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.
“”” RobP (09:32:02) :
A point we have to think about is why are hybrids being developed. An interview with a VP from Ford a few years back revealed their thinking – hybrids enable them to play with electric car technology before going to full electrically-driven vehicles in the future. They are not an end in themselves and the current form – adding an electric motor and batteries to an existing car (complete with combustion engine and transmission) – is not an efficient option. “””
Well Rob, I didn’t copy past here because from here on you just trundle out the same old tired rationalizations, that the greens have been foisting off on us for years.
In the first place hdrocarbons are not destroying the planet; every living thing on this planet is made from hydrocarbons.
Hydrocarbon fuelled autos have a lot in common with chemical rockets. As a chemical rocket burns its fuel and exhausts the combustion products; it also loses mass, so the thrust just produces even greater acceleration to higher speeds for the payload. Autos too powered by hydrocarbons exhaust the combustion products harmlessly into the atmopshere, and continually lower the total mass being carried down the road.
These hybrids or your preferred all electric monstrosities end up with the same total mass when the battery goes flat; as they had when it was fully charged; so that is akin to driving around with your gas tank full all the time. It’s as inefficient as a snail which must carry its house around everywhere it goes; no wonder they don’t last very long.
We don’t have any local Hydrogen mines; so it takes scarce and expensive energy to obtain hydrogen fuel from low quality ores like water; or even lower quality ores like sea water; which is about as low as you can get on the stored chemical energy food chain.
Somebody is experimenting with a totally different carbon neutral but non hydrogen fuel source; carbon dioxide; which is readily available in our atmosphere. If you can effectively extract hydrogen from its combustion product; why not do the same thing with carbon. The process uses a Cobalt refractory ceramic; basically cobalt oxide. The ceramic is heated to about 2000 F in a vaccuum, and it decomposes giving off Oxygen which is vented to the atmosphere.
Then CO2 is introduced to the chamber, and the hot cobalt robs the CO2 of the oxygen; recreating the ceramic; and leaving a carbon residue ready for burning.
The world will be using hydrocarbons for ever more amazing products as well as automobile fuels long after electric cars have gone the way of the horse and buggy.
Gasoline (a hydocarbon mix) is still the safest high energy density energy storage medium that we have; and your granchildren’s granchildren will be using plenty of it.
I forgot to mention in my previous post.
“John Nevard (08:03:13) :
Just Want Truth… (20:21:15) :
Agreed- the (limited) popularity of the Smart is a little strange. It’s just a very small French car.”
French?
It’s German!
SMART is part of the Mercedes group, so I suppose it’s really American,
The Chrysler Crossfire has the same running gear as a Mercedes SLK.
DaveE.
DaveE says:
Abysmal in what way? As noted above, while the Prius excels more in city driving, it still is quite efficient on the highway. And, there is no problem keeping them up to speed…I think Al Gore’s son demonstrated that!
I love driving my Prius on the interstate. I just set the cruise control and relax.
“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.”
Thanks for sharing my sentiments! I feel like this with many “eco-friendly” death-traps they call cars…like that smart car. I kinda almost wanna see a Hummer run it over.
DaveE (17:01:35) :
All the LPG vehicles I’ve driven require that you have some petrol, (gasoline,) in the second tank.
Not so. The old VOLVO estate I ran on LPG used to start up fine on the stuff, never needed to switch over to petrol. Never ran out of LPG either, the UK is quite well provided with LPG stations. There is an OVL file you can download and use with a satnav unit to show where they all are.
Just a pity they doubled the price over the last 5 years.
hmmmm (11:22:45) :
As a side note they get decent low-end torque compared to other cars.
No they don’t. That’s why the revs go straight up to where peak torque is and then as Jeremy puts it, the speed ‘catches up’.
CVT transmission has come a long way since the elastic band powered DAF 33. These days CVT gearbxes use steel belts and some clever electronic tech to control to the final drive ratio.
I believe chevrolet were playing with a CVT called the transmatic a few years ago.
The problem is customer perception. As Jeremy puts it, he like revs which climb with engine speed, and a ‘direct feel’ to the transmission.
Thing is, CVT is pretty good at getting peak power onto the road. Those old DAF 33’s used to beat more powerful cars away from the lights every time.
