|
Home > Archive > Alternative Power sources > November 2005 > Toyota's All hybrid Dreams
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Toyota's All hybrid Dreams
|
|
|
|
| Christian M. Mericle 2005-09-27, 11:21 am |
| On 26 Sep 2005 18:40:27 -0700, "hawkerforest" <hawkerforest@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>Did anyone see the announcement about Toyota's goal of reaching an
>all-hybrid fleet? Notice, they didn't exactly set a time frame ;)
>
>http://www.cleantechblog.com/2005/0...automotive.html
I think it's an excellent idea. We need to reduce gas dependence as
much as possible.
-- Christian
| |
| Ed Earl Ross 2005-09-27, 6:21 pm |
| hawkerforest wrote:
> Did anyone see the announcement about Toyota's goal of reaching an
> all-hybrid fleet? Notice, they didn't exactly set a time frame ;)
>
> http://www.cleantechblog.com/2005/0...automotive.html
Couple of years ago, the sales person we worked with said that
Toyota will offer hybrid as an optional engine drive-train for any
of their vehicles. Does this qualify as an all-hybrid fleet, or has
Toyota changed their goal?
--
Humbly--Ed
"If the man doesn't believe as we do,
we say he is a crank, and that settles it.
I mean, it does nowadays, because now we
can't burn him." (Mark Twain)
| |
|
| Now IF someone would come up with a diesel hybrid - that might make
hybrids worth buying. At present, considering cost of battery
replacement every few years, I doubt a hybrid would be any more
economical.
| |
| Bob Adkins 2005-09-28, 11:21 am |
| On 28 Sep 2005 04:46:59 -0700, "Jake" <ki0oe@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Now IF someone would come up with a diesel hybrid - that might make
>hybrids worth buying. At present, considering cost of battery
>replacement every few years, I doubt a hybrid would be any more
>economical.
Bingo. Anyone who has a lot of experience with batteries knows they are
always the weak link in any alternative power scheme.
--
Bob
| |
|
| On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 08:58:41 -0500, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net>
wrote:
>On 28 Sep 2005 04:46:59 -0700, "Jake" <ki0oe@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>Bingo. Anyone who has a lot of experience with batteries knows they are
>always the weak link in any alternative power scheme.
Does anyone have an idea of what the battery replacement costs on a
Toyota hybrid average out to on a yearly basis?
-- Christian
| |
| zenboom 2005-09-28, 2:21 pm |
|
"Jake" <ki0oe@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1127908019.262640.306770@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Now IF someone would come up with a diesel hybrid - that might make
> hybrids worth buying. At present, considering cost of battery
> replacement every few years, I doubt a hybrid would be any more
> economical.
The curious thing is ... why not yet??
| |
| Dave Hinz 2005-09-28, 3:21 pm |
| On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:40:44 +0200, zenboom <?signal.ds?@?bluebottle.com?> wrote:
>
>
>
> "Jake" <ki0oe@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1127908019.262640.306770@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
[color=darkred]
> The curious thing is ... why not yet??
That's a really, really good question. I'd probably own one now if they
were available at a reasonable cost. I think it may still come back to
GM poisoning the market as far as consumers and diesels.
| |
| Nick Hull 2005-09-28, 4:21 pm |
| In article <bqblj11r85olpek2qi5a38hn6p6r3v41u1@4ax.com>,
CMM <newsgroupinky@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Does anyone have an idea of what the battery replacement costs on a
> Toyota hybrid average out to on a yearly basis?
I suspect that replacement batteries, if they are even availiable, will
cost more than the value of the vehicle. I suspect most hybrids will be
junked at battery renewal time. Might be possible to pick them up cheap
and install cheap (and lower performing) lead acid batteries if you
could get the charging system to work on LA.
--
Free men own guns, slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/
| |
|
| >>>Now IF someone would come up with a diesel hybrid - that might make
Hybrid diesel is technically feasable, but diesel engines are more
expensive than gas engines, so a diesel hybrid would cost more. Also,
diesels do not currently meet California emission standards, so they can't
be sold here. Newly developed catalytic converter and soot filter
technology may change that, though.
[color=darkred]
All cars have batteries, but how long the batteries last depends on how
well it is managed - proper charging, avoiding excessive discharge,
avoiding excessive charging/discharging rates, avoiding overheating - all
those contribute to a long battery life.
Toyota designed their hybrid system to maximize the NiMH battery life with
a battery managment system to maintain the NiMH battery in the optimum
charge range, preventing charge from falling below 40%, preventing
overcharging, and preventing excessive currents and overheating. They have
a 8 year warranty on that battery, and it may well last the life of the
car. The only battery problem for the Prius was with the 12 volt lead acid
battery used to power accessories and theft deterrent systems - it could be
drained dead if the car was left unused and undriven for several months.
A 2001 Prius was used as a taxi in Vancouver, BC for 4 years, it racked up
over 200,000 miles, is still in use as a personal car, it still has it's
original batteries, and it required less maintenance than other taxis in
the fleet! (The brakes were very low maintenance due to regenerative
braking).
Early model Honda Insight hybrids, on the other hand, didn't manage battery
charge as well, and they did have some problems with battery replacement -
a problem that Honda has now fixed.
[color=darkred]
> Does anyone have an idea of what the battery replacement costs on a
> Toyota hybrid average out to on a yearly basis?
Considering they haven't had to replace any of the NiMH traction batteries
yet, it is a little hard to figure. The current estimate is about $3k for a
complete battery pack. If we used a very pessimistic estimate of a 9 year
life (expiring shortly after the warranty), that works out to about $333
per year. A more realistic 15 year life would be only $200 per year.
Whether that is worthwhile depends on how much you drive and how much
higher gas prices rise. (hint: we will not see gas below $2 a gallon ever
again)
CM
| |
|
| > I suspect that replacement batteries, if they are even availiable, will
> cost more than the value of the vehicle. I suspect most hybrids will be
> junked at battery renewal time. Might be possible to pick them up cheap
> and install cheap (and lower performing) lead acid batteries if you
> could get the charging system to work on LA.
Replacement NiMH batteries are available but only as a special order -
Toyota doesn't have to keep them in stock, since they haven't had to
replace them. Considering that a 2001 Prius is selling used for over $12K,
that is 4x the price of battery replacement! Too much demand - the Prius
isn't depreciating much.
The only way to get a Prius cheap is to buy one damaged in an accident, or
be a lucky bidder at a sparsely attended auction somewhere.
CM
| |
| Vaughn 2005-09-28, 7:21 pm |
|
"CM" <cm@cm.not.really> wrote in message
news:o9C_e.4235$zQ3.2138@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> If we used a very pessimistic estimate of a 9 year life (expiring shortly
> after the warranty), that works out to about $333 per year.
I would say that 9 years is highly, no...wildly optimistic. My experience
is that NIMH batteries are good for about three years, and I have seen little to
make me expect different in the future. If we assume computer control that is
especially gentle on the batteries and are willing to tolerate a reduction in
efficiency and performance as the batteries deteriate to a fraction of their
original capacity, perhaps that could double to 6 years; but I wouldn't want to
bet on it. I think that Toyota will simply, quietly, absorb the warranty cost
of replacing lots of batteries.
> A more realistic 15 year life would be only $200 per year.
IMHO, (based on my experience with thousands of NIMH packs over the last
decade) 15 years is crazy! It will never happen.
The above said, I don't expect hybrid auto battery packs to cost thousands
once a secondary market develops to bypass the OEM. For example; a NIMH battery
pack that once cost me $140 when it was only available from the OEM, is now
available to me from multiple sources for under $40.00. From what I understand,
there is no ground-breaking technology in those Toyota battery packs, they are
just a bunch of NIMH "D" cells. I can name any of several companies that would
be capable of making or rebuilding these packs if there were a market for them.
Right now there isn't a market because all of those cars are under warranty.
> Whether that is worthwhile depends on how much you drive and how much higher
> gas prices rise. (hint: we will not see gas below $2 a gallon ever again)
I agree: Certainly it will never happen as long as we keep electing oil men
to high office. ;-)
Vaughn
>
> CM
>
| |
|
| "Vaughn" <vaughnsimonHATESSPAM@att.fake.net> wrote in
news:tpE_e.89148$qY1.86519@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>
[color=darkred]
>
> SNIP>
> Vaughn
>
>
>
I wish somody in this group would buy one, then figure out how
to charge one from a 120v house outlet. My wife could go weeks without
having the gas engine start.............Rob
| |
| Solar Flare 2005-09-28, 10:21 pm |
| We have experience with flooded ni-Cad cells functioning for 15 years in
battery backup situations.
