I had a strange banner ad on my Yahoo home page today. Not sure why myride.com would be advertising their website in this way, but the banner said Hybrids are Evil - see below and link. The linked article seems a bit dated too, in that it keeps referring to 2005 models. Introduction Hybrids are Evil. You heard it here first, and here's why: they cost more money, don't deliver an equal value for all that cash and will keep the filthy little foreign oil rats in business for another 30 years. Hybrids do nothing well but everything okay. That makes about as much sense as diet soda, fat-free ice cream or low-tar cigarettes. Conservation. Hah - go build a better engine. Less dependence on foreign oil. Yeah - like a heroin junkie can do just a little bit of smack at a time. If you are seriously considering a hybrid vehicle, wake up and turn off the television. And by the way - if you really want to save a tree -- go ride a bike to work or take a train. Hybrid technology is just a ploy to extend the consumer life of the internal combustion engine and - here's the headline - get us to pay more for less...
This was my favorite part ... Is it really likely that the ICE would shut off at a stop light and then just up and die before the light changes? And if I hit the accelerator and slowly started to creep, especially when I wasn't trying to EV, I'd pull the darn car over so I didn't block traffic. Yeesh.
Sure, hybrid cars put out CO2 and other emissions. They just put out way less, like 3 or 4 times less than the typical American-style SUV or over-sized pickup truck. Hybrids evil? Yes. SUV's and pickups evil? 3XYes. Harry
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(galaxee @ Nov 15 2007, 12:31 PM) [snapback]540084[/snapback]</div> Got 5 years to wait for hydrogen? Too much infrastructure to build for now. I would bet it will be 20 years at the earliest, before hydrogen is as mainstream as a current hybrid.
The end of that article attributes it to Brian Chee who I assume is the one described at: http://a904.g.akamai.net/7/904/506/v0011/w...S/Chee-1007.pdf All sort of weird as he lists the car he drives as a Honda Civic Hybrid. The original source of this story appears to be a piece he wrote for autobytel. No date listed though, so you can't really tell how old it is. http://www.autobytel.com/content/shared/ar...icle_id_int/366 The conclusion he reaches is frankly mind-boggling: Fuel savings are minimal, performance suffers, repair is problematic and the price is high. The powertrain is overly complicated, and though automakers have thoroughly tested these vehicles, they will likely suffer when exposed to real world driving conditions. That this guy is a journalist -- with hybrids listed as an area of his special expertise -- is sad. He is also curiously soft when commenting on GM: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19049079/ Chee said General Motors Corp.’s “aggressive†entrance into the hybrid market also could shake things up.... Chee said he thinks there’s a market for the larger hybrids, even if the fuel savings is minimal. “A lot of people buy large vehicles because they need to tow and they need to haul people as well,†Chee said. “I think anybody who owns a large vehicle is going to appreciate any fuel savings and they’re going to be willing to pay for that.†See also: GM Now Stands for "Green Mobility" by Brian Chee
Wow.. quite the article. I think the word FUD is used far too often on the internet and chat boards, but this is a great example of it. That article is nothing but FUD! I love how people talk about the extra cost, yet never really look any further. Yes, it may cost more up front. But the only savings they ever discuss is gas. How about the other savings? My 60,000 mile tune up cost me $100 less than it would have with a gas only engine. I still haven' t had to replace my breaks either. I can agree that hybrids arent' for everyone, but dismissing them altogether is ridiculous. I went from a Jeep to my Prius, so how am I not saving money? Sure, I could have chosen from many other vehicles, but none compared to the Prius. Move along.. there's really nothing to see with this article.
