Honda Car Forum

Michael Pardee wrote:
> "John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:Iedcf.54339$An6.619@trnddc08...
>
>>Michael Pardee wrote:
>>
>>>"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
>>>news:elmop-811E23.13304108112005@nntp2.usenetserver.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>But what problems do they solve, and what other solutions are there for
>>>>the same problems?
>>>>
>>>>They solve exactly one problem: recapturing braking energy to re-use on
>>>>acceleration. There's only one place where that works: city driving.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Regenerative braking is very far down on the list of values in
>>>hybridization. The essential purpose is to use the primary power source
>>>more efficiently. Putting a 240 hp engine in a passenger car to cruise
>>>around town at 35 mph is extremely inefficient. Using a 50 hp engine to
>>>do that is far more efficient, but responsiveness suffers badly. We are
>>>in the infancy of hybridization now, but as the power technology advances
>>>a 50 hp hybrid can be more efficient than a 50 hp conventional car and
>>>provide better responsiveness than a 240 hp conventional car. The
>>>difference is made up by stored electric power.
>>
>>One problem with that is the fact that the stored electric power
>>eventually runs down. It would not be fun to be in the passing lane on a
>>long uphill section of road going around a vehicle only to discover that
>>your battery storage has just been exhausted and that the available torque
>>is suddenly reduced 50%. Yikes!
>>
>>One thing hybrids bring into the equation is a significant depenence on
>>near term prior history to a degree which conventional engines do not.
>>
>>John
>
>
> It's all a matter of design. In your example, a properly designed hybrid
> will not run out of passing power because the engine power was enough to
> maintain full legal speed, while passing power is available because it was
> not needed to reach the cruising speed. A major reason multi-hundred
> horsepower engines are used in passenger cars today is to provide that
> margin, in spite of the economy penalty the vast majority of the time.
>
> Even in the previous generation Prius - the one we have - our battery has
> never dropped to "empty" (actually something like 50% charge) although we
> live at 7000 feet and have made trips with ful load to Washington state and
> the LA area. I've never heard anybody complain about that happening, either.
> It just isn't a problem.
>
> Mike
>
>

I wasn't talking about the Prius, I was talking about your hypothetical
vehicle which you say would have a much smaller conventional engine than
does a Prius.

John

Michael Pardee wrote:

> The Prius first went on sale in Japan in 1997, 8 years ago. I don't have
> solid information, but AFAIK no reports have come out about failures of
> those batteries.
>
> As you say, we shall see.
>
> Mike
>
>

Clearly not every Prius owner is a happy owner. Look here:

http://www.epinions.com/auto_Make-20...ion_list/pp_~2

John Horner wrote:

> Clearly not every Prius owner is a happy owner. Look here:
>
> http://www.epinions.com/auto_Make-20...ion_list/pp_~2

But out of those 18 polled, only 1 reported a premature battery failure.

"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:10qcf.23701$Q27.19230@trnddc02...
>> It's all a matter of design. In your example, a properly designed hybrid
>> will not run out of passing power because the engine power was enough to
>> maintain full legal speed, while passing power is available because it
>> was not needed to reach the cruising speed. A major reason multi-hundred
>> horsepower engines are used in passenger cars today is to provide that
>> margin, in spite of the economy penalty the vast majority of the time.
>>
>> Even in the previous generation Prius - the one we have - our battery has
>> never dropped to "empty" (actually something like 50% charge) although we
>> live at 7000 feet and have made trips with ful load to Washington state
>> and the LA area. I've never heard anybody complain about that happening,
>> either. It just isn't a problem.
>>
>> Mike
>
> I wasn't talking about the Prius, I was talking about your hypothetical
> vehicle which you say would have a much smaller conventional engine than
> does a Prius.
>
> John

Right - the basic principle is to size the engine for the largest continuous
output power required. Making it smaller will cause exactly what you
describe (running out of power on long, hard uphill slopes) while making it
larger is just a waste. Making a hybrid with a 50 hp engine (as I used as an
earlier example) works just fine in the flatlands but would get a poisonous
reputation for more general use. I used 50 hp as an example for the
illustration of moving a car around in town in comparison with using a 240
hp engine. I realize in looking back that confused the issue. Sorry about
that. It is useful to note that the driver wouldn't necessarily notice the
difference in performance between a 50 hp engine and a 100 hp engine except
for the hill climbs.