Not all batteries are created equal.
"Vaughn" <vaughnsimonHATESSPAM@att.fake.net> wrote in message
news:tpE_e.89148$qY1.86519@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"CM" <cm@cm.not.really> wrote in message
news:o9C_e.4235$zQ3.2138@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> If we used a very pessimistic estimate of a 9 year life (expiring shortly
> after the warranty), that works out to about $333 per year.
I would say that 9 years is highly, no...wildly optimistic. My
experience
is that NIMH batteries are good for about three years, and I have seen
little to
make me expect different in the future. If we assume computer control that
is
especially gentle on the batteries and are willing to tolerate a reduction
in
efficiency and performance as the batteries deteriate to a fraction of their
original capacity, perhaps that could double to 6 years; but I wouldn't want
to
bet on it. I think that Toyota will simply, quietly, absorb the warranty
cost
of replacing lots of batteries.
> A more realistic 15 year life would be only $200 per year.
IMHO, (based on my experience with thousands of NIMH packs over the
last
decade) 15 years is crazy! It will never happen.
The above said, I don't expect hybrid auto battery packs to cost
thousands
once a secondary market develops to bypass the OEM. For example; a NIMH
battery
pack that once cost me $140 when it was only available from the OEM, is now
available to me from multiple sources for under $40.00. From what I
understand,
there is no ground-breaking technology in those Toyota battery packs, they
are
just a bunch of NIMH "D" cells. I can name any of several companies that
would
be capable of making or rebuilding these packs if there were a market for
them.
Right now there isn't a market because all of those cars are under warranty.
> Whether that is worthwhile depends on how much you drive and how much
higher
> gas prices rise. (hint: we will not see gas below $2 a gallon ever again)
I agree: Certainly it will never happen as long as we keep electing oil
men
to high office. ;-)
Vaughn
>
> CM
>
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-09-28, 11:21 pm |
| CMM wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 08:58:41 -0500, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Does anyone have an idea of what the battery replacement costs on a
> Toyota hybrid average out to on a yearly basis?
>
> -- Christian
The batteries are covered under warranty
| |
| Nathan Hill 2005-09-28, 11:21 pm |
|
> I wish somody in this group would buy one, then figure out how
> to charge one from a 120v house outlet. My wife could go weeks without
> having the gas engine start.............Rob
I belive there are several groups and one company that I have heard of that
can do this already. The groups are called Plug in groups.
Try:
http://www.sciencefriday.com/kids/sfkc20050422-2.html
| |
|
|
| Bob Adkins 2005-09-29, 1:21 am |
| On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 22:02:01 GMT, "Vaughn"
<vaughnsimonHATESSPAM@att.fake.net> wrote:
>From what I understand,
>there is no ground-breaking technology in those Toyota battery packs, they are
>just a bunch of NIMH "D" cells.
Really? I had envisioned NiMH cells the size of an oatmeal box.
Toyota's cells may be extra heavy duty. Perhaps not optimized for storage
capacity, but optimized for longevity.
Can you imagine a wreck where the pack is penetrated and many cells shorted?
It could get pretty exciting! Even a single D cell can melt pretty big wires
and sheet metal. :D
--
Bob
| |
| Vaughn 2005-09-29, 7:21 am |
|
"mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:e9H_e.6927$cq2.728578@news20.bellglobal.com...
> CMM wrote:
>
> The batteries are covered under warranty
Yes, that has already been mentioned several times in this thread.
Warranties don't last forever. If the batteries don't last for the entire
warranty period, then the manufacturer must build their replacement cost into
the price of the car. After the warranty period, the usefulness and value of
the car will depend greatly on the battery costs. Either way, the buyer of the
car pays the maintenance cost of the batteries, so this is a valid concern.
Vaughn
| |
| JTurner 2005-09-29, 9:21 am |
| Jake wrote:
> Now IF someone would come up with a diesel hybrid - that might make
> hybrids worth buying. At present, considering cost of battery
> replacement every few years, I doubt a hybrid would be any more
> economical.
Diesels alone are the best technology.
Some friends who own an '04 Prius have had to replace their computer twice
in less than 30,000 miles. Both times the computer went out - the car was
inoperable. Major league bummer if you have a transportation-critical job.
It makes me think that Toyota released the design too early or they are
having serious quality problems.
| |
| JTurner 2005-09-29, 9:21 am |
| CM wrote:
>
> Hybrid diesel is technically feasable, but diesel engines are more
> expensive than gas engines, so a diesel hybrid would cost more.
This is largely not true. Diesels have a robust, heavy design compared to
gas engines. This equates to heavier castings and forged metal parts. The
added cost would be due to the extra metal used -- which does not amount to
any significant cost.
Diesels can easily be as cheap as gas engines when they are sold in large
volume. Manufacturing economy-of-scale is the only significant variable.
| |
| Nick Hull 2005-09-29, 12:21 pm |
| In article <emC_e.4246$zQ3.4113@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"CM" <cm@cm.not.really> wrote:
>
> Replacement NiMH batteries are available but only as a special order -
> Toyota doesn't have to keep them in stock, since they haven't had to
> replace them. Considering that a 2001 Prius is selling used for over $12K,
> that is 4x the price of battery replacement! Too much demand - the Prius
> isn't depreciating much.
>
> The only way to get a Prius cheap is to buy one damaged in an accident, or
> be a lucky bidder at a sparsely attended auction somewhere.
The way to get one cheap is to wait until the batteries go dead and the
owner gets sticker shock over the replacement price. What is the
expected lifetime?
--
Free men own guns, slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/
| |
| Anthony Matonak 2005-09-29, 12:21 pm |
| JTurner wrote:
> Diesels alone are the best technology.
>
> Some friends who own an '04 Prius have had to replace their computer twice
> in less than 30,000 miles. Both times the computer went out - the car was
> inoperable. Major league bummer if you have a transportation-critical job.
I believe almost every new car sold today has a computer and
if those computers go out, the car is inoperable. I would
suspect that even a diesel engine on a passenger car would
have some kind of computer these days.
Anthony
| |
| Steve Spence 2005-09-29, 12:21 pm |
| Anthony Matonak wrote:
> JTurner wrote:
>
>
>
> I believe almost every new car sold today has a computer and
> if those computers go out, the car is inoperable. I would
> suspect that even a diesel engine on a passenger car would
> have some kind of computer these days.
>
> Anthony
I like the old diesels. No computers, no electronics, everything was
mechanical. The only electrics needed was the starter.
--
Steve Spence
Dir., Green Trust, http://www.green-trust.org
Contributing Editor, http://www.off-grid.net
http://www.rebelwolf.com/essn.html
| |
| Ed Earl Ross 2005-09-29, 3:21 pm |
| CMM wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 08:58:41 -0500, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Does anyone have an idea of what the battery replacement costs on a
> Toyota hybrid average out to on a yearly basis?
I bought an '04 with a 100,000 mi warranty on the hybrid system,
and a claim the battery would last to 150,000 mi. I checked the
Toyota catalog about a year ago, and the battery price was "no charge."
--
Humbly--Ed
"If the man doesn't believe as we do,
we say he is a crank, and that settles it.
I mean, it does nowadays, because now we
can't burn him." (Mark Twain)
| |
| zenboom 2005-09-29, 5:21 pm |
|
"Vaughn" <vaughnsimonHATESSPAM@att.fake.net> wrote in message
news:h6P_e.90821$qY1.13823@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:e9H_e.6927$cq2.728578@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
> Yes, that has already been mentioned several times in this thread.
>
> Warranties don't last forever. If the batteries don't last for the
entire
> warranty period, then the manufacturer must build their replacement cost
into
> the price of the car. After the warranty period, the usefulness and value
of
> the car will depend greatly on the battery costs. Either way, the buyer
of the
> car pays the maintenance cost of the batteries, so this is a valid
concern.
>
> Vaughn
>
Not neccessarily. It might suite Toyota to cover the warrenty risk
themselves, for whatever period, to suit their business plan...
| |
| Gordon Richmond 2005-09-29, 7:21 pm |
| "Not neccessarily. It might suite Toyota to cover the warrenty risk
themselves, for whatever period, to suit their business plan..."
In which case the buyers of new Priuses, or other Toyota vehicles, are
subsidizing the lucky early Prius buyers, eh?
Or do you expect Toyota to run itself into the red?
Gordon Richmond
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-09-30, 12:21 am |
| Vaughn wrote:
> "mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:e9H_e.6927$cq2.728578@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
>
>
> Yes, that has already been mentioned several times in this thread.
