10 fuel efficient vehicles on the horizon

[saaber1]

1. Subaru outback diesel – on sale in Europe now, US next year, 50 mpg hwy, AWD

http://www.subaru.co.uk/Subaru_co_uk/ViewMenu.qed?menuid=M1M8M1

also a slow Subaru diesel microsite - http://www.boxerdiesel.com/en/index.html

2. VentureOne – supposedly 100mpg, avail in California supposedly 2009, quite a concept

Price $23k

http://www.flytheroad.com/

3. VW Polo Bluetec diesel – on sale in Europe now, US availability in near future?

http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/automotive_news/4219904.html

4. VW Polo Diesel hybrid – 70 mpg, not yet in production

http://gas2.org/2008/03/03/a-biodiesel-prius-vw-to-release-699-mpg-diesel-hybrid/

5. VW 1 L – 200 mpg, concept only at the moment

http://gas2.org/2008/05/07/vw-confirms-1l-concept-will-become-reality-in-2010/

6. Aptera – 130-1000 mpg depending on driving distance before plugging in, California availability soon supposedly

http://www.aptera.com/

7. Tesla – I don’t like it personally, in production, US

http://www.teslamotors.com/

8. Prius gen3 – discussed in numerous places elsewhere

9. Mercedes diesel hybrid SUV – 40 mpg

http://gas2.org/2008/04/07/mercedes-40-mpg-diesel-hybrid-vision-glk-bluetec-suv/

10. Gm Volt http://gm-volt.com/

Any others?

 

[blackcherry06]

Tesla is the only one that appeals to me. The Aptera?...not on a bet. VW 1L....no thanks. I could do the rest if I had no other options.

 

[wavinwayne]

#4 All the way, baby!!!

 

[H2GURU]

Well...you can cross off those diesels because the extraction rate from a barrel of crude in NOT scalable to those who think diesels will cure their problem. The amount of diesel fuel from oil is a constant. At a dollar more than un-leaded its not the bargain it once was anyway.

 

[H2GURU]

Petroleum Products Yielded from One Barrel of Crude Oil in California

Product Percent of Total
Finished Motor Gasoline 51.4%
Distillate Fuel Oil 15.3%
Jet Fuel 12.3%
Still Gas 5.4%
Marketable Coke 5.0%
Residual Fuel Oil 3.3%
Liquefied Refinery Gas 2.8%
Asphalt and Road Oil 1.7%
Other Refined Products 1.5%
Lubricants 0.9%




One barrel contains 42 gallons of crude oil. The total volume of products made from crude oil based origins is 48.43 gallons on average - 6.43 gallons greater than the original 42 gallons of crude oil. This represents a "processing gain" due to the additional other petroleum products such as alkylates that are added to the refining process to create the final products.

Additionally, California gasoline contains approximately 5.7 percent by volume of ethanol, a non-petroleum-based additive that brings the total processing gain to 7.59 gallons (or 49.59 total gallons).




Source: California Energy Commission, Fuels Office, PIIRA database. Based on 2004 data.


You are in the 15% bracket for diesel and as the airlines scale back operations you may get another 2-4 percentage points there?

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: H2GURU
Well...you can cross off those diesels because the extraction rate from a barrel of crude in NOT scalable to those who think diesels will cure their problem. The amount of diesel fuel from oil is a constant. At a dollar more than un-leaded its not the bargain it once was anyway.


how so, heavier ends can be sent back to the cat cracker and be re-broken to present a proper blending pool to produce a diesel-type fuel.

The recovery of different cuts is very feedstock dependent, too. Crudes are benchmarked with respect to processing ease and recovery of highly saleable products. Main cost #1 is HDS, which is high for gasoline and diesel now, due to hydrogen requirements to drive the reaction. Given that our crudes tend to be getting heavier, the easy to remove naphtha fractions may need more processing to be made in bulk, and diesel allows you to have the c7-18 cut that gasoline does not.

