A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Honda
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Fit hybrid ?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 12th 06, 12:40 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.honda
anyone
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Fit hybrid ?

When might there be a Fit hybrid, I'm starting to druel ...
--
Rob Fruth - Houston, Tx
http://www.rfruth.net


1981 Raleigh for errands & fun ____ __o
1997 Trek 2300 for real fun ! ____ _ \ | _)
2000 Civic hatchback (_)/ (_)
Ads
  #2  
Old August 12th 06, 01:25 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.honda
Bucky[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Fit hybrid ?

anyone wrote:
> When might there be a Fit hybrid, I'm starting to druel ...


You can stop your drooling. Even though there's plenty of rumors about
a Fit hybrid, consider these numbers: the EPA gas mileage for the Fit
is only 31/38 city/hwy. That's worse than the Civic, which is 30/40.
Also, the rumors also say that if Honda implements hybrid for Fit, it
will be a scaled down hybridization, meaning smaller batteries than
other hybrids. So I can't see a hybrid Fit getting better than 40-45
mpg, which is not impressive at all.

BTW, can anyone explain how the Fit gets no better mileage than the
Civic? I can't.

Fit: 2514 lbs, 1.5L, 109HP, 5-speed auto
Civic: 2751 lbs, 1.8L, 140HP, 5-speed auto

  #3  
Old August 12th 06, 01:32 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.honda
anyone
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Fit hybrid ?

Bucky wrote:
> anyone wrote:
>> When might there be a Fit hybrid, I'm starting to druel ...

>
> You can stop your drooling. Even though there's plenty of rumors about
> a Fit hybrid, consider these numbers: the EPA gas mileage for the Fit
> is only 31/38 city/hwy. That's worse than the Civic, which is 30/40.


- snip -

Possibly a Fit hybrid would run cleaner than a Civic ...


--
Rob Fruth - Houston, Tx
http://www.rfruth.net


1981 Raleigh for errands & fun ____ __o
1997 Trek 2300 for real fun ! ____ _ \ | _)
2000 Civic hatchback (_)/ (_)
  #4  
Old August 12th 06, 01:54 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.honda
TeGGeR®
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 465
Default Fit hybrid ?

"Bucky" > wrote in
ps.com:


>
> BTW, can anyone explain how the Fit gets no better mileage than the
> Civic? I can't.
>
> Fit: 2514 lbs, 1.5L, 109HP, 5-speed auto
> Civic: 2751 lbs, 1.8L, 140HP, 5-speed auto
>



Some simple arithmetic (from your numbers):

Civic: 0.051 hp/lb
Fit: 0.043 hp/lb

Civic: 1.27 hp/cu in
Fit: 1.18 hp/cu in

Simply put, the Fit's engine is having to work a bit harder than the one in
the Civic. A smaller engine is not necessarily more economical.


--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
  #5  
Old August 12th 06, 02:13 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.honda
anyone
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Fit hybrid ?

TeGGeR wrote:
> "Bucky" > wrote in
> ps.com:
>
>
>> BTW, can anyone explain how the Fit gets no better mileage than the
>> Civic? I can't.
>>
>> Fit: 2514 lbs, 1.5L, 109HP, 5-speed auto
>> Civic: 2751 lbs, 1.8L, 140HP, 5-speed auto
>>

>
>
> Some simple arithmetic (from your numbers):
>
> Civic: 0.051 hp/lb
> Fit: 0.043 hp/lb
>
> Civic: 1.27 hp/cu in
> Fit: 1.18 hp/cu in
>
> Simply put, the Fit's engine is having to work a bit harder than the one in
> the Civic. A smaller engine is not necessarily more economical.
>
>


SO a Fit hybrid must be in the works (more power/creature comfort, lower
emissions, same cost) as a gas only Fit ?

--
Rob Fruth - Houston, Tx
http://www.rfruth.net


1981 Raleigh for errands & fun ____ __o
1997 Trek 2300 for real fun ! ____ _ \ | _)
2000 Civic hatchback (_)/ (_)
  #6  
Old August 12th 06, 03:13 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.honda
TeGGeR®
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 465
Default Fit hybrid ?

anyone > wrote in
t:

> TeGGeR wrote:
>> "Bucky" > wrote in
>> ps.com:
>>
>>
>>> BTW, can anyone explain how the Fit gets no better mileage than the
>>> Civic? I can't.
>>>
>>> Fit: 2514 lbs, 1.5L, 109HP, 5-speed auto
>>> Civic: 2751 lbs, 1.8L, 140HP, 5-speed auto
>>>

>>
>>
>> Some simple arithmetic (from your numbers):
>>
>> Civic: 0.051 hp/lb
>> Fit: 0.043 hp/lb
>>
>> Civic: 1.27 hp/cu in
>> Fit: 1.18 hp/cu in
>>
>> Simply put, the Fit's engine is having to work a bit harder than the
>> one in the Civic. A smaller engine is not necessarily more
>> economical.
>>
>>

>
> SO a Fit hybrid must be in the works (more power/creature comfort,
> lower emissions, same cost) as a gas only Fit ?
>



Maybe to all but "same cost". Hybrids are by definition more expensive than
IC-only, and will remain so for evermore. Hybrids are an evolutionary dead-
end.

Personally, I think the next wave is electric cars (think 2006 Tesla, not
1907 Electromobile). The major stumbling block to electric cars is energy
storage. Eventually there will be a breakthrough-type development in
battery technology, and when that happens, the ICE will be dead.

