Much has been written about the Insight, Honda’s new low-priced hybrid. We’ve been told how much carbon dioxide it produces, how its dashboard encourages frugal driving by glowing green when you’re easy on the throttle and how it is the dawn of all things. The beginning of days.So far, though, you have not been told what it’s like as a car; as a tool for moving you, your friends and your things from place to place.
So here goes. It’s terrible. Biblically terrible. Possibly the worst new car money can buy. It’s the first car I’ve ever considered crashing into a tree, on purpose, so I didn’t have to drive it any more.
The biggest problem, and it’s taken me a while to work this out, because all the other problems are so vast and so cancerous, is the gearbox. For reasons known only to itself, Honda has fitted the Insight with something called constantly variable transmission (CVT).
It doesn’t work. Put your foot down in a normal car and the revs climb in tandem with the speed. In a CVT car, the revs spool up quickly and then the speed rises to match them. It feels like the clutch is slipping. It feels horrid.
And the sound is worse. The Honda’s petrol engine is a much-shaved, built-for-economy, low-friction 1.3 that, at full chat, makes a noise worse than someone else’s crying baby on an airliner. It’s worse than the sound of your parachute failing to open. Really, to get an idea of how awful it is, you’d have to sit a dog on a ham slicer.
So you’re sitting there with the engine screaming its head off, and your ears bleeding, and you’re doing only 23mph because that’s about the top speed, and you’re thinking things can’t get any worse, and then they do because you run over a small piece of grit.
Because the Honda has two motors, one that runs on petrol and one that runs on batteries, it is more expensive to make than a car that has one. But since the whole point of this car is that it could be sold for less than Toyota’s Smugmobile, the engineers have plainly peeled the suspension components to the bone. The result is a ride that beggars belief.
There’s more. Normally, Hondas feel as though they have been screwed together by eye surgeons. This one, however, feels as if it’s been made from steel so thin, you could read through it. And the seats, finished in pleblon, are designed specifically, it seems, to ruin your skeleton. This is hairy-shirted eco-ism at its very worst.
Please click to read the rest of the article at the Times Online
Don’t get me wrong, I like new technology, and improved fuel economy too, but I just had to show this auto review excerpt from the Sunday Times because, well, it’s just so darn funny.
I am securely surrounded by two tons of steel and comfortably ensconced on a leather seat in a 23-year-old Mercedes diesel. I get 36 mpg Imperial (30 mpg U.S.) on the highway. My ‘carbon footprint’, apart from being a ‘so what’, is low because all the CO2 used to build my car has now been absorbed by the forest. Besides, when I am done with it, it can be recycled since it isn’t full of plastic. Not to mention that it cost me (used) half the price of a new Smart “car” and it will almost certainly last longer, even giving the Smart a 17-year head start! No hybrids for this chap.
I gave the Toyota Prius serious consideration when I was looking for a new car a few years ago. After doing some fuel consumption calculations, I came to the conclusion that it didn’t make economical sense given my annual mileage.
I’ll give hybrids another look the next time I am looking for a new car but, like before, the economics have to make sense.
Was going to say I haven’t laughed so hard since I fell in a pit of snakes, but Smokey has given Mr. Clarkson a run for his money.
Those observing that the more CO2 a car produces the more plant life is fertilized – are heretics of such magnitude as to be candidates for a slicer sit down themselves. But in serial hybrids (Chevy Volt) where the ICE only kicks in to re-up the battery – a display with competing green vines might be interesting: one vine for “EV Mode,” another for “CO2 Fertility Mode.” Or should it be “Alarmist vs. Skeptic” modes?
Try putting 3 car seats in the back for 3 kids under 5 and then load all your stuff for a week visit at Grandma’s house. Over the river and through the woods? Not possible!
dhogaza (16:19:42) :
“Remember though that in terms of CO2 output burning a gallon of diesel emits about 20% more than burning a gallon of gasoline, due to the higher density of hydrocarbons in diesel.”
Excellent then we should all convert to diesel powers cars to do our bit helping plants to grow better in our cooling climate. 🙂
Jeez: Sorry
Ed Berry……….