You get to the middle of the intersection and, oh oh - the darn thing clicks off and dies. You're not smiling anymore. I've had this happen with a "normal" car more than a few times. Why should this never happen to a hybrid? I'd bet that guy has never even driven a hybrid...much less a Prius. And where are they going to get all that hydrogen anyway...from oil? Then we still have the problems we have now. ~buttster
And shockingly, the myride.com editors' choice awards for 2008 conclude: This year, domestic automakers are on top, sweeping most of the major categories in MyRide.com’s 2008 Editors’ Choice Awards,†said MyRide.com Chief Automotive Analyst Brian Chee. “Clearly, the time and energy the winning automakers have invested in making better quality cars is starting to pay off for them.†Out of 20 categories, not one of the Editors' Choices is a Toyota.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(excuseMeButt @ Nov 15 2007, 03:21 PM) [snapback]540113[/snapback]</div> My first car did that, a GM Corvair: in the middle of an intersection it didn't click, it went bang, the engine raced and the car wouldn't move. A big puddle of automatic transmission fluid bled out on the pavement, and there was a chunk of the transaxle housing laying on the road. Harry
He is obviously a shill for the US car makers who are struggling to catch up. I wonder who are the main sponsors of "MyRide"?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(patsparks @ Nov 15 2007, 02:50 PM) [snapback]540131[/snapback]</div> It's owned by Autobytel, an internet auto marketing company. An early report on MyRide wonders: http://aapl.bloggingstocks.com/2007/06/08/...hip-to-come-in/ When finally launched, will MyRide.com be another advertising channel or will the editorial content be more along the lines of bias-free Consumer Reports? Just how neutral will the information about cars and aftermarket products be? By their own statements, MyRide.com's primary purpose is to generate customer leads for auto dealerships. So I think it's safe to say they're not trying to be another Consumer Reports. http://a904.g.akamai.net/7/904/506/v0011/w...eptember/3.html What's weird is some of Chee's older (2004 Prius) and newer articles (Hybrid-x) seem completely reasonable. But that hybrid article at this thread's top just doesn't make a whit of sense -- not in the context of having been written by somebody who knows hybrids and drives one. It leaves me scratching my head.
Hybrids will extend the consumable life of the internal combustion engine, which is essentially 19th century technology, and put the brakes on the development of feasible hydrogen transportation. And blind people hate 'em too! Let's see...if I buy a non-hybrid I am encouraging the development of hydrogen powered cars because...I am using fuel supplies up so quickly and causing wars with oil rich countries that engineers and scientists will be even more motivated to come up with a hydrogen based solution. What if they don't? Then we are better of extending the oil supply. ~buttster
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(excuseMeButt @ Nov 15 2007, 05:24 PM) [snapback]540191[/snapback]</div> That was a good one! Yeah, don't by the newest innovative version of the old technology, buy the really old technology instead so we don't put the brakes on development of new technology. :blink: :huh: :blink:
I laugh at the "it takes years to pay off the difference". Difference of what? Did Toyota make a non hybrid Prius? I don't think so, so compared to what other car? As far as I know, there is no other car to compare it to. It is larger than the Civic, and Corolla, so it doesn't compare to them. Any other car that has the same amount of interior space doesn't even come close to half of what the MPG is on it. Here is my take on it, in 5 years the car will be paid off, thats the length of the loan. PERIOD. Now as far as gas savings, going from something that got 15 MPG running a more expensive fuel, to the Prius which is getting me 48 MPG, um over the miles driven so far, I actually saved more in fuel costs than the car payment AND insurance is costing me. So stick that in your article and smoke it. OTOH if referring to a Camry or Highlander Hybrid, that is a justifiable argument, same as comparing whether to get a diesel in a pickup or stick with the cheaper gas engine. Plan to keep it a long time if thats how you look at it. The difference in gas savings between those models will take some time to balance out the premium of the hybrid. The Diesel in my truck was a $6K premium, but it will last 3 times as long as a gasoline engine, and also run on WVO or bio diesel, where the gas engines are stuck to run on only gas, not e85 or any other form of fuel. That right there is a good reason to spend the extra on it, plus it has more power for doing what I need it to do while using less fuel. Now if the camry or highlander were to have flex fuel engines in addition to being a hybrid, then that would also be a plus factor. If it had a diesel engine, then that would make it even more economical and further help reduce the dependence since it can run on bio diesel as well, which would further reduce emissions and fuel consumption.
