How About a Hybrid Ridgeline?

[shovelhd]

Qed. :d :d

[hofffam]

Originally Posted by alexander

How about alot of things. The RL is not even close to being MPG what it could be and you know what as long as big oil uses all the money we give them to lobby manufacturers and the government in the US it will remain that way.

Look at Chevy there losing money hand over fist but they dont feel the US market would buy there small subcompact they just released that gets 52mpg like the Yaris which is selling like hotcakes.

How about Honda with the CR-Z same thing.

And if the pilot with the same engine and weight gets 50% better mileage than the RL you just have to ask why?

It's simple they meet our expectations no more no less and we accept it.

the Hybrid Tahoe is a joke a 50K dollar joke so that chevy can avoid huge tax penalties they evaded by making most of there cars flex fuel

Within 200 miles of where I live in southern california there is only 3 places you can get E85

oh but wait because the compression is designed for gas you cant take advantage of its high octane rating.

what you can take advantage of is it's inherent 30% worse fuel efficiency for more money per gallon.

You want a Hybrid RL - buy that german natural gas conversion or do what I do and drive less.

Actually I only drive on the weekends mostly and I dont miss it one bit cause I get to drive for fun all weekend long.

You like to make up stuff don't you?

I own a 2006 Pilot 2WD and a 2006 Ridgline. The Pilot, even in 2WD, does not get 50% better mileage. It is better, but more like 3 MPG in daily driving. It can get 25 MPG on the highway to my very best 20 MPG in the Ridgeline.

So you think Honda had a conversation with the Exxon CEO and Honda agreed to make the RL less fuel efficient? That is an idiotic statement. Wouldn't the RL sell like hotcakes if it performed as is but had 25MPG instead?

As for Chevy - they do some strange things. I don't know what car you are talking about but they do sell the Aveo here now. It is about the size of the Yaris. As for the hybrid Tahoe - I think it is impressive and the reviews have been good. It is too expensive - I think Chevy is trying to capitalize on hybrid-mania right now and priced it high.

Oh and if you need to tow 6000 lbs - two Ridgelines won't help.

[HondaTech]

This is more of a general observation than a reply to the OP. I don't foresee Honda making a hybrid Pilot, RL or even an Element. The Civic hybrid is the only one that sells. The Accord hybrid was a dismal failure. I also believe that hybrids are not the final plan - never were. Just the first step in teaching the american consumer to accept alternate powertrain technologies. In my opinion, the end-product is either fuel-cell or completely electric. there are technology and material limitations right now, so there needs to be some major advances made.

The single biggest limiting factor is electricity storage. For decades, the lead-acid battery had been the only way to store large amounts of power for extended periods of time. It has evolved, lithium ion, Ni-Cad - but the principle remains the same, as does much of the weight. If battery technology were to make a giant leap forward, many of the issues facing electric and fuel-cell vehicles would subsequently dissolve.

Imagine, if you had something the size and weight of a standard car battery that could store enough power to travel, say.... 300 miles? What amazing possibilities that would open up for future design and development.

I do not think there is any single answer, but rather a combination of all the different options. I can see definite possibility for an all electric vehicle. Especially as a "daily commuter" type of vehicle. Most people do live within 20 miles of where they work... and drive those miles on a daily basis.

Electric vehicles would put additional strain on the nations electric grid which would no doubt need additional power stations. I believe at this point that nuclear power is a very clean and safe option. I think it should be expanded greatly, albeit safely.

In the end I don't know what will happen, but I am honestly quite concerned about the oil supply. I know we aren't running out.... but you don't have to run out, you just have to fall short, then there is a problem.

Increased demand from growing nations is putting a huge draw onto the already slim oil supply. We need to find more, or use less. One option helps in the short term, one in the long term.

Invest in companies developing battery technology. If you hit the one that cracks the solution, you'll be rich.

And read this,
Peak Oil: Life After the Oil Crash

It's very skewed one way, but interesting nonetheless.