Like California, London is also pursuing a policy of electric vehicles. But do Schwarzenegger and Boris realise that electric vehicles are more polluting than standard diesel vehicles?
Diesel vehicle
Diesel transport to pumps 98% efficient
Diesel engine in car 38% efficient
Total for diesel car 37% energy efficiency
Electric vehicle
Electrical generation at power station 45% efficient
Electrical transmission 98% efficient
Electrical storage in lithium-ion battery 85% efficient
Electric motor 90% efficient
Total for electric car 34% energy efficiency
Thus diesel cars are more efficient than electric cars.
Schwarzenegger and Boris may achieve a cleaner environment for L.A. and London, in that they can transfer all transport emissions and pollution to the regions around the power stations, but I don’t think the residents in these regions will appreciate this. And let us not pretend that the adoption of electric vehicles has anything to do with carbon emissions and saving the planet, for these electric vehicles will use MORE energy than a standard diesel.
In addition, do Schwarzenegger and Boris realise that they will have to commission a new fossil-fuelled power station to provide all this extra electrical transport energy (unless ALL the energy can be drawn at night)? And let us not kid ourselves that the new arrays of wind-turbines will assist in this, unless it is decreed that all electric vehicles are banned from driving unless the mean wind velocity is between 10 and 45 mph.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_efficiency
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_power_plant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion#cite_note-3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_motor
And let us not get misty-eyed over hydrogen cars either. The hydrogen cycle is remarkably inefficient, and the same figures for a hydrogen car become:
Hydrogen vehicle
Electrical generation at power station 45% efficient
Hydrogen generation 70% efficient
Hydrogen compression 90% efficient
Hydrogen transport 95% efficient
Fuel cell 50% efficient
Electric motor 90% efficient
Total for hydrogen car 12% energy efficiency
In other words, if you really want to stuff the environment and empty those oil wells, then drive a hydrogen powered vehicle.
.
>>I’ve owned a Toyota Camery Hybrid (4-door) for three years.
>> It seats five. I’m getting on average 35 – 37 mpg around
>>town and 32 on the hiway.
Which is exactly what I mean. I own a Citroen C5, which is a huge 5-seater saloon car, with a 2.2 litre twin-turbo diesel.
I get 40 mpg in town, and 55mpg on the motorway at 70mph. As I said before, hybrid electric vehicles are not only a waste of money, they also pollute the environment more than a good diesel.
http://www.citroen.co.uk/new-cars/citroen-c5-saloon/media-gallery/picture-gallery/exterior/
.
Having said all that, when we get a battery that will power a car for 500 miles and weigh in at 5 kg, then electric vehicles will be a good idea. However, let us not kid ourselves that this is a panacea. To power all our vehicles from electric power, will require a DOUBLING (or even TREBELING) of the number of power stations. Work it out for yourselves – transport is one of the largest sectors for energy consumption.
.
“Joel Shore (18:47:47) :
Abysmal in what way? As noted above, while the Prius excels more in city driving, it still is quite efficient on the highway. And, there is no problem keeping them up to speed…I think Al Gore’s son demonstrated that!
I love driving my Prius on the interstate. I just set the cruise control and relax.”
Abysmal in that they drive like a tank and fuel efficiency is rubbish.
I must admit, I’m comparing it with standard European family cars such as the French made Peugeot 405 1.9TD that I own, a bigger car which on a decent run consumes less fuel. Simpler to maintain too.
A Ford Mondeo Diesel is excellent on fuel and also drive better than a Prius.
In fact, I can’t think of a car I’ve driven that is worse!
DaveE
“BTW to the potential hate mail senders, I drive an electric car myself to/from work most days. It costs me about five cents a mile to operate.”
What type of car is that? Because I’m using gasoline and getting about 9 cents a mile (with gas @2.15/gal). I’d LOVE to cut costs and am quite willing to buy electric if I can do a 100 mile round trip for 5 cents a mile.
Just a couple of real-world questions:
How easily damaged are the batteries when the car is involved in an accident? I suspect that because of weight considerations, they aren’t given a lot of shielding.
How easily damaged are the batteries by extreme heat or cold conditions?
How much pollution will be caused when a battery is damaged? Aren’t they still lead-acid?
Are there battery disposal fees? If the cars are sold in large numbers, will the batteries become a disposal/landfill problem, or are they completely recyclable?