Mike

"High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:1v7a6mtio38sy$.dlg@hightech.misfit...
> John Horner wrote:
>
>> Clearly not every Prius owner is a happy owner. Look here:
>>
>> http://www.epinions.com/auto_Make-20...ion_list/pp_~2
>
> But out of those 18 polled, only 1 reported a premature battery failure.

That is the link I posted somewhere above as a tinyURL. Note the battery
failure post is awry; there is no sulfur in the hybrid battery (NaOH
electrolyte, not H2SO4). The 12V aux battery, which does have a fairly high
failure rate, is an AGM battery. It can produce sulfur dioxide, while the
hybrid battery can't.

Still, no car makes everybody happy.

Mike

On Mon, 7 Nov 2005 07:52:22 -0500, High Tech Misfit <me@privacy.net>
wrote:

>John Horner wrote:
>
>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>>> The International engine that Ford uses in its light trucks turns a lot
>>> faster then any either one of them us in their farm equipment.
>>>
>>> mike hunt
>>>
>>
>> Even so, it is at nothing approaching the sophistication level of the
>> best modern European car diesels.
>>
>> John
>
>Pay no attention to "Mike Hunter". He is a notorious pro-Ford liar and
>troll in the Toyota newsgroup (to which this thread had been cross-posted).

Its true about the diesels though. Diesels sold in the US are
antiquated, lumbering beasts from the late 70s and early 80s. a modern
european diesel is not smokey, clattery, or similar. The nearest
you'll get to a euro diesel at the moemnt, is the one in the Golf, or
the one in the Dodge (actually Mercedies) Sprinter cargo van. Only
ford diesel i've been impressed with over the years, was the 1.9 they
used to have in the Ford Fiesta Cargo. The one they've put the the
s-type Jag's meant to be good though.

Not necessarily. It would depend at what RPMs each engine produced its
maximum torque. It is after all tongue, not HP, that get the vehicle going
from a stop and what keeps it going, at speed, up a long grade. The Pruis
uses the electric motor when staring and adds it on grades because electric
motors develop their greatest amount of tongue at start up. That is why
most Toyota are under powered, compared to many of its competitors
vehicles. . Toyota, like many import brand engines are designed to
produce their HP at higher RPMs than the engines in domestic brands, that is
why they run out of tongue rather quickly at speed.. The reason is domestics
sell mostly automatic tyrannies in the majority of their vehicles that are
equipped with tongue converters. On the other hand Japanese brands which
use the same engines in cars sold in other countries that have a much larger
percentage of their vehicle equipped with manual tyrannies. With a manual
tranny the gear selector can be used to stay on the tongue curve to climb
grades, particularly long grades. Most drivers of automatics are want to
run their cars in the lower gears to stay on the tongue curve. Follow a
Corolla equipped with a manual tranny up a long grade and it will quickly
drop off the prevailing speed, unless the drive reverts to lower gears.
Follow one with an automatic and you will see it runs out of gears trying to
maintain speed, and the speed quickly drops off, because few drivers are
willing to run their engines at the much higher RPMs in lower gears needed
to maintain the prevailing speed.

mike hunt


"Michael Pardee" . Sorry about
> that. It is useful to note that the driver wouldn't necessarily notice the
> difference in performance between a 50 hp engine and a 100 hp engine
> except for the hill climbs.
>
> Mike
>

hybrids don't just work by capturing braking energy.


They run a more fuel efficient cycle with a longer expansion stroke.
The Miller/Atkinson cycle. They can do this because acceleration is
supplemented by the battery. They also have a smaller engine b/c it
can use batteries to accelerate.


By using the Miller cycle they get a higher % of energy out of the gas
and into the drivetrain.


It's very ingenious.


Hydrogen is probably never going to "be here". You need a fuel source
to get hydrogen. Hydrogen is very hard to transport (harder than
natural gas which is difficult enough) and there are no cheap "fuel
cells". The advantages of a liquid fuel are great.