HT

[C25A1guy]

I do agree with what HT said, considering that he and I have butted heads on quite a few subjects.

Electric or hydrogen would be the way to go, but like HT said, main issue is storage. More specifically, we do not have the technology/materials to either produce it and/or make it cost effective in its packaging constraints.

I also agree the nuclear energy is the way to go. San Onfre (sp?) down in oceanside, ca has the capacity to produce more electricity. Last I heard, it was only producing at 25-34% capacity. Most of our naval ships and subs are completely nuclear powered now and have no need to refuel for something like 10k years. Basically the power plant will outlast the vehicle.

Overall, the general american public needs to wake up and realize that we need to chage our ways in terms of material consumption and the way we live now will only lead to our own demise. Of course there isn't going to be an easy single approach to this. This is an issue that will have to be attacked from multiple angles with multiple solutions working concurrently.

Oh, and hybrids are not the way. If anything, over the lifespan of the vehicle from production to death, it'll do more harm to the enviroment then regular gas vehicles and it'll have a shorter life span. I just see it as a stepping stone to where we need to be, but its not the end-all cure.

[shovelhd]

Originally Posted by C25A1guy

Oh, and hybrids are not the way. If anything, over the lifespan of the vehicle from production to death, it'll do more harm to the enviroment then regular gas vehicles and it'll have a shorter life span. I just see it as a stepping stone to where we need to be, but its not the end-all cure.

I agree with your last sentence but have issue with the others. Everything in a hybrid is recyclable, including the batteries. What leads you to believe that they will have a shorter lifespan? There are 10 year old Prii on the road that have never had a traction battery replacement.

[xd9x19]

Is there any hard data available about the life expectancy of the hybrid vehicles? How long will the batteries last before they need to be replaced and will it be economically feasible to replace them?

[hofffam]

I suppose the amount of hard data on hybrid lifespan is in short supply right now because the oldest hybrid on the road in the USA is the original Prius. According to the wiki the Prius was introduced in the US in 2001 but that model was introduced in Japan in 1997 - eleven years ago.

Toyota has published papers that say they designed their current hybrids for a battery life of 180,000 miles. They claim zero premature failures so far. It is reasonable to be skeptical of a manufacturer's claims - but I believe that if failures were common we would hear about it because of very high interest in the topic. Toyota says the long life is due to the electronics - which optimize the charge rates and the discharge levels of the batteries. They are never drained completely nor overcharged.

The batteries are designed for recycling. I don't believe Toyota will sell just the batteries so no one will replace them DIY. The recycle rate should be near 100%.

[shovelhd]

In the Highlander Hybrid, the traction battery is warranted for 8 years or 100,000 miles. The charge is modulated so that it never gets below 40% or higher than 80%.

[typesfanatik]

Originally Posted by C25A1guy

I do agree with what HT said, considering that he and I have butted heads on quite a few subjects.

was only producing at 25-34% capacity. Most of our naval ships and subs are completely nuclear powered now and have no need to refuel for something like 10k years. Basically the power plant will outlast the vehicle.

actually thier subs and carriers will run for 25 yrs without refueling My bro is in the navy

[footer]

I just read every word at this website:

Honda FCX Clarity - Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle - Official Web Site

I WANT ONE! But seeings how I live in MN, it's not going to happen ... for awhile yet anyway. Even better would be a version of this that IS a Ridgeline! I love my Ridgeline, even if it's costing me $60+ to fill it now. I'm driving a little less but the fuel bills keep adding up in spite of it ...

Anyway, I'm extremely excited about Honda's efforts in fuel-cell technology and quite pleased to see it's becoming a reality. Is it the future? That remains to be seen ... I sure hope so. Especially now that a barrel of oil has topped $125 and Exxon doesn't think $40.6 billion in profit (last year) is enough: Exxon posts quarterly, annual profit records - Feb. 1, 2008.

Someone asked in an earlier post about the Home Energy Station. I too would like to know how much one costs. Probably not cheap at this point but I am VERY interested nonetheless.

Good job Honda! Please keep it up!!!