>
> Warranties don't last forever. If the batteries don't last for the entire
> warranty period, then the manufacturer must build their replacement cost into
> the price of the car. After the warranty period, the usefulness and value of
> the car will depend greatly on the battery costs. Either way, the buyer of the
> car pays the maintenance cost of the batteries, so this is a valid concern.
>
> Vaughn
>
>
I don't know about you, but I seldom keep a car more than four years.
According to most stats the average american dives 8,000-12,000 miles a
year, at that rate the car is going to be over 10 years old before the
batteries are going to be a problem.
| |
|
|
>
> The way to get one cheap is to wait until the batteries go dead and the
> owner gets sticker shock over the replacement price. What is the
> expected lifetime?
Toyota's battery management system is designed to maximize the battery
life, and the Toyota warranty covers the NiMH batteries for 8 years. The
Prius has been available in the US for almost 5 years, and have been sold
in Japan for about 8 years. In most cases, the batteries will last the life
of the car.
You will have a very very loooong wait for those batteries to go dead!
CM
| |
| zenboom 2005-09-30, 6:21 am |
|
"Gordon Richmond" <richmond@telusplanet.net> wrote in message
news:vgooj19dbqeci3arj77oahse3m66ql8v1r@4ax.com...
> "Not neccessarily. It might suite Toyota to cover the warrenty risk
> themselves, for whatever period, to suit their business plan..."
>
> In which case the buyers of new Priuses, or other Toyota vehicles, are
> subsidizing the lucky early Prius buyers, eh?
>
> Or do you expect Toyota to run itself into the red?
>
> Gordon Richmond
You don't think none of em cross-subsidize, do you?? Then there is their
capital resources...
| |
| Vaughn 2005-09-30, 8:21 am |
|
"CM" <cm@cm.not.really> wrote in message
news:N36%e.5315$oc.3210@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>
> In most cases, the batteries will last the life of the car.
Do you have a reference for this or is it just your opinion?
Vaughn
| |
| Vaughn 2005-09-30, 8:21 am |
|
"mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:Eu1%e.7696$cq2.921805@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Vaughn wrote:
>
> I don't know about you, but I seldom keep a car more than four years.
You must spend more money on transportation than I do. I still think of a
car as new after four years.
> According to most stats the average american dives 8,000-12,000 miles a year,
> at that rate the car is going to be over 10 years old before the batteries are
> going to be a problem.
Perhaps Toyota has pulled some type of a technological rabbit out of their
hat, but in my experience (which is extensive) NIMH batteries are good for about
three years.
Vaughn
| |
| Tony Wesley 2005-09-30, 9:21 am |
|
Vaughn wrote:
> "CM" <cm@cm.not.really> wrote in message
> news:N36%e.5315$oc.3210@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> Do you have a reference for this or is it just your opinion?
According to Toyota, they haven't had to replace one yet.
"Since the car went on sale in 2000, Toyota has not replaced a single
battery for wear and tear."
http://pressroom.toyota.com/photo_l...tml?id=20040623
| |
| Derek Broughton 2005-09-30, 10:21 am |
| Vaughn wrote:
> "mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote:
You only have to look on the street to see that while the _average_ car may
be only 4 years old, or less, there are a lot of older cars out there. If
the batteries _really_ only have a 3 or 4 year life span, even if the
second owner gets a replacement under warranty, it's going to affect resale
value?
[color=darkred]
With batteries, it's rarely _frequency_ of use that's a problem (though
complete lack of use is, as I don't think any type of battery holds a
charge over the long term). I'd be surprised if a car driven 8000 miles a
year has a significantly different battery life span than one driven 20000
miles a year.[color=darkred]
>
> Perhaps Toyota has pulled some type of a technological rabbit out of their
> hat, but in my experience (which is extensive) NIMH batteries are good for
> about three years.
I don't really understand it either. Unless they're somehow managing to do
warranty replacements on the sly - and bribing customers & employees not to
talk - they would seem to be managing it, though, since they've already
gone well over 3 years.
--
derek
| |
| andre_54005@yahoo.com 2005-09-30, 11:21 am |
|
Vaughn wrote:
> "mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:Eu1%e.7696$cq2.921805@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
> You must spend more money on transportation than I do. I still think of a
> car as new after four years.
>
>
> Perhaps Toyota has pulled some type of a technological rabbit out of their
> hat, but in my experience (which is extensive) NIMH batteries are good for about
> three years.
>
> Vaughn
If you are comparing to batteries in cordless tools, then I thing the
big difference is in how well controlled the charge and discharge
cycles are controlled. Chargers for cordless tool batteries are a lot
better then they used to be but some still tend to cook the snot out of
the batteries if they are left on too long. But I think the main
problem is in the discharge cycle, most cordless tool users that I have
seen keep running a battery until the drill just will not turn any more
, some of them then wait a short period of time and try it again just
to be sure the battery really is dead. Doing that almost ensures that
one or more cells in the pack are being reversed which quickly destroys
the battery. The computer in the car has a lot better control of the
state of charge of the battery pack and of the power levels both in and
out of the pack so the pack in the car should last longer.
___________
Andre' B.
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-09-30, 1:21 pm |
| Vaughn wrote:
> "mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:Eu1%e.7696$cq2.921805@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
>
>
> You must spend more money on transportation than I do. I still think of a
> car as new after four years.
>
>
>
>
> Perhaps Toyota has pulled some type of a technological rabbit out of their
> hat, but in my experience (which is extensive) NIMH batteries are good for about
> three years.
>
> Vaughn
>
>
As has been pointed out here many times Toyota has designed the system
so the batteries are not depleted the way they would be in a laptop or
power tool. Batteries that are not deeply discharged last a lot longer.
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-09-30, 1:21 pm |
| Derek Broughton wrote:
> Vaughn wrote:
>
>
>
>
> You only have to look on the street to see that while the _average_ car may
> be only 4 years old, or less, there are a lot of older cars out there. If
> the batteries _really_ only have a 3 or 4 year life span, even if the
> second owner gets a replacement under warranty, it's going to affect resale
> value?
Who said the batteires only last 3-4 years? Toyota covers them for 8
years and a Prius used as a taxi has already covered over 200,000K on
the original set .
>
>
>
>
> With batteries, it's rarely _frequency_ of use that's a problem (though
> complete lack of use is, as I don't think any type of battery holds a
> charge over the long term). I'd be surprised if a car driven 8000 miles a
> year has a significantly different battery life span than one driven 20000
> miles a year.
>
>
>
> I don't really understand it either. Unless they're somehow managing to do
> warranty replacements on the sly - and bribing customers & employees not to
> talk - they would seem to be managing it, though, since they've already
> gone well over 3 years.
Do you honestly think a Japanese company would spend hundreds of
millions of dollars developing a technological blunder? They test
everything to death before offering it to the public.
| |
| Vaughn Simon 2005-09-30, 2:21 pm |
|
"Tony Wesley" <tonywesley@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128081811.504357.294210@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Vaughn wrote:
>
>
> According to Toyota, they haven't had to replace one yet.
>
> "Since the car went on sale in 2000, Toyota has not replaced a single
> battery for wear and tear."
>
>
> http://pressroom.toyota.com/photo_l...tml?id=20040623
At last, someone who knows how to post a reference. Thanks!
Please note that the reference was written over 15 months ago, and the
situation may have changed. That paragraph also seems to be the source for
the claim that the battery will last the life of the vehicle; something I
seriously doubt. It also mentions that battery costs are still dropping and
should not be a major issue in the future; this matches my observations and
expectations.
Vaughn
Quote Follows from 6/29/2004 news release:
"The Prius battery (and the battery-power management system) has been
designed to maximize battery life. In part this is done by keeping the
battery at an optimum charge level - never fully draining it and never fully
recharging it. As a result, the Prius battery leads a pretty easy life. We
have lab data showing the equivalent of 180,000 miles with no deterioration
and expect it to last the life of the vehicle. We also expect battery
technology to continue to improve: the second-generation model battery is
15% smaller, 25% lighter, and has 35% more specific power than the first.
This is true of price as well. Between the 2003 and 2004 models, service
battery costs came down 36% and we expect them to continue to drop so that
by the time replacements may be needed it won't be a much of an issue. Since
the car went on sale in 2000, Toyota has not replaced a single battery for
wear and tear."
>
| |
| Vaughn Simon 2005-09-30, 2:21 pm |
|
"mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:7xd%e.8340$cq2.1015997@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Derek Broughton wrote:
>
>
> Who said the batteires only last 3-4 years? Toyota covers them for 8 years
> ...
You are mistaking the warrany period of the device for the lifetime of
the device. One has nothing to do with the other.