Oh my gosh, so funny!
And I’m with Kevin. At $2.15/gallon, my Scion xA is costing me less than 6 cents a mile to drive. The differential needs to go way down before I believe this is a better deal–for me or the environment.
That is the funniest thing I have read in a while. I wonder why nobody seems to care that that thing looks exactly like a Prius. What an ingenious design idea.
tallbloke,
They do get decent low end torque through the electric drive
That’s certainly one way to put it. Doing anything regarding a solar village? We have a story on that.
http://greenermilwaukee.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/solar-housing-village-in-bay-view/
Have you seen the crash test on these tuna-can cars?
http://factreal.wordpress.com/2009/05/20/quick-news-killing-our-cars/
Lol, is that a real car? Seriously? Someone named their car the “Mundano”? As in “mundane”??
Zer0th (01:41:18) :
Charles the moderator,
We had a censor moment between us about three weeks ago where I accused moderators of a lack of humour. My apologies, I was wrong. That piece about Clarkson Island was a classic and comparable to Monty Python at their best.
Thanks for fun.
jtom:
In the Prius, the batteries are located in the front area of the rear hatch, i.e., right behind the rear seats, so I think it would take a pretty severe accident (i.e., one that likely totals the car) to damage them. I haven’t heard of any issues involving this.
Well, they seem to work fine here in Rochester, NY and I don’t think people in colder places like Minnesota and Canada have reported any problems either. I am personally less familiar with extreme heat but haven’t heard of any issues from the hotter parts of the country.
The batteries are sealed nickel-metal-hydride (Ni-MH). And, although I haven’t actually ever looked at mine, I am told that they are only about the size of a telephone book. The car also has a lead acid battery but I understand it to be smaller than the ones found in most cars since it is only used to run auxillary stuff, not to start the car.
According to Toyota (see e.g., here:http://trucks.about.com/od/hybridcar/a/toyota_hybrids_2.htm ):
It’s Jeremy Clarkson you are quoting here… here’s a clue, he is not a serious roadtester, he is someone who writes for shock value. See pistonheads.com and do a search on his name to see how he is derided.
This site gets worse and worse… ~snip~
>>Someone named their car the “Mundano”? As in “mundane”??
Its a Mondaeo, presumably. A Ford.
FatBigot (16:15:25) : “…No one gave a moment’s thought to any risk from slicing raw bacon and then cooked meat on the same slicer and no one ever became ill as a result…”
Pure luck. Cases of trichinosis have resulted from grinding pork and then switching to beef for steak tartare without a tear-down and cleansing of the grinder. Smoking, salting, or curing are not preventives, so raw, unfrozen bacon would also be risky.
Not hearing of anyone becoming ill isn’t the same as no one becoming ill. It takes several weeks for trichinosis to be diagnosed. One of the diagnostic questions is “Have you eaten any raw meat recently?” The victim of a contaminated slicer would answer “no,” since he or she had ordered cooked meat, thus possibly delaying or frustrating diagnosis.
There is no specific treatment for trichinosis once the larvae have invaded the muscles. The cysts remain viable for years, and may invade the heart, lungs and brain. Death may result, though the geometry of a slicer would make that unlikely. Anyone who would slice pork and then ready-to-eat meat on an uncleaned slicer is a health risk. It is quite possible that no one became ill, but, if so, that was luck, not competence.
edcon (18:58:01) : “Anthony, did you include the replacement cost for batteries in your per mile cost?”
A good question, one I’m not sure we’re getting a straight answer on from the manufacturers. The replacement cost is typically quoted as between $3200 and $4000. The battery life is harder to determine, since it depends on the use cycle of the vehicle, but they’re probably good for 80,000 to 160,000 miles. If the manufacturer doesn’t warantee the battery, then figure 50,000 miles. That adds anywhere from 2 to 8 cents per mile.
Remember, though, Obamarama’s energy program has built-in inflation of about 10 to 20% per year once coal is locked out, so battery costs will probably inflate rapidly as we get further into the cycle. Better allow $8,000 to $10,000 for replacements in ten years. Used batteries would cost somewhat less, but might be iffy and hard to find.
His criticisms of CVT are bogus. I drive a Honda Civic hybrid with CVT and it works like a charm. Very smooth and quiet.