tests. They have been in place in California for a while and also in some large cities onthe east coast.

The PCM or the ECM/TCM are required by law to respond to certain communication protocols that the federal governement has dictated. If a car company fails to do so they could face fines and stopage of the assembly plants until it is fixed. You ask how can the US Government do this? They can fine the car company upto $10,000 per car built.

Ok back to the protocol. While your engine and transmission are operating you have hundreds if not a thousand or so diagnostics running in the vehicle. Thoes related to emission devices must be reported out via these modes. Currently it is limited to the Engine and Transmission, it may also include the ABS in the future. If the diagnostics have set previously and then "fixed" themselves teh light on your dash will go out and the computer or controller will store the DTC or Diagnostic Trouble Code. The Code is kept in history until over 40 consecutive Warm cycles without a fail has occurred. A warm up cycle is defined by a whole lot of paragraphs in regulatory documents. If you have an active code it should appear as a light on your dash board. Either the Service Vehicle Soon or the Service Engine/Pwertrain Soon. The Service Vehicle soon is non emission related and not of concern to the regulations from my understanding. Illinois may be different, I have not read their requriements, and would not expect them to be less or equal to that of California. Even the requirements on for the East Coast are about the same as that of California.

Th Service Engine Soon light would be on if there was an eemission related issue of concern with the vehicle. Yes if you have a light on in your vehicle it means you will have to pay to get it fixed. Yet you should know about most if not all of the problems before you go for the test. In California they have these tests stations along the higway and can stop you and run the test relatively fast. These are called the IM Stations.

I would talk to a service person who would run the test to see what is expected befre you go in for your actual test.

:asian:

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by upnorthkyosa
More technology abolished by the "free market"

Fuel Ionization utilizes magnetic fields inside fuel injectors to scatter gasoline at an atomic level as it enters the piston. When the piston fires, there are no fuel globules that do remain uncombusted, hereby increasing fuel efficiency of the internal combustion engine sometimes more then 20 percent. There is no sacrifice in horsepower. Why is this not standard equipment on our auto fleet? The technology is patented and hidden. The engineers who invented it are very rich men.
Meanwhile, we argue about drilling.

upnorthkyosa,

How is it Patented and Hidden. If it is Patented, then it is available to the public for viewing. If you are implying that someone bought the rigths to this patent and are sitting on it, then could you explain who bought it?

Given that GM is about worth $40 Billion on paper and Ford less than that, and Diamler Chrysler was about $55 Billion at the time of the merger, and I seem to remember that Toyota was about $240 Billion in net worth. With this type of money to leverage I would expect they would want it to use to make their vehicles more fuel efficient. You see there is this little thing called CAFE. Corporate Average Fuel Economy. There is a minimum that everyone (Companies) here in the Number one vehicle market of the USA, that is required to meet. And they could build credits up if they had this technology. So, who would stop them from using this technology? Which company or persons would have the money to stop anyone of these companies or combined to get this technololgy?

I am sure if the press received a copy of this patent and your explanation on how it works and the conspricy you are mentioning here. Please provide me the patent number so I can read it myself and also find out the patent filers and contact them about this technology. Maybe, I can negotiate a deal for a car company or two. If I get anything from it I would split all finders fees with you.

I am serious here. 20% increase in Efficiency is wonderful. Of course if the efficiency is from 8 MPG to 10 MPG, when we are at 16 MPG today on a V8. Now from what little I know, your explanation sounds like it would be useful.

Please contact me or post the data here.

:asian:

 

[Makalakumu]

Patents are not so easily dug out of the woodwork. My friend is a patent lawyer and this kind of information, especially technical information is buried deep. This is the process, just enough info to distinguish the technology, but not enough to give it away is offered to the patent office. Honestly, though, I have never looked.

The gist of the post I offered above comes from a conversation I had with a professor from MIT. He spoke at my college to the college of science and engineering and afterward met people for an informal discussion complete with coffee and doughnuts. I bounced the above idea off of him and he told me not to bother because the idea was old. It had been researched and developed and locked away.

Maybe I should ask my uncle where to find this info. He has several patents on medical equipment. Including the stent.