>
> Do you honestly think a Japanese company would spend hundreds of millions
> of dollars developing a technological blunder? They test everything to
> death before offering it to the public.
I have said no such thing, please do not ever put words in my mouth.
Vaughn
| |
| Arnold Walker 2005-09-30, 3:21 pm |
|
"mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:Pbd%e.2701$l03.574355@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Vaughn wrote:
>
think of a[color=darkred]
year,[color=darkred]
batteries are[color=darkred]
of their[color=darkred]
for about[color=darkred]
>
>
> As has been pointed out here many times Toyota has designed the system
> so the batteries are not depleted the way they would be in a laptop or
> power tool. Batteries that are not deeply discharged last a lot longer.
>
So you saying they don't develope memory like NiCad from partial discharge
before charging.
Because with NiCad you have to fully discharge them in order to get a full
charge.
You look in the maintenance shops and they have shorting strip for that
purpose.
At the same time,it don't make sense to buy that much heavy metal.
When you can get a diesel to do the same thing in a light vehicle.
----== Posted via droptable.com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.droptable.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-09-30, 3:21 pm |
| Vaughn Simon wrote:
> "mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:7xd%e.8340$cq2.1015997@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
>
>
> You are mistaking the warrany period of the device for the lifetime of
> the device. One has nothing to do with the other.
What? They are not going to provide such a warranty unless they are very
sure the batteries will last at least that long. To provide a 8 year
warranty on a product that would last less than half that time from a
financial and credibility standpoint would be commercial suicide.
>
>
>
> I have said no such thing, please do not ever put words in my mouth.
>
> Vaughn
>
I read it the way you wrote it my friend. You have been going on about
batteries lasting only three years all through thread and giving the
impression Toyota is not being very upfront regarding the life of the
batteries. The fact is Toyota has spent millions on this project and are
known for producing high quality durable products.
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-09-30, 3:21 pm |
| Arnold Walker wrote:
> "mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:Pbd%e.2701$l03.574355@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
>
> think of a
>
>
> year,
>
>
> batteries are
>
>
> of their
>
>
> for about
>
>
> So you saying they don't develope memory like NiCad from partial discharge
> before charging.
> Because with NiCad you have to fully discharge them in order to get a full
> charge.
> You look in the maintenance shops and they have shorting strip for that
> purpose.
> At the same time,it don't make sense to buy that much heavy metal.
> When you can get a diesel to do the same thing in a light vehicle.
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via droptable.com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
> http://www.droptable.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
No they don't have a memory, and in the Prius they never get anywhere
near full discharge.
| |
| Vaughn Simon 2005-09-30, 4:21 pm |
|
"mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:K4f%e.8448$cq2.1030521@news20.bellglobal.com...
[color=darkred]
> I read it the way you wrote it my friend.
Then you are reading it wrong.
> You have been going on about batteries lasting only three years all
> through thread and giving the impression Toyota is not being very upfront
> regarding the life of the batteries.
Yes, I think there is some hype here. That is not the same as a
technological blunder.
The fact is Toyota has spent millions on this project and are
> known for producing high quality durable products.
True, but they also have an effective marketing staff.
Vaughn
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-09-30, 4:21 pm |
| Vaughn Simon wrote:
> "mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:K4f%e.8448$cq2.1030521@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> Then you are reading it wrong.
>
>
>
>
> Yes, I think there is some hype here. That is not the same as a
> technological blunder.
>
> The fact is Toyota has spent millions on this project and are
>
>
>
> True, but they also have an effective marketing staff.
>
> Vaughn
>
>
Plus the proof and reputation to back it up. All the marketing in the
world would not hide a glaring problem like batteries packing it in
at 3-4 years, the competition like GM and Ford would have their PR
people that all over the media with it in a second ;~)
| |
| Chris Hill 2005-09-30, 4:21 pm |
| On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 10:26:32 GMT, "Vaughn"
<vaughnsimonHATESSPAM@att.fake.net> wrote:
>
> Perhaps Toyota has pulled some type of a technological rabbit out of their
>hat, but in my experience (which is extensive) NIMH batteries are good for about
>three years.
Do you only discharge your batteries to 40% then only recharge them to
80%? That's what Toyota is doing.
| |
|
| hawkerforest wrote:
> Did anyone see the announcement about Toyota's goal of reaching an
> all-hybrid fleet? Notice, they didn't exactly set a time frame ;)
> http://www.cleantechblog.com/2005/0...automotive.html
Not to throw a wrench into your smooth train of thought, guys, but to get
you back to the planet Earth, here is a quote from Mr. David Hermance,
Toyota's executive engineer for advanced technology vehicles:
"By the end of 2005 there will be 500,000 hybrid vehicles in the world
(NOT ONLY TOYOTA'S - MY COMMENT), half of them in US. We are targeting
production at 1 million units per year by 2012"
Well, back in 2002 (I could not find any more recent data) the total
production by Toyota was 1.78 million units. Considering that it goes up
every year, I would guess that it would be pretty darn close to 2 million
in 2012. So, just half is going to be hybrid. Additionally, let me quote
Karina Morley, director of power train control electronics at Visteon:
"The power trains for the 2009 model year are ulready under contract, and
I can tell you that they are almost entirely based on internal-combustion
technology".
All the quotes are from EETimes magazine, Sept. 05 2005
So, not so fast, my friends. Although it is a very nice dream to have,
indeed.
Cheers!
D.
-------------------------------------
##-----------------------------------------------##
Delivered via http://www.equity-loan.info
Your home, its financing and everything about it
no-spam access to your favorite newsgroup -
alt.energy.homepower - 10401 messages and counting!
##-----------------------------------------------##
| |
| Vaughn 2005-09-30, 7:21 pm |
|
"mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:lXf%e.2808$l03.584262@news20.bellglobal.com...
>All the marketing in the world would not hide a glaring problem like batteries
>packing it in
> at 3-4 years, the competition like GM and Ford would have their PR people that
> all over the media with it in a second ;~)
I doubt it, it will more likely be a wash. Since all hybrid manufacturers
will probably be using the same battery technology for the immediate future,
they will likely all be in the same boat...be that good, bad or indifferent.
Anyhow, time will tell.
Vaughn
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-09-30, 9:21 pm |
| Vaughn wrote:
> "mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:lXf%e.2808$l03.584262@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
>
>
> I doubt it, it will more likely be a wash. Since all hybrid manufacturers
> will probably be using the same battery technology for the immediate future,
> they will likely all be in the same boat...be that good, bad or indifferent.
> Anyhow, time will tell.
>
> Vaughn
>
>
>
Time has already told, the Prius has been has been available in Japan
since 1997 and the USA since 2000. Over on the Yahoo prius owners group
there are posters with over 170,000 miles on theirs. It would appear
that the technology is now "mature" and no longer in doubt.
| |
|
| >> If we used a very pessimistic estimate of a 9 year life (expiring
>
> I would say that 9 years is highly, no...wildly optimistic. My
> experience is that NIMH batteries are good for about three years, and I
> have seen little to make me expect different in the future. If we assume
> computer control that is especially gentle on the batteries and are
> willing to tolerate a reduction in efficiency and performance as the
> batteries deteriate to a fraction of their original capacity, perhaps
> that could double to 6 years; but I wouldn't want to bet on it. I think
> that Toyota will simply, quietly, absorb the warranty cost of replacing
> lots of batteries.
>
>
> IMHO, (based on my experience with thousands of NIMH packs over the
> last decade) 15 years is crazy! It will never happen.
What is your "experience" with? Laptops? portable electronics? cordless
power tools?
May I point out that in those applications the primary engineering focus is
on light weight, power, long running on a single charge, and rapid
recharging. "Long battery pack life" is just not a consideration. So for
those applications, the packs will typically go from 100% fully charged to
fully discharged, and may remain discharged for hours or days until quickly
charged to 100% full charge again. Under those conditions, a relatively
short battery pack life is to be expected. (I know, I've had some
rechargable batteries fail)
A hybrid battery pack is a much larger and more expensive item than a
laptop battery, so, for reliability, Toyota designed the Prius battery
management system to carefully monitor the battery state-of-charge, rarely
allowing the charge to go over 80%, and never allowing the charge to go
under 40%. It monitors temperature and charge/discharge rate and voltage,
and takes steps to protect the battery. That contributes to long battery
life, but you _never_ see that kind of battery managment in a laptop.
> The above said, I don't expect hybrid auto battery packs to cost
> thousands once a secondary market develops to bypass the OEM. For
> example; a NIMH battery pack that once cost me $140 when it was only
> available from the OEM, is now available to me from multiple sources for
> under $40.00. From what I understand, there is no ground-breaking
> technology in those Toyota battery packs, they are just a bunch of NIMH
> "D" cells.
