2006 Honda Ridgeline - Invoice Price CAD

"mrdancer" > wrote in message
...
> You might also check out Fred's tdi page tdiclub.com - some of those guys
> are getting 65mpg with their TDi's, although prolly not at 75mph, and they
> have their motors 'tuned' a bit...
>
> FWIW, in decent weather, my '02 Accord has gotten 40mpg on long 75mph
> trips
> while using A/C, but it is a 4cyl./5-spd.
>
Highway economy really isn't a big concern for me, since the great majority
of our miles are in town.

However, I sure like the TDi in my new work truck - it gets right at twice
the economy the old gasser did under all conditions, which means "longer
legs." It also has phenomenal power on the highway and is great off-road.
Rock crawling is so much easier with a diesel. Sure wish it had some
acceleration - *any* acceleration - off the line, though. I may be old, but
I can still get across an intersection on my bicycle quicker than the truck
can. (No, silly, I haven't done a head to head race with myself!)

Mike

High Tech Misfit wrote:

> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>
>>>How, exactly, is the V6 Honda Accord Hybrid misguided?
>>
>>Forgive me for believing that the objective of hybrids is to save
>>energy. The Hybrid makes no (or very little) gain in actual gas economy.
>
>
> The only logical reason to buy a hybrid is reduced emissions. It is for
> the environmentalists.

And since the Honda Accord Hybrid gets poor gas mileage, it fails at
reduced emissions.

I don't agree that fuel economy is for "environmentalists". Oil is a
dwindling source that when used pollutes the air. Everyone should try
to use less. First step, is get the right sized car for your needs.

Kent Finnell wrote:

> "Alan Browne" > wrote in message

>>Forgive me for believing that the objective of hybrids is to save energy.
>>The Hybrid makes no (or very little) gain in actual gas economy.
>
>
> As compared to what, a Prius or a Civic Hybrid? It does show an improvement
> over the standard Accord V6, 29/37 city/highway vs. 24/34. If you want
> maximum fuel efficiency, stick yourself in an Insight. Forget comfort,
> passenger and luggage capacity. Will you scoff the new Lexus Hybrid Luxury
> Sedan? It probably won't do any better.

They could have achieved much better mileage with a 4 banger-hybrid.
Period.

Michael Pardee wrote:

> "Alan Browne" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Kent Finnell wrote:
>>
>>>"Alan Browne" > wrote in message
. ..
>>>
>>>How, exactly, is the V6 Honda Accord Hybrid misguided?
>>
>>Forgive me for believing that the objective of hybrids is to save energy.
>>The Hybrid makes no (or very little) gain in actual gas economy.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Alan
>
>
> That's okay - it is a common error. The objective of hybrids is to correct a
> huge design compromise we have been forced into for a century: the use of
> the same power source for low speeds, acceleration and high speeds. Whenever
> auto makers increase engine power in cars (as they did in the '70s and are
> currently doing) the flub becomes even more glaring - we have 300 hp engines
> pulling 3000 lb cars around. Not a great concept.
>
> Hybridization effectively separates engine power from acceleration
> performance and frees the engine from stupid things like low speed operation

<snipped>

I don't disagree with you. However, a more modest 4 banger Accord would
very easilly achieve acceptable performance in a hybrid with better
mileage numbers.

SoCalMike wrote:

> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> Forgive me for believing that the objective of hybrids is to save
>> energy. The Hybrid makes no (or very little) gain in actual gas economy.
>
> mebbe a stripped down 4-door accord with a 4 cylinder engine is in the
> works?

I would have hoped they would begin there ... I would bet it would
become a fondly regarded classic.

Cheers,
Alan.

"Alan Browne" > wrote in message
...
> I don't disagree with you. However, a more modest 4 banger Accord would
> very easilly achieve acceptable performance in a hybrid with better
> mileage numbers.

I think so, too. Mating a small electric system to a V6 is not really part
of the path forward in hybridization. In fact, I think it's silly. But as
long as it sells, I suppose it is a success.

Mike

On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 21:31:15 -0700, "Michael Pardee"
> wrote:

>"Alan Browne" > wrote in message
.. .
>> I don't disagree with you. However, a more modest 4 banger Accord would
>> very easilly achieve acceptable performance in a hybrid with better
>> mileage numbers.
>
>I think so, too. Mating a small electric system to a V6 is not really part
>of the path forward in hybridization. In fact, I think it's silly. But as
>long as it sells, I suppose it is a success.
>
>Mike

I really wonder how much better a 4 would be IF one drives the V6
conservatively. With the ability to switch to three cylinders and
shut down at idle, I bet that you would get very close to the same mpg
if you drive both cars gently. OTOH, if you can't control your right
foot, the V6 will cost more at the pump. No free lunch.

I am glad that Honda is experimenting with performance hybrids. I
kind of wish they would put it on the Civic Si/RSX-S class of cars. I
think that would be a better application.