JMH

 

[Chuck1986]

I wish people wouldn't overrate econoboxes..I could never see myself driving one.
1) They have the speed of an octogenarian pushing himself in a wheelchair. (I've never owned a car that's been rated less than 190 horsepower.)
2) Many of them are extremely unsafe. Get in a bad accident and you'll be glad you saved on gas so you can apply the savings towards the co-pays on opiod analgesics, physical therapy and cervical vertebrae surgeries. Oh gosh, imagine if a drunk driver in a Ford Explorer smashed into that VentureOne - then the gas savings can go towards your funeral.
3) Better hope the battery never breaks. To replace it you'll be paying far more than the $$ you saved on gas.
4) Contrary to popular myth, they're actually very bad for the environment. Refining the zinc/nickel for the batteries produces many toxic chemicals that destroy the environment. And disposing of those batteries will do further damage to the environment, not to mention the recycling fee.

 

[glennc]

Great list, I'll take one of each.

There are always problems with new ideas. You can turn tail and run as a result or work on the problems and end up with a better world. What major technology has not improved our lives, on balance?

Some of these small, faired-body concepts are truly interesting to me. In small numbers they will probably be too expensive and won't get the development they need to be fully realized vehicles, but if production numbers could approach mass-market levels they could have great promise IMO. Just looking at the issue from a first-principles perspective, individuals commuting alone in 3000-5000lb boxes seems very wasteful, although it's what our culture currently accepts.

Diesel has promise. It is possible for the refining mix to change, and it is possible that diesel could come from other sources as well.

It is good to approach the problem from many angles at once and see what the market comes up with.

Appreciate the thread.

 

[Pop_Rivit]

Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
And disposing of those batteries will do further damage to the environment, not to mention the recycling fee.


So recycling batteries is bad for the environment? Cool. I'll go back to tossing my old car batteries into the landfill. Thanks for enlightening me. I'll help the environment and save money at the same time.

Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
Better hope the battery never breaks. To replace it you'll be paying far more than the $$ you saved on gas.


In 58 years I've never had a battery "break".

Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
Many of them are extremely unsafe. Get in a bad accident and you'll be glad you saved on gas so you can apply the savings towards the co-pays on opiod analgesics, physical therapy and cervical vertebrae surgeries. Oh gosh, imagine if a drunk driver in a Ford Explorer smashed into that VentureOne - then the gas savings can go towards your funeral.


Odd-my "econobox" has a better crash safety rating than a Ford Explorer. Would that be the same Explorer that had Firestone tires that blow apart? That had a habit of rolling over when the tires blow apart?

Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
2008 Nissan Altima Coupe SE coming after grad school


If they don't teach thinking skills in "grad school", perhaps you should ask for a tuition refund?

 

[mjoekingz28]

#3 is appealing. Nothing but crude diesel power, roll up windows, 5spd, decent style with a happening hatch for your system and even a backseat for whoever gets lucky.

No gizmo gadgetry, maybe it will hold a DIN style radio since they probably won't equip a suitable system for under $20k. No biggie, 14 inch wheels. The only thing that would be confusing for me is, Turbo or NA?

A turbo would be nice for smooth torque and spirited driving, but besides being 'another thing to break' and something to maintain, when I got my hands full now. Could it possibly increase mileage putting around? I doubt a turbo could ever lower consumption on a gas rig, but with a diesel just maybe.

 

[Chuck1986]

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
And disposing of those batteries will do further damage to the environment, not to mention the recycling fee.


So recycling batteries is bad for the environment? Cool. I'll go back to tossing my old car batteries into the landfill. Thanks for enlightening me. I'll help the environment and save money at the same time.

Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
Better hope the battery never breaks. To replace it you'll be paying far more than the $$ you saved on gas.


In 58 years I've never had a battery "break".

Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
Many of them are extremely unsafe. Get in a bad accident and you'll be glad you saved on gas so you can apply the savings towards the co-pays on opiod analgesics, physical therapy and cervical vertebrae surgeries. Oh gosh, imagine if a drunk driver in a Ford Explorer smashed into that VentureOne - then the gas savings can go towards your funeral.