You're 2 generations behind. The first Prius model, introduced in 1997 and
sold only in Japan, had a battery pack made of hundreds of D cell NiMH
batteries, but the 2001 - 2003 models had an improved prismatic NiMH
battery made by Panasonic that stored more power, weighed less, and had
better thermal management. The 2004 model upped the performance even more
and used a more powerful battery.
>
> I agree: Certainly it will never happen as long as we keep electing
> oil men to high office. ;-)
Are you sure he was elected?
I get the impression that his cronies have been rigging the votes for him.
<g>
CM
| |
|
| >> According to most stats the average american dives 8,000-12,000 miles a
>
> Perhaps Toyota has pulled some type of a technological rabbit out of
> their hat, but in my experience (which is extensive) NIMH batteries are
> good for about three years.
Toyota developed a very good battery management system - no rabbit hats
involved.
Unless your experience is with hybrid car NiMH batteries (which I doubt),
your experience is irrelevant - laptops and cordless power tools have no
special battery managment and are not designed to maximize battery pack
lifespan. Instead, they are designed to get as much energy and/or power as
possible out of the batteries, which shortens their lifespan.
CM
| |
| Derek Broughton 2005-10-01, 1:21 pm |
| CM wrote:
>
> Toyota developed a very good battery management system - no rabbit hats
> involved.
>
> Unless your experience is with hybrid car NiMH batteries (which I doubt),
> your experience is irrelevant - laptops and cordless power tools have no
> special battery managment
Laptops _do_ have special battery management (though to my knowledge all the
current batteries are Li-ion not NiMH). It's built into the battery pack.
However, it only prevents overcharge, not full depletion.
--
derek
| |
| Bob Adkins 2005-10-01, 2:21 pm |
| On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 23:23:17 GMT, "CM" <cm@cm.not.really> wrote:
>You're 2 generations behind. The first Prius model, introduced in 1997 and
>sold only in Japan, had a battery pack made of hundreds of D cell NiMH
>batteries, but the 2001 - 2003 models had an improved prismatic NiMH
>battery made by Panasonic that stored more power, weighed less, and had
>better thermal management. The 2004 model upped the performance even more
>and used a more powerful battery.
Here's more what I was thinking:
http://www.powerstream.com/Ni-Prism.htm
and
http://www.powerstream.com/LLL.htm
The specific power in the big Li cells is impressive!
--
Bob
| |
| Nick Hull 2005-10-01, 5:21 pm |
| In article
<I%d%e.344880$5N3.221964@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Vaughn Simon" <vaughnsimonHATESSPAM@att.net> wrote:
> "Tony Wesley" <tonywesley@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1128081811.504357.294210@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> At last, someone who knows how to post a reference. Thanks!
>
> Please note that the reference was written over 15 months ago, and the
> situation may have changed. That paragraph also seems to be the source for
> the claim that the battery will last the life of the vehicle; something I
> seriously doubt. It also mentions that battery costs are still dropping and
> should not be a major issue in the future; this matches my observations and
> expectations.
>
> Vaughn
>
> Quote Follows from 6/29/2004 news release:
> "The Prius battery (and the battery-power management system) has been
> designed to maximize battery life. In part this is done by keeping the
> battery at an optimum charge level - never fully draining it and never fully
> recharging it. As a result, the Prius battery leads a pretty easy life. We
> have lab data showing the equivalent of 180,000 miles with no deterioration
> and expect it to last the life of the vehicle. We also expect battery
> technology to continue to improve: the second-generation model battery is
> 15% smaller, 25% lighter, and has 35% more specific power than the first.
> This is true of price as well. Between the 2003 and 2004 models, service
> battery costs came down 36% and we expect them to continue to drop so that
> by the time replacements may be needed it won't be a much of an issue. Since
> the car went on sale in 2000, Toyota has not replaced a single battery for
> wear and tear."
Note that the Toyota release says "Additionally, the electric-only mode
would be good for less than a mile at low speed, so the practicality of
it is very limited." That implied the battery is VERY small.
--
Free men own guns, slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/
| |
| Nick Hull 2005-10-01, 5:21 pm |
| In article <N36%e.5315$oc.3210@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"CM" <cm@cm.not.really> wrote:
>
> Toyota's battery management system is designed to maximize the battery
> life, and the Toyota warranty covers the NiMH batteries for 8 years. The
> Prius has been available in the US for almost 5 years, and have been sold
> in Japan for about 8 years. In most cases, the batteries will last the life
> of the car.
>
> You will have a very very loooong wait for those batteries to go dead!
8 years is the life of the vehicle? I use a 1970 pickup and a 93
Saturn; I used to use a 66 Chrysler, which worked great until my
teenager wrapped it around a tree. I would really hate to have to buy
another car every 8 years!
--
Free men own guns, slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/
| |
| Solar Flare 2005-10-01, 7:21 pm |
| Read again. 8 year life of the vehicle was not said or implied. It is not a
Ford or a GM
"Nick Hull" <nhull@access4less.net> wrote in message
news:nhull-F06D84.16085501102005@news1.east.earthlink.net...
In article <N36%e.5315$oc.3210@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
"CM" <cm@cm.not.really> wrote:
>
> Toyota's battery management system is designed to maximize the battery
> life, and the Toyota warranty covers the NiMH batteries for 8 years. The
> Prius has been available in the US for almost 5 years, and have been sold
> in Japan for about 8 years. In most cases, the batteries will last the
life
> of the car.
>
> You will have a very very loooong wait for those batteries to go dead!
8 years is the life of the vehicle? I use a 1970 pickup and a 93
Saturn; I used to use a 66 Chrysler, which worked great until my
teenager wrapped it around a tree. I would really hate to have to buy
another car every 8 years!
--
Free men own guns, slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/
| |
| Derek Broughton 2005-10-02, 11:21 am |
| mike wilcox wrote:
> Derek Broughton wrote:
>
>
> Who said the batteires only last 3-4 years? Toyota covers them for 8
> years and a Prius used as a taxi has already covered over 200,000K on
> the original set .
Which part of "if" was a problem for you? Essentially, Vaughn said he
didn't believe they could have an 8 year life span, and you said it didn't
matter since the batteries were guaranteed. I say it matters a great deal.
Which part of the following was so difficult to follow?
Or one that had 200,000k in two or three years. _If_ Toyota turns out to be
wrong, and they _don't_ get 8 years out of the batteries, it doesn't matter
if they're warrantied - the resale value will plummet.[color=darkred]
>
> Do you honestly think a Japanese company would spend hundreds of
> millions of dollars developing a technological blunder? They test
> everything to death before offering it to the public.
Actually, yes. _Every_ company spends large (to them) sums of money, at some
point, developing a "blunder". I'm not yet fully convinced this isn't one.
You can test everything to death, but you can only really test a car under
normal driving conditions in the time it takes a normal driver to drive it.
I _think_ we're about at the point where I can feel comfortable believing
they've got it right - but the fact that there was significant
reengineering of later models suggests they _didn't_ get it quite right the
first time, despite testing "everything to death".
--
derek
| |
| Solar Flare 2005-10-02, 4:21 pm |
| This is Toyota, not GM, Ford or Chrapsler
"Derek Broughton" <news@pointerstop.ca> wrote in message
news:u6p213-d68.ln1@news.pointerstop.ca...
mike wilcox wrote:
> Derek Broughton wrote:
>
>
> Who said the batteires only last 3-4 years? Toyota covers them for 8
> years and a Prius used as a taxi has already covered over 200,000K on
> the original set .
Which part of "if" was a problem for you? Essentially, Vaughn said he
didn't believe they could have an 8 year life span, and you said it didn't
matter since the batteries were guaranteed. I say it matters a great deal.
Which part of the following was so difficult to follow?
Or one that had 200,000k in two or three years. _If_ Toyota turns out to be
wrong, and they _don't_ get 8 years out of the batteries, it doesn't matter
if they're warrantied - the resale value will plummet.[color=darkred]
>
> Do you honestly think a Japanese company would spend hundreds of
> millions of dollars developing a technological blunder? They test
> everything to death before offering it to the public.
Actually, yes. _Every_ company spends large (to them) sums of money, at some
point, developing a "blunder". I'm not yet fully convinced this isn't one.
You can test everything to death, but you can only really test a car under
normal driving conditions in the time it takes a normal driver to drive it.
I _think_ we're about at the point where I can feel comfortable believing
they've got it right - but the fact that there was significant
reengineering of later models suggests they _didn't_ get it quite right the
first time, despite testing "everything to death".