"Gordon McGrew" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 21:31:15 -0700, "Michael Pardee"
> > wrote:
>
>>"Alan Browne" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> I don't disagree with you. However, a more modest 4 banger Accord would
>>> very easilly achieve acceptable performance in a hybrid with better
>>> mileage numbers.
>>
>>I think so, too. Mating a small electric system to a V6 is not really part
>>of the path forward in hybridization. In fact, I think it's silly. But as
>>long as it sells, I suppose it is a success.
>>
>>Mike
>
> I really wonder how much better a 4 would be IF one drives the V6
> conservatively. With the ability to switch to three cylinders and
> shut down at idle, I bet that you would get very close to the same mpg
> if you drive both cars gently. OTOH, if you can't control your right
> foot, the V6 will cost more at the pump. No free lunch.
>
> I am glad that Honda is experimenting with performance hybrids. I
> kind of wish they would put it on the Civic Si/RSX-S class of cars. I
> think that would be a better application.
>
>
I go along with you. The cylinder shutdown is undoubtedly a plus, since much
of the penalty of a larger engine comes from too little manifold pressure
most of the time.

Hybrids really won't get respect until they provide better performance than
conventional power trains. The sooner the better, I say.

Mike

Kent Finnell wrote:

> "Alan Browne" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>High Tech Misfit wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Alan Browne wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>How, exactly, is the V6 Honda Accord Hybrid misguided?
>>>>
>>>>Forgive me for believing that the objective of hybrids is to save energy.
>>>>The Hybrid makes no (or very little) gain in actual gas economy.
>>>
>>>
>>>The only logical reason to buy a hybrid is reduced emissions. It is for
>>>the environmentalists.
>>
>>And since the Honda Accord Hybrid gets poor gas mileage, it fails at
>>reduced emissions.
>
>
> Poor gas mileage? 38 mpg is poor gas mileage? And if it fails at reduced
> emissions, how does it meet muster to be on sale in California?

Yes it's poor mileage. A 4 cyl. solution would do even better. That's
the point of hybrid: reduce consumption. Not make minor muscle cars.


>
>
>>I don't agree that fuel economy is for "environmentalists". Oil is a
>>dwindling source that when used pollutes the air. Everyone should try to
>>use less. First step, is get the right sized car for your needs.
>
>
> And if your needs exceed a Civic LX 4 door?

Hybrid can be scaled up as much as needed for the need. There is no
need for a hybrid passenger sedan to have more than a 4 cyl. engine.
The electric motors will provide the boost for the acceleration and cyl
is more than enough for cruise.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...121600098.html
refers



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Kent Finnell wrote:

> "Alan Browne" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Michael Pardee wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Alan Browne" > wrote in message
. ..
>>>
>>>
>>>>Kent Finnell wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Alan Browne" > wrote in message
t...
>>>>>
>>>>>How, exactly, is the V6 Honda Accord Hybrid misguided?
>>>>
>>>>Forgive me for believing that the objective of hybrids is to save energy.
>>>>The Hybrid makes no (or very little) gain in actual gas economy.
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>Alan
>>>
>>>
>>>That's okay - it is a common error. The objective of hybrids is to
>>>correct a huge design compromise we have been forced into for a century:
>>>the use of the same power source for low speeds, acceleration and high
>>>speeds. Whenever auto makers increase engine power in cars (as they did
>>>in the '70s and are currently doing) the flub becomes even more glaring -
>>>we have 300 hp engines pulling 3000 lb cars around. Not a great concept.
>>>
>>>Hybridization effectively separates engine power from acceleration
>>>performance and frees the engine from stupid things like low speed
>>>operation
>>
>><snipped>
>>
>>I don't disagree with you. However, a more modest 4 banger Accord would
>>very easilly achieve acceptable performance in a hybrid with better
>>mileage numbers.
>
>
> Hence the 4 cylinder Civic Hybrid ... sheesh, I'll bet you're going to carp
> about that too. 49/51 mpg with performance on a par with the NA 1.8 4
> cylinder.

A Civic is too small for a lot of people, including me. An Accord is
"just right" (for me and many people) and 4 cyl/manual is fine for me
now, so why would I need a 6 cyl. hybrid?

The civic could have been 3 cyl or smaller displacement. The idea is to
get accleration from the electric+gas side and cruise+recharge from the
gasoline side. But, people these days seem to be overly concerned with
strong acceleration. It's thrilling, but unneeded.

>
> Honda just didn't slap the 3.0 liter V6 into the nearest Accord and throw in
> the electric motor for grins and giggles. It is a system, a system that
> includes the shut down of 3 of the cylinders under the certain conditions,
> effectively becoming a 3 cylinder. The Civic has a 1.3 liter 4. Hummm, 1.5
> 3 cylinder, 1.3 4 cylinder.

And they could have achieved better mileage with a 4 banger. What they
wanted to achieve was something with a hybrid label and Jr. Muscle car
acceleration.

I have a 4 cyl. accord (manual). It drives very fast and has good but
not great acceleration. So why would you need a 6 cyl. in a hybrid.
You don't.

3 cyl shut down is good, however you are still dragging around a heavier
engine.


>
> The Accord is a larger, heavier car that some people need. Of course you
> might want to opt for a Yugo.

Irrelvant. For a familly of 3, an Accord is a sensible solution. But
it does not need a 6 cyl. engine.

>
> Neither of the 4 - 6 passenger Hondas is a failure. Different specs for
> different markets, yes but not failures. At least neither of them has had a
> massive recall because the gas engines shut down at speed like the Toyota
> hybrid. How many were there ... 75,000 or so?

Irrelevant.
>
> Then there's always that other line of Hondas ... motorcycles.

Irrelvant.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.