I think the next step is using a smaller gas engine and a
larger/cheaper battery that you can plug in. You could plug it in for
an hour a night and that would take you maybe 30-40 miles. On longer
trips and under acceleration the gas engine would turn on. That way
you'd be replacing gas with electricity, which can come from
nuclear/coal/wind whatever.

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
newsZCcnRFQXs6Axe_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Not necessarily. It would depend at what RPMs each engine produced its
> maximum torque. It is after all tongue, not HP, that get the vehicle
> going from a stop and what keeps it going, at speed, up a long grade. The
> Pruis uses the electric motor when staring and adds it on grades because
> electric motors develop their greatest amount of tongue at start up. That
> is why most Toyota are under powered, compared to many of its competitors
> vehicles. . Toyota, like many import brand engines are designed to
> produce their HP at higher RPMs than the engines in domestic brands, that
> is why they run out of tongue rather quickly at speed.. The reason is
> domestics sell mostly automatic tyrannies in the majority of their
> vehicles that are equipped with tongue converters. On the other hand
> Japanese brands which use the same engines in cars sold in other countries
> that have a much larger percentage of their vehicle equipped with manual
> tyrannies. With a manual tranny the gear selector can be used to stay on
> the tongue curve to climb grades, particularly long grades. Most drivers
> of automatics are want to run their cars in the lower gears to stay on the
> tongue curve. Follow a Corolla equipped with a manual tranny up a long
> grade and it will quickly drop off the prevailing speed, unless the drive
> reverts to lower gears. Follow one with an automatic and you will see it
> runs out of gears trying to maintain speed, and the speed quickly drops
> off, because few drivers are willing to run their engines at the much
> higher RPMs in lower gears needed to maintain the prevailing speed.
>
> mike hunt
>
In a serial hybrid (which does not yet exist in mass production) there are
no gearing issues because the engine only drives a generator, and the
electricity powers the car. We don't have the power electronics yet for
serial hybrids, but another decade should get us there.

(Getting back to the subject line...) Presently, Honda's hybrids are what
are usually called parallel hybrids. The power train is conventional except
that the engine is assisted (Honda calls it Integrated Motor Assist, or IMA)
by the electrics. Toyota uses an inventive scheme they call
"series-parallel," where a part of the engine torque is directed to the
wheels and part is used to generate electricity to power the electric motor.
That's why the Prius has no transmission per se (and can't have one), just a
skewed differential and a pair of motor/generators. They call it an
Electronic CVT. On hard uphill climbs the engine runs up to the maximum
engine speed (4500 rpm in the pre-2004s, 5000 rpm in the current ones IIRC)
and puts out full rated power with a minimum of drama, completely
independent of the car's speed. At lesser power requirements the hybrid
computer adjusts the load on the generation part to control the load on the
engine, so all aspects of the engine operation are under computer control:
mixture, ignition and valve timing, throttle and load... even whether the
engine is running or not.

Mike

On 2005-11-09, st-bum <kennykabuki@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hydrogen is probably never going to "be here". You need a fuel source
> to get hydrogen.

How do you figure? You need a power source, not a fuel souce. The
power is electrical. It can be generated from wind power and solar
power. The current hydrogen research being subsidized by the Bush
administration is indeed planning on the oil industry being the
primary source of this "fuel" you mention. Otherwise they wouldn't be
subsidizing it. That's one of the main reasons hydrogen has been put
on the back burner for 30 years. Anyone with a windmill, the
production equipment, and a storage tank can produce hydrogen. No
profit there.

> Hydrogen is very hard to transport (harder than
> natural gas which is difficult enough) and there are no cheap "fuel
> cells".

Hydrogen can be pressurized and stored just like propane. It is no
more dangerous than gasoline. In fact, in some ways it's safer. After
gasoline's initial explosion, the liquid gas remains and burns
furiously. Once hydrogen explodes, that's it. It's all gone. Fuel
cells are unnecessary. Hydrogen will burn in reciprocating combustion
engines just like other flammable gas (natural, propane). All this
was known 30 years ago. The boogie-man scare tactics and
disinformation are all oil industry bullshit.

nb