--
derek
| |
| Arnold Walker 2005-10-02, 5:21 pm |
|
"Derek Broughton" <news@pointerstop.ca> wrote in message
news:ljo213-b58.ln1@news.pointerstop.ca...
> CM wrote:
>
a[color=darkred]
of[color=darkred]
doubt),[color=darkred]
>
> Laptops _do_ have special battery management (though to my knowledge all
the
> current batteries are Li-ion not NiMH). It's built into the battery pack.
> However, it only prevents overcharge, not full depletion.
> --
> derek
>
Toyota may not have to worry about the battery warranty....
Stop and think here ....gas generator running fulll throttle.
What is the service life of a gasoline generator engine running the hours
that this Toyota would clock,in8yrs or even 3yrs.
Is there ever a time time that full trottle lengths the service life of a
gasoline engine?
In short,we may be talking a throw away car.
Better profits for Toyota........
----== Posted via droptable.com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.droptable.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
| |
| Arnold Walker 2005-10-02, 5:21 pm |
|
"Solar Flare" <sflare@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:m9adnfIq6N7Lsd3enZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@golden.net...
> This is Toyota, not GM, Ford or Chrapsler
>
> "Derek Broughton" <news@pointerstop.ca> wrote in message
> news:u6p213-d68.ln1@news.pointerstop.ca...
> mike wilcox wrote:
>
>
> Which part of "if" was a problem for you? Essentially, Vaughn said he
> didn't believe they could have an 8 year life span, and you said it didn't
> matter since the batteries were guaranteed. I say it matters a great
deal.
> Which part of the following was so difficult to follow?
>
miles[color=darkred]
>
> Or one that had 200,000k in two or three years. _If_ Toyota turns out to
be
> wrong, and they _don't_ get 8 years out of the batteries, it doesn't
matter
> if they're warrantied - the resale value will plummet.
>
> Actually, yes. _Every_ company spends large (to them) sums of money, at
some
> point, developing a "blunder". I'm not yet fully convinced this isn't
one.
> You can test everything to death, but you can only really test a car under
> normal driving conditions in the time it takes a normal driver to drive
it.
> I _think_ we're about at the point where I can feel comfortable believing
> they've got it right - but the fact that there was significant
> reengineering of later models suggests they _didn't_ get it quite right
the
> first time, despite testing "everything to death".
> --
> derek
>
>
>
www.caranddriver.com
----== Posted via droptable.com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.droptable.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-10-02, 10:21 pm |
| Solar Flare wrote:
> This is Toyota, not GM, Ford or Chrapsler
>
> "Derek Broughton" <news@pointerstop.ca> wrote in message
> news:u6p213-d68.ln1@news.pointerstop.ca...
> mike wilcox wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Which part of "if" was a problem for you? Essentially, Vaughn said he
> didn't believe they could have an 8 year life span, and you said it didn't
> matter since the batteries were guaranteed. I say it matters a great deal.
> Which part of the following was so difficult to follow?
Because the "if" part is bullshit, no point in continuing the discussion
of "if" when "if" is totally inaccurate.
>
>
>
>
> Or one that had 200,000k in two or three years. _If_ Toyota turns out to be
> wrong, and they _don't_ get 8 years out of the batteries, it doesn't matter
> if they're warrantied - the resale value will plummet.
>
>
>
> Actually, yes. _Every_ company spends large (to them) sums of money, at some
> point, developing a "blunder". I'm not yet fully convinced this isn't one.
> You can test everything to death, but you can only really test a car under
> normal driving conditions in the time it takes a normal driver to drive it.
> I _think_ we're about at the point where I can feel comfortable believing
> they've got it right - but the fact that there was significant
> reengineering of later models suggests they _didn't_ get it quite right the
> first time, despite testing "everything to death".
Testing for wear and tear, metal fatigue etc.. dates back before World
War Two and is highly acurrate in testing new technolodgies. The concept
is very simple, you build a product, run it far in excess to what would
be average conditions and make the necessary modifications before you
offer it fo sale to the public. What Toyota has done with newer models
is simply improve an already reliable product, a natural progression
Japanese companies are famous for. The fact that the Prius has already
been in production since the late 1990's without any major problems all
over the news seems to have escaped you.
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-10-02, 11:21 pm |
| Arnold Walker wrote:
> "Derek Broughton" <news@pointerstop.ca> wrote in message
> news:ljo213-b58.ln1@news.pointerstop.ca...
>
>
> a
>
>
> of
>
>
> doubt),
>
>
> the
>
>
> Toyota may not have to worry about the battery warranty....
> Stop and think here ....gas generator running fulll throttle.
> What is the service life of a gasoline generator engine running the hours
> that this Toyota would clock,in8yrs or even 3yrs.
> Is there ever a time time that full trottle lengths the service life of a
> gasoline engine?
> In short,we may be talking a throw away car.
> Better profits for Toyota........
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via droptable.com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
> http://www.droptable.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
What's with you guys? it sounds like you all work for one of the big
three auto makers and are full of sour grapes ;~) How you can compare
a auto engine running at a 1/4 throttle most of the time to a gas
generator running full throttle? Seeing how the Prius has been sold here
since 2000, if your theory was correct we would have already heard
reports of thousands of Prius's blowing motors all over CNN and Fox news.
| |
| Vaughn 2005-10-02, 11:21 pm |
|
"Arnold Walker" <arnoldwalker@consolidated.net> wrote in message
news:1128282288_39443@spool6-east.superfeed.net...
> Stop and think here ....gas generator running fulll throttle.
> What is the service life of a gasoline generator engine running the hours
> that this Toyota would clock,in8yrs or even 3yrs.
> Is there ever a time time that full trottle lengths the service life of a
> gasoline engine?
Go to the nearest general aviation airport and look at all the little
airplanes. Check out their average age and then consider that they normally
cruise at 80% throttle, while a car normally cruises at what? 20% throttle? The
Cessnas I fly are typically a quarter century old. Their engines are ancient
technology, yet are typically rated for 2000 hours between major overhauls, and
often exceed that.
I still don't believe the hype about the Prius battery lifetime, but I
think we would know by now if they had troublesome engines.
Vaughn
| |
| Chris Hill 2005-10-03, 11:21 am |
| On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 14:42:11 -0500, "Arnold Walker"
<arnoldwalker@consolidated.net> wrote:
>Toyota may not have to worry about the battery warranty....
>Stop and think here ....gas generator running fulll throttle.
>What is the service life of a gasoline generator engine running the hours
>that this Toyota would clock,in8yrs or even 3yrs.
>Is there ever a time time that full trottle lengths the service life of a
>gasoline engine?
The Toyota Prius engine rarely runs at full throttle, they have found
ways to get a lot of torque at very low throttle, in fact it isn't an
Auto cycle engine at all. Information is available, try a search
engine.
| |
| Arnold Walker 2005-10-03, 11:21 pm |
|
"Chris Hill" <hillco@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:hvc2k19i30ms7cqanca7m42m6bpo417fdm@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 14:42:11 -0500, "Arnold Walker"
> <arnoldwalker@consolidated.net> wrote:
>
> The Toyota Prius engine rarely runs at full throttle, they have found
> ways to get a lot of torque at very low throttle, in fact it isn't an
> Auto cycle engine at all. Information is available, try a search
> engine.
Shouldn't be a gas engine either.......not many generator engines are gas
anymore.
Because of fuel economy and emission problems.
Gas is at its last knot on emissions.
But Toyota is living proof, obsolete technology does in fact sell over good
designs and new ideas.
And frankly almost everything about the car was patented decades ago.
A better inventment would in fact be a diesel car.
"Greens " got to have a scam instead of ideas ,so what the heck.
----== Posted via droptable.com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.droptable.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
| |
| Vaughn 2005-10-04, 7:21 am |
|
"Arnold Walker" <arnoldwalker@consolidated.net> wrote in message
news:1128391113_41463@spool6-east.superfeed.net...
> Shouldn't be a gas engine either.......not many generator engines are gas
> anymore.
Where I live, they sell emergency generators not only in Home Depot, but
also in the warehouse stores, appliance stores, and even supermarkets!
Thousands of generators must have been purchased in my county in the last year
or two, and I haven't seen one diesel. Not that I wouldn't like to have one...
Vaughn
| |
| Nick Hull 2005-10-04, 9:21 am |
| In article
<sp8%e.343284$5N3.127272@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Vaughn" <vaughnsimonHATESSPAM@att.fake.net> wrote:
> Perhaps Toyota has pulled some type of a technological rabbit out of
> their
> hat, but in my experience (which is extensive) NIMH batteries are good for
> about
> three years.