Odd-my "econobox" has a better crash safety rating than a Ford Explorer. Would that be the same Explorer that had Firestone tires that blow apart? That had a habit of rolling over when the tires blow apart?


Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
2008 Nissan Altima Coupe SE coming after grad school


If they don't teach thinking skills in "grad school", perhaps you should ask for a tuition refund?




WOW. Did you really think I was referring to regular car batteries? No, I was referring to the battery used in powering a hybrid. They didn't have them 58 years ago. How old are you anyways?

I never said a Ford Explorer is safe. All I said was, imagine if a Ford Explorer crashed into one of those tiny POS like the VentureOne. Many econoboxes are highly unsafe. The Corolla, Sentra and Civic are some of the few safe econoboxes out there.

Thinking skills? I'll be graduating with $0 of debt, a decent savings account of 5-digits and a 6-figure income. Oh, I guess I can't afford $18k for a used Altima coupe. Just out of curiousity, I see you're retired - what did you do for a living? I'd love to hear what you did that gave you these infinite words of wisdom. I've always thought there's a positive correlation between age and wisdom, however, in your case I see there's an inverse relationship.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
...
3) Better hope the battery never breaks. To replace it you'll be paying far more than the $$ you saved on gas.

Totally FALSE. I've owned a Prius for less than two years, and my fuel savings (relative to the G35 I was driving before) would now have paid for TWO new batteries. My car has only ~65k miles, is still under wty (I have the TCU 7/100 deal), and is still going strong.
Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
4) Contrary to popular myth, they're actually very bad for the environment. Refining the zinc/nickel for the batteries produces many toxic chemicals that destroy the environment. And disposing of those batteries will do further damage to the environment, not to mention the recycling fee.

Wrong again. Batteries can easily be recycled. Toyota pays a "bounty" of $250 apiece for failed batteries (though there have been very few failures...), so no cost there. And the toxins produced by refining the metals used in the battery are more than offset by the lesser amount of metals mined and refined to build the bodies of larger vehicles. A 3,000 lb Prius with a 100 lb battery makes a much smaller environmental mining and refining footprint than does a 5,000 lb Suburban...

 

[ARB1977]

Number 4 looks pretty cool.

 

[harry j]

Originally Posted By: H2GURU
Well...you can cross off those diesels because the extraction rate from a barrel of crude in NOT scalable to those who think diesels will cure their problem. The amount of diesel fuel from oil is a constant. At a dollar more than un-leaded its not the bargain it once was anyway.


How about bio diesel?

 

[VK56VD]

The Outback and Legacy diesel should be interesting. You get the best of all world's-AWD, Torque, & fuel economy!

 

[Chuck1986]

Diesel sounds like much more promising technology than hybrids. Disiel engines will likely last exponentially longer, you don't have to worry about that battery and they can be decently fast (most hybrids I see on the road are extremely slow, heck they probably couldn't go a quarter mile in less than 18 seconds). The 2010 Maxima is supposed to have a 3.0L diesel that makes 400 lb/ft torque!

 

[Chuck1986]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
...
3) Better hope the battery never breaks. To replace it you'll be paying far more than the $$ you saved on gas.

Totally FALSE. I've owned a Prius for less than two years, and my fuel savings (relative to the G35 I was driving before) would now have paid for TWO new batteries. My car has only ~65k miles, is still under wty (I have the TCU 7/100 deal), and is still going strong.
Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
4) Contrary to popular myth, they're actually very bad for the environment. Refining the zinc/nickel for the batteries produces many toxic chemicals that destroy the environment. And disposing of those batteries will do further damage to the environment, not to mention the recycling fee.