The higher oil costs go, the more investment capital will desert oil and
migrate to alternative technology, such as electrical energy storage. This
is already happening, and energy storage is one of the beneficiaries. The
free market at work. Just wait.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
  #7  
Old August 12th 06, 09:01 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.honda
Bucky[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Fit hybrid ?

TeGGeR® wrote:
> Simply put, the Fit's engine is having to work a bit harder than the one in
> the Civic. A smaller engine is not necessarily more economical.


True, but practically speaking, it's almost always the case that the
smaller the engine displacement, the better the gas mileage. Your
calculations were based on max HP (around 5000-6000 rpm), which I'm not
sure even comes even to play in the EPA tests.

  #8  
Old August 12th 06, 09:12 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.honda
Bucky[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Fit hybrid ?

TeGGeR® wrote:
> Personally, I think the next wave is electric cars (think 2006 Tesla, not
> 1907 Electromobile).


They already had an electric car wave back in the 90s (i.e. GM's EV1).
I have personally driven the EV1, and it was a sweet car. An
all-electric was an unbelievable experience. So quiet and smooth, 0-60
in 7.4s, top speed of over 100 mph (although governed to ~80mph),
almost no maintenance required except for brakes, tires, and batteries.
The most impressive thing was the acceleration. Even when you are
cruising and floor the pedal, you get an *immediate* response that is
quicker than any sports car out there, because there is zero lag with
an all-electric.

The 120 mile range is more than adequate for normal usage. But I think
what killed it was the cost of the technology at that time. Maybe the
next wave will succeed after people realize that hybrids are a marginal
improvement over gas, while doubling the complexity.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/07/25/paul.commentary/

  #9  
Old August 13th 06, 12:28 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.honda
TeGGeR®
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 465
Default Fit hybrid ?

"Bucky" > wrote in
oups.com:

> TeGGeR® wrote:
>> Personally, I think the next wave is electric cars (think 2006 Tesla,
>> not 1907 Electromobile).

>
> They already had an electric car wave back in the 90s (i.e. GM's EV1).
> I have personally driven the EV1, and it was a sweet car. An
> all-electric was an unbelievable experience. So quiet and smooth, 0-60
> in 7.4s, top speed of over 100 mph (although governed to ~80mph),
> almost no maintenance required except for brakes, tires, and
> batteries.




Ah, the batteries: a garrison of ordinary 12V lead-acid assemblies. They
were the EV-1's Achilles heel.

The state of California's legislative pinheads really outdid themselves
that time, forcing automakers to produce the uproduceable.

And that's the very point here. These new electric cars (such as the Tesla)
are being designed, funded and produced without any sort of governmental
stupidity...er...involvement. Right now they're terribly expensive, but so
were IC cars around 1900. Their only real obstacle is batttery capacity and
delivery, and you can expect that to be solved within the next ten years
provided oil prices stay high and the government butts out. Then kiss the
gasoline engine goodbye.



> The most impressive thing was the acceleration. Even when
> you are cruising and floor the pedal, you get an *immediate* response
> that is quicker than any sports car out there, because there is zero
> lag with an all-electric.




Which probably explains the near-universal reported 0-60 times of around 4
sec for most of the new generation of electric cars.



>
> The 120 mile range is more than adequate for normal usage.




Sorry but 120 miles is not impressive to the motoring public.

Tesla gets 250 miles. Now *that's* practical. 250 miles will get you
somewhere meaningful, and back.



> But I think
> what killed it was the cost of the technology at that time.




And the clunkiness.



> Maybe the
> next wave will succeed after people realize that hybrids are a
> marginal improvement over gas, while doubling the complexity.



The next wave will succeed so long as the government and the environuts
stay out of it. Get them involved and the promise will implode.

Personally, I think the electric car is the next big thing.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
  #10  
Old August 13th 06, 12:45 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.honda
Skippy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Fit hybrid ?


"Bucky" > wrote in message
ps.com...
> anyone wrote:
>> When might there be a Fit hybrid, I'm starting to druel ...

>
> You can stop your drooling. Even though there's plenty of rumors about
> a Fit hybrid, consider these numbers: the EPA gas mileage for the Fit
> is only 31/38 city/hwy. That's worse than the Civic, which is 30/40.
> Also, the rumors also say that if Honda implements hybrid for Fit, it
> will be a scaled down hybridization, meaning smaller batteries than
> other hybrids. So I can't see a hybrid Fit getting better than 40-45
> mpg, which is not impressive at all.
>
> BTW, can anyone explain how the Fit gets no better mileage than the
> Civic? I can't.
>
> Fit: 2514 lbs, 1.5L, 109HP, 5-speed auto
> Civic: 2751 lbs, 1.8L, 140HP, 5-speed auto
>


My Jazz/Fit (1.4DSI Sport) 50MPG right now.

Skippy
E&OE


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Honda to sell sub $12,000 hybrid in 07 or 08 laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE Driving 25 February 27th 06 03:25 AM
GM to build and sell hybrid cars in Canada ... cheaper! Chris Technology 0 February 26th 06 12:52 PM
Hybrid cars Gordon McGrew Technology 0 February 4th 06 05:29 PM
Dear Valued Hybrid Customer... fclaugus Driving 26 December 2nd 05 11:39 PM
bio-diesel hybrid future Don Stauffer Technology 19 August 31st 05 12:58 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.