I think Toyota pulled a LEGAL rabbit out of their hat. Consider that
the battery itself is only good for less than a mile, at low speed.
Very little energy can be recycled into the battery, and I wonder if the
driver would even notice a dead battery other than hard starting. Does
the 'hybrid' battery start the engine too?
What 'hybrid' has done is given them legal status in California and
maybe elsewhere, and an advertising boost. Has anyone disconnected the
battery and checked mileage without the battery?
--
Free men own guns, slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/
| |
| Chris Hill 2005-10-04, 10:21 am |
| On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 11:51:39 GMT, Nick Hull <nhull@access4less.net>
wrote:
>In article
><sp8%e.343284$5N3.127272@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> "Vaughn" <vaughnsimonHATESSPAM@att.fake.net> wrote:
>
>
>I think Toyota pulled a LEGAL rabbit out of their hat. Consider that
>the battery itself is only good for less than a mile, at low speed.
>Very little energy can be recycled into the battery, and I wonder if the
>driver would even notice a dead battery other than hard starting. Does
>the 'hybrid' battery start the engine too?
Yep. It gets very low emissions ratings for several reasons including
the engine technology which is a good bit different than what we're
used to, along with dual cat converters.
>
| |
| Chris Hill 2005-10-04, 10:21 am |
| On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 20:55:55 -0500, "Arnold Walker"
<arnoldwalker@consolidated.net> wrote:
>
>"Chris Hill" <hillco@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:hvc2k19i30ms7cqanca7m42m6bpo417fdm@4ax.com...
>Shouldn't be a gas engine either.......not many generator engines are gas
>anymore.
>Because of fuel economy and emission problems.
Hmmm, don't know where you live, but here gas engines have far fewer
emission problems than diesels, and you'd have to go to buy a
generator from a specialty store to get anything but a gas one.
I just love people who bad-mouth things they don't understand.
| |
| Ed Earl Ross 2005-10-04, 12:21 pm |
| Nick Hull wrote:
> In article
> <sp8%e.343284$5N3.127272@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> "Vaughn" <vaughnsimonHATESSPAM@att.fake.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> I think Toyota pulled a LEGAL rabbit out of their hat. Consider that
> the battery itself is only good for less than a mile, at low speed.
> Very little energy can be recycled into the battery, and I wonder if the
> driver would even notice a dead battery other than hard starting. Does
> the 'hybrid' battery start the engine too?
>
> What 'hybrid' has done is given them legal status in California and
> maybe elsewhere, and an advertising boost. Has anyone disconnected the
> battery and checked mileage without the battery?
My Prius owner's manual says the engine will not run if the battery
is not OK.
Whether hybrid trans-axles become standard depends on customer
acceptance, which is driven mostly by cost, style and reliability.
Moreover, Toyota says their hybrid cars can be produced at a
competitive cost--whatever that means.
IMO they Toyota Prius gives a superior ride, compared to a
mechanical automatic transmission. That the hybrid drive train
improves mileage is also good. Even if Toyota's claim that the
hybrid battery will last 150,000 miles is optimistic, I am
confident better batteries will be developed in the future--maybe
ones good enough to make EVs practical.
--
Humbly--Ed
"If the man doesn't believe as we do,
we say he is a crank, and that settles it.
I mean, it does nowadays, because now we
can't burn him." (Mark Twain)
| |
| Nick Hull 2005-10-06, 12:21 am |
| In article <%aT_e.2994$dl2.13@fe08.lga>,
Steve Spence <sspence@green-trust.org> wrote:
> Anthony Matonak wrote:
>
> I like the old diesels. No computers, no electronics, everything was
> mechanical. The only electrics needed was the starter.
The old Deere tractors didn't even have a starter, you spun the flywheel
to start.
--
Free men own guns, slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/
| |
| George Mills 2005-10-06, 11:21 am |
| Yes, a clean burning Diesel, like a Common Rail technology with or without
turbo, with particulate filter running on sulphur-free fuel, like the new
European standard vehicles. Okay, and then make it a Diesel-electric hybrid.
Not necessarily the absolutely perfect short-distance in-city commuter car,
but the better long-distance runner. Bugs me that Toyota has wonderful
Diesels that meet 2006 standards and won't bring them to North America, just
because Americans won't buy economy vehicles, whereas Canadians would buy
them in a heartbeat (and everything is dictated in the NA market by the US)
Jim Bartley on PEI *just opinion*
"Arnold Walker" <arnoldwalker@consolidated.net> wrote in message
news:1128391113_41463@spool6-east.superfeed.net...
>
> "Chris Hill" <hillco@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:hvc2k19i30ms7cqanca7m42m6bpo417fdm@4ax.com...
snips
[color=darkred]
> Shouldn't be a gas engine either.......not many generator engines are gas
> anymore.
> Because of fuel economy and emission problems.
> Gas is at its last knot on emissions.
> But Toyota is living proof, obsolete technology does in fact sell over
good
> designs and new ideas.
> And frankly almost everything about the car was patented decades ago.
> A better inventment would in fact be a diesel car.
> "Greens " got to have a scam instead of ideas ,so what the heck.
| |
|
|
> I think Toyota pulled a LEGAL rabbit out of their hat. Consider that
> the battery itself is only good for less than a mile, at low speed.
That is why the gas engine kicks in whenever it is needed.
It is a _Hybrid_ and does not rely solely on the battery.
They could have used a larger battery, but that would have added cost and
weight for little added benefit.
> Very little energy can be recycled into the battery, and I wonder if the
> driver would even notice a dead battery other than hard starting. Does
> the 'hybrid' battery start the engine too?
Yes. Instead of a dinky little 12 volt half horse starter motor found on
non-hybrids, the Toyota and Ford hybrids use a high voltage high torque 40
hp motor/generator - it has no trouble starting the engine when needed.
> What 'hybrid' has done is given them legal status in California and
> maybe elsewhere, and an advertising boost.
Yes, having a very clean AT-PZEV rating, outstanding milage, good
performace, smooth operation and reliability does make for a great
"advertising boost". Other car companies are stuck with using "looks macho"
or snob appeal for their ads.
> Has anyone disconnected the
> battery and checked mileage without the battery?
Well, lets see how well your car runs without a battery!
Unless it was really really old it couldn't be started, even by pushing.
No car will run with an essential component removed, and the batteries are
essential to the Prius.
CM
| |
| zenboom 2005-10-07, 11:21 am |
|
"Arnold Walker" <arnoldwalker@consolidated.net> wrote in message
news:1128391113_41463@spool6-east.superfeed.net...
>
> "Chris Hill" <hillco@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:hvc2k19i30ms7cqanca7m42m6bpo417fdm@4ax.com...
hours[color=darkred]
a[color=darkred]
> Shouldn't be a gas engine either.......not many generator engines are gas
> anymore.
> Because of fuel economy and emission problems.
> Gas is at its last knot on emissions.
> But Toyota is living proof, obsolete technology does in fact sell over
good
> designs and new ideas.
> And frankly almost everything about the car was patented decades ago.
> A better inventment would in fact be a diesel car.
> "Greens " got to have a scam instead of ideas ,so what the heck.
I've just checked the various company milage figures published here, and the
Prius rating given is approx the same as current small-sized turbo diesel
cars.
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-10-07, 1:21 pm |
| zenboom wrote:
> "Arnold Walker" <arnoldwalker@consolidated.net> wrote in message
> news:1128391113_41463@spool6-east.superfeed.net...
>
>
> hours
>
>
> a
>
>
> good
>
>
>
> I've just checked the various company milage figures published here, and the
> Prius rating given is approx the same as current small-sized turbo diesel
> cars.
>
>
Not for either city or highway driving**, the Prius rates 60 mpg city/
51 hiway. The Volkswagen TDI Golf, TDI Jetta, TDI New Beetle and TDI
Passat all rate at about 39mpg City/46 hiway ( manual tranny)
I don't know about you, but a 21 mpg difference city and 5 mpg highway
is not "approx the same"
** For cars available in North America, there are far more options in
Europe.
| |
|
|
| Roberto Waltman 2005-10-07, 3:21 pm |
| <anthonym40@nothing.like.comcast.net> wrote:
>I believe almost every new car sold today has a computer and
>if those computers go out, the car is inoperable. I would
>suspect that even a diesel engine on a passenger car would
>have some kind of computer these days.
"A" computer? What about a dozen or more?
This was posted some time ago in alt.folklore.computers regarding
push-starting a modern car, (not an hybrid,) with a dead battery:
>... push-starting (use another car w/o jumper cables, or
>Last I tried that was on my '90 Voyager. I just about ruptured a duck
>before I figured out that no amount of my pushing was going to get the
>fuel injectors injecting and computers computing.