Wrong again. Batteries can easily be recycled. Toyota pays a "bounty" of $250 apiece for failed batteries (though there have been very few failures...), so no cost there. And the toxins produced by refining the metals used in the battery are more than offset by the lesser amount of metals mined and refined to build the bodies of larger vehicles. A 3,000 lb Prius with a 100 lb battery makes a much smaller environmental mining and refining footprint than does a 5,000 lb Suburban...

May I ask why you went from a G35 to a Prius? I personally would've kept the G35 cuz it's safer, sexier and faster. But that's just me

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
Diesel sounds like much more promising technology than hybrids. Disiel engines will likely last exponentially longer, you don't have to worry about that battery and they can be decently fast (most hybrids I see on the road are extremely slow, heck they probably couldn't go a quarter mile in less than 18 seconds). The 2010 Maxima is supposed to have a 3.0L diesel that makes 400 lb/ft torque!


1) Well, with diesel costing close to a buck a gallon more than gasoline in some places, maybe not such a great deal. Also, whether one technology or the other is best for an individual driver depends a lot on their driving pattern, not dogmatic claims of "this is 'better' than that". If you're mostly an urban driver, the hybrid is way ahead of diesel. If you're solely a highway cruiser, the diesel will probably edge ahead. For mixed driving, you have to decide for yourself.

2) In order to stay emissions legal, diesels are coming with tremendously complex, Rube Goldberg exhaust systems with particle traps, extra cats, urea injection (in some cases), and so forth. Everyone hoots and hollers about hybrid complexity, while totally overlooking the complexities inherent in a modern diesel.

3) Exactly how many of those hybrids have you driven? You should try one before you declare them "slow". The Prius can do 0-60 in under 10 seconds when the battery is juiced up. No Corvette, but not bad either. And what a lot of you guys who've never driven one don't seem to get is that often, we're driving slower on purpose. This week, I kept my tank average over 50 mpg by slowing down and accelerating more sedately then usual. Oh yeah, the Prius generates 295 ft-lb of torque (all available from zero rpms) -- and so gets off the line a little better than you might expect.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
...
May I ask why you went from a G35 to a Prius? I personally would've kept the G35 cuz it's safer, sexier and faster. But that's just me

Sure. I determined that I'd be driving between 35k-45k miles per year for the next several years. I liked the G35, but the sexier and faster parts are not that important to me. Safer? What's your basis for that claim. According to the IIHS ratings, the Prius should actually be slightly safer than the G. Are you laboring under the belief that the Prius is a "tiny" car? It's not. It actually weighs about 3000 lbs, and is much closer to the size of a Camry than a Corolla. The short nose is an illusion too; you're really not much closer to the front bumper than you are in any mid-size car. The base of the windshield is much further forward than it is in more conventional cars. The flat space on top of the dash is vast. I don't see any reason why the Prius is any less safe than any other car of similar size.

 

[Chuck1986]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Originally Posted By: Chuck1986
...
May I ask why you went from a G35 to a Prius? I personally would've kept the G35 cuz it's safer, sexier and faster. But that's just me

Sure. I determined that I'd be driving between 35k-45k miles per year for the next several years. I liked the G35, but the sexier and faster parts are not that important to me. Safer? What's your basis for that claim. According to the IIHS ratings, the Prius should actually be slightly safer than the G. Are you laboring under the belief that the Prius is a "tiny" car? It's not. It actually weighs about 3000 lbs, and is much closer to the size of a Camry than a Corolla. The short nose is an illusion too; you're really not much closer to the front bumper than you are in any mid-size car. The base of the windshield is much further forward than it is in more conventional cars. The flat space on top of the dash is vast. I don't see any reason why the Prius is any less safe than any other car of similar size.

Gotcha. And yes, you're right, it's not a good idea to generalize as diesel being better than hybrid. Although I would like to see some effort made with biodiesel technology - I think diesel and CVT technology shows some promise.
If you're doing that much driving in a year, fuel economy would seem like your #1 priority (or maybe #2 behind safety.)
So what year was your G35? Did ya like it? Have any problems with oil burning? I know some of the VQ35s had oil burning issues.