When Will El-Viejo go back to Hell???
Honda (Atmospheric) Insights 1.3
I have a 2000 VW TDI Jetta and it’s well over 35mpg… and the new 2009 is well over 50mpg (combined city and highway) and can get as high as 58mpg on the highway, all while meeting the California’s Tier II, Bin 5 emission control standards… WOW!
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/automotive_news/4235586.html
My BMW 320d gets better economy, better acceleration, and looks and feels better than a Prious or any of it’s imitators.
I bought one of the first Honda Civic hybrids. I have driven it 170,000 miles in a little less than 7 years. I drive it like an old lady and average about 50mpg, except when I drive fast, then it isn’t using the hybrid feature and it doesn’t do that well.
The CVT is great, although I should have waited to get the manual. Like all automatics, it needed a $300 service at about 150,000 miles, but no replacement. Best feature is it turning engine off at stoplights. And the regenerative braking saved my having to touch the brakes until 155,000 miles. And it doesn’t look like it’s trying too hard like the Prius. No leaves on the dashboard, just some trip meters with fuel economy.
For anyone who cares, although I thoroughly enjoyed the review of the Insight, there are not two motors, just an electric motor on the same crankshaft as the gasoline motor. And there is no distinct noise from the electric motor or power control unit. The only time you would notice a different noise from a gas only Civic engine would be when you run out of fuel and can hear the high speed wind and bearing noise without the combustion noise.
The State Motor Pool of Oregon has had 1st and 2nd generations long enough to do some cost comparisons with comparable standard 4-door compact sedans over 100,000 miles of operation.
They’ve found they’ve been saving considerable money with the Prius, even factoring in the higher initial cost of purchase. One reason was lower maintenance.
I guess you’re right though – saving money would make most people feel good. Don’t knock it until you try it!
Personally I’m driving an 1990 acura integra with 235,000 miles on it. When I replace it, hopefully there will be a much wider range of high mileage options available for me to purchase.
Someone mentioned Toyota and Honda having a head start….does not matter, US Government Motors is going to get $65bl more taxpayer money to build it’s fleet. I’ll never buy a GM or Chrysler from the Government, I’ll walk first.
bill-tb says:
It is true that the original way that the EPA was computing mileage tended to overestimate the mileage obtained in the real world for a lot of cars, with hybrids being overestimated somewhat more than average. However, the new EPA estimates that are supposed to be more representative of real world conditions are pretty good. I think they estimate the Prius at 46 or 47 mpg overall, which is about exactly what I am getting. And, if I lived in a climate with less frigid winters than Rochester (and/or had a longer commute to work so the car had more time to warm up), I would average more than their estimate, since I consistently average above 50mpg in summer but drop down into the low 40s in winter.
Overall I think that my 2004 Prius is a great car. And, I am not the only one. Consumer Reports survey has consistently found the Prius has the highest customer satisfaction (percentage of owners who say they would buy it again) of ANY car.
EPA equivalent for this car is very good at 48 MPG combined.
However, in terms of carbon emissions, it’s more like 38 MPG combined compared to a gasoline engine, not that close to the 50 MPG combined the Prius 3 is rated at.
Looks, of course, are a matter of personal taste.
Anthony,
Did you include the replacement cost for batteries in your per mile cost?
A rather pointed and unusual restaurant review from the same paper
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/food_and_drink/eating_out/a_a_gill/article6225761.ece
Well worth reading.
And… my two cents as usual:
87 Daytona Shelby, 35+ MPG highway (yes, US gallons, yes, US miles), mid 20s in the city, unless I’m doing those 12 second quarters. Power AND economy 22 years ago.
But I suspect my Challenger R/T, when (if) I get it, will not be an economy car. I happen to like power AND security, not tin can crumple-mobiles.
My ex-girlfriend’s dad had a first gen Insight… he rolled it doing a low speed u-turn on a gravel road. Guess how likely I am to ever get in one?
dhogaza (16:19:42)
Toyota’s making money on the Prius, though I’m not sure how long it will take them to pay off the research investment.