Roberto Waltman
[ Please reply to the group, ]
[ return address is invalid. ]
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-10-07, 3:21 pm |
| Steve Spence wrote:
> mike wilcox wrote:
>
>
>
> See http://www.green-trust.org/2005/10/...-you-money.html
>
What most of these articles fail to address is the diffence in city
mileage. If you are an urban driver, or spend a great deal of time in
low speed bumper to bumper gridlock, a 21 mpg saving over the next best
conventional diesil car and 40mpg saving over average ICE engined cars
is huge. In my own case nearly all of my driving is urban, gas here
Ontario, Canada today costs $4.76 a gallon and our daily commute is 20
miles. A car getting 20 mpg/city would cost me $4.76 per day, the Prius
@60mpg/city would cost me $1.58, a saving of $3.18 per day or $1,160.70
per year. Even though my yearly mileage is below average at about 7500
miles the savings are substantial.
| |
| Derek Broughton 2005-10-07, 4:21 pm |
| Steve Spence wrote:
> mike wilcox wrote:
>
>
> See http://www.green-trust.org/2005/10/...-you-money.html
>
Sure, and that advises you to do such things as "change the way you drive."
If we could all change the way we drive, we wouldn't _need_ hybrids.
Secondly, the financial calculations are based on 15,000 miles, annually.
That's probably an accurate _average_ yearly figure, but it just means you
probably have no need to consider a hybrid if you're an average driver.
otoh, it clearly doesn't pay to buy a Honda hybrid under any conditions.
otth, they already agreed that the Prius might work out cheaper than a Camry
- let's look at the numbers comparing it to a Corolla. If you do all your
driving in the city, the Prius gets _double_ the mileage (according to
Edmunds.com - I'm not sure if they're quoting the EPA numbers or their test
figures). With a price difference of $3,500 over a fully loaded Corolla,
at $3/gallon, you'd need to drive 35,000 total city miles to break even
(assuming same maintenance costs - debatable - and no rebates). You'd need
to do a bit better than twice that on the highway. I've done that in the
last 18 months, and I don't think I drive a huge amount, though clearly
above average. Even over a base-price Corolla, the payback is only twice
as long - still within the typical length of ownership of a new car.
I'm still not really sure I trust the Prius and it's new technology, but I
haven't found anything to convince me it's a bad choice yet :-)
--
derek
| |
| Derek Broughton 2005-10-07, 4:21 pm |
| Roberto Waltman wrote:
[color=darkred]
> <anthonym40@nothing.like.comcast.net> wrote:
>
> "A" computer? What about a dozen or more?
> This was posted some time ago in alt.folklore.computers regarding
> push-starting a modern car, (not an hybrid,) with a dead battery:
>
Well, I roll-started a '99 Hyundai Excel a couple of times, but there's also
a difference between a "dead" battery (one without sufficient amps to crank
the starter) and a non-existent one (either absolutely dead flat or
removed).
--
derek
| |
| Vaughn Simon 2005-10-07, 5:21 pm |
|
"mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:%Qy1f.8727$2F2.1086518@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Steve Spence wrote:
> What most of these articles fail to address is the diffence in city
> mileage. If you are an urban driver, or spend a great deal of time in low
> speed bumper to bumper gridlock, a 21 mpg saving over the next best
> conventional diesil car and 40mpg saving over average ICE engined cars is
> huge. In my own case nearly all of my driving is urban, gas here Ontario,
> Canada today costs $4.76 a gallon and our daily commute is 20 miles. A car
> getting 20 mpg/city would cost me $4.76 per day, the Prius
> @60mpg/city would cost me $1.58, a saving of $3.18 per day or $1,160.70
> per year. Even though my yearly mileage is below average at about 7500
> miles the savings are substantial.
In the real world, most people will tell you not to expect 60 mpg. See
the recent issue of Consumer reports. EPA mileage is a useable way of
comparing different vehicles to one another, but not necessarily a realistic
prediction of actual gas mileage of a given vehicle with a real driver under
real conditions.
Vaughn
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-10-07, 8:21 pm |
| Vaughn Simon wrote:
> "mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:%Qy1f.8727$2F2.1086518@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
>
>
> In the real world, most people will tell you not to expect 60 mpg. See
> the recent issue of Consumer reports. EPA mileage is a useable way of
> comparing different vehicles to one another, but not necessarily a realistic
> prediction of actual gas mileage of a given vehicle with a real driver under
> real conditions.
>
> Vaughn
>
>
In that case the deal is the same,the numbers have changed, but the
ratio remains the same. Say if the EPA rates are off by 10%, one car at
30 mpg city now gets 27 mpg and the other 54. That's still a 50% saving,
double the mileage is double the mileage.
| |
| Vaughn 2005-10-07, 10:21 pm |
|
"mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:ljD1f.6181$R4.623009@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Vaughn Simon wrote:
>
>
> In that case the deal is the same,the numbers have changed, but the ratio
> remains the same. Say if the EPA rates are off by 10%, one car at 30 mpg city
> now gets 27 mpg and the other 54. That's still a 50% saving, double the
> mileage is double the mileage.
Exactly true. However...in the example above, 20 MPG sounded like it could
be a "real world" figure while the 60 MPG is an EPA figure. We agree that there
is some validity to comparing EPA to EPA, and it is certainly OK to compare
"real world" to "real world" but one should not fall in the trap of comparing a
"real world" mileage to an EPA mileage.
| |
| mike wilcox 2005-10-07, 10:21 pm |
| Vaughn wrote:
> "mike wilcox" <appraisers@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:ljD1f.6181$R4.623009@news20.bellglobal.com...
>
>
>
> Exactly true. However...in the example above, 20 MPG sounded like it could
> be a "real world" figure while the 60 MPG is an EPA figure. We agree that there
> is some validity to comparing EPA to EPA, and it is certainly OK to compare
> "real world" to "real world" but one should not fall in the trap of comparing a
> "real world" mileage to an EPA mileage.
>
>
As the EPA states " Your vehicle's fuel economy will almost certainly
vary from EPA's fuel economy rating" but not to the extent you list @
20 mpg vs 60 mpg. The point of using the EPA is that every car is tested
exactly the same way that gives us a benchmark of what each vehicle is
capable of. In the case of my own vehicle I can exceed its EPA rating
if I make a game out of it and use all the usual methods and in regular
driving get 36mpg out of its 40mpg highway rating. So I could say in my
case this car's regular rating is only 10% off of the EPA's. In the case
of the Prius the 10% rule also seems to hold up, in fact average Prius
users have rated the 2005 Prius @ 48.4 combined vs the EPA's 55 mpg
combined.
| |
| vaughnsimon@att.net 2005-10-07, 11:21 pm |
| mike wilcox wrote:
> As the EPA states " Your vehicle's fuel economy will almost certainly
> vary from EPA's fuel economy rating" but not to the extent you list @
> 20 mpg vs 60 mpg.
(This is my third and last try) You missed my point. I was
referring to Steve's example which was 20 mpg vs 60 mpg and simply
pointing out that one should be sure to compare "EPA to EPA" or "real
world to real world" but never "real world to EPA".
Someone who dumps their 20 mph vehicle for a new high-mpg vehicle
while expecting to actually get the sticker mpg is likely in for a
nasty surprise. You will probably get significantly better mpg than
your old gas hog, but not as high as the EPA sticker seems to promise.
(This is not to say that economical cars are a bad thing, I drive a
Civic myself and laugh at the SUV owners crying at the gas pumps.)
Vaughn
| |
| Steve Spence 2005-10-08, 12:21 am |
| vaughnsimon@att.net wrote:
> mike wilcox wrote:
>
>
>
> (This is my third and last try) You missed my point. I was
> referring to Steve's example which was 20 mpg vs 60 mpg and simply
> pointing out that one should be sure to compare "EPA to EPA" or "real
> world to real world" but never "real world to EPA".
>
> Someone who dumps their 20 mph vehicle for a new high-mpg vehicle
> while expecting to actually get the sticker mpg is likely in for a
> nasty surprise. You will probably get significantly better mpg than
> your old gas hog, but not as high as the EPA sticker seems to promise.
> (This is not to say that economical cars are a bad thing, I drive a
> Civic myself and laugh at the SUV owners crying at the gas pumps.)
>
> Vaughn
>
I don't recall making any 20 mpg vs. 60 mpg comparison.
--
Steve Spence
Dir., Green Trust, http://www.green-trust.org
Contributing Editor, http://www.off-grid.net
http://www.rebelwolf.com/essn.html
| | |