Everything I’ve seen in the automotive and financial press says that at best Toyota made money on the Prius when demand spiked briefly last summer when gas topped $4/gal., but have lost money the rest of the time. They’ve had to cut the price on the new one to bring it closer to the Honda’s price point, so the margins will be worse.
dhogaza (17:24:20) :
The new Telsa being introduced is claimed to get about 300 miles on a charge.
The new Tesla is mostly vaporware at this point, raising the amount of capital necessary to ramp up from the mostly hand built methods of the first one to production capacity large enough to bring the new one in at a competitive price looks to be highly problematic, when Toyota is having a hard time generating profits with their much more highly developed technology.
There’s more than a few 1st gen Prius that are in the quarter million mile club, that are still running like trains, and there’s even a Gen 1 Prius taxi in Victoria B.C. that’s over 300,000 with no battery related problems. And just in case you’re interested, the record is over 400,000 miles for a Prius.
Some years ago I saw a story about one of the light bulbs from Edison’s earliest production that had been burning continuously in an old stairwell for about eighty years. A remarkable performance of technology, but I wouldn’t base my prediction of the lifespan of the bulb in my desk lamp on it. If my experience with modern technological devices that rely on sophisticated electronics and deep cycle batteries is any where close to typical, expecting bulletproof reliability from these things is like drawing four cards in a poker hand and expecting to fill a royal flush.
For perspective, unless already mentioned, the prius driving around a track at its best speed followed behind by a bmw m3 comsumed MORE gallons per mile that the M3. FACT!
Joel Shore,
You’re right about the CR rating for the Pius [Oops… the Prius]. But if I only touch the CO2 emission generator pedal on Mrs. Smokey’s 268 HP Camry, I can leave any Prius ever made way back in the dust — looking like they’re powered by hamsters in an exercise wheel.
I admire people who think they’re actually saving the planet by buying a Prius; they’re so cute. But as for me… give me power!! And the CO2 I’m donating to the atmosphere is simply another added benefit.
It’s all good!
The White House will be flying 747s over Manhattan to make sure that no one is wasting fuel.
New battery technology, might be of interest…
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/05/19/lithium_oxygen_stair_battery/
Umm, that sure sounds like two motors to me. Just a common drive train.
A friend of mine was looking at a Prius, and mentioned to me that, with leather, sunroof, etc, it was priced in the high 20’s.
I had just purchased a Hyundai Sonata 4cyl, I think (24/33) was the rating. My price: $14,975, and it has a LOT of features, tho not leather and sunroof in this model.
After she looked it over, she bought the exact same car as mine, and didn’t need leather or sunroof. Why? Because it was such a tremendous value, it is easily appreciated for what it does have. And I checked the first several tanks and averaged ~500 miles on 17 gallons (combined city/hwy) (so almost 30 mpg combined)
It’s important to note that Hyundai has come a long way. This car has 60k in just 2 years, and runs like a swiss watch. The paint is the only weakness I’m noticing. It seats 5, has adequate power (170bhp), and is more attractive and roomier than the prius. It has power windows/mirrors, air, tilt, cruise, auto. Not everything, but very nice.
Bottom line, it’s about value: The Prius (at ~50 combined) would go 100K miles on 2000 gal of fuel. My car would need 3333 gal, or 1333 more gallons of fuel for the same distance. At $4/gal, that’s $5332 more in fuel. But the Prius (they wanted) cost 12k more. Around here, the stripped model prius was ~$22,500. ($7500 more than my car) And that’s the payback at $4/gal? What is that, 150k miles to break even?
Hmmmm….Maybe I should take another look at that new mustang…. 🙂
“James (19:18:40) :
For perspective, unless already mentioned, the prius driving around a track at its best speed followed behind by a bmw m3 comsumed MORE gallons per mile that the M3. FACT!”
That was a Top Gear stunt. The cars were driven as hard as possible, the M3 won of course. All cars in the UK have their best fule rating listed at a constant 56MPH (Highway).
Peter (19:13:48),
Thanx for pointing out that really great restaurant review.
I liked it!