Ferrari or Prius? Mileage comparison:

......... ahh yes.......... ebay scammer scum at their best......... Thats almost like the "turbo" I've seen out there which is a marine bilge blower. (these folks should be tied up and drug underneath the Louisiana waters for a good toxic dose)

 

Yeah, Dave, but you don't get a "Friends of OPEC" membership card and decoder ring with a focking Prius.
And that fan thing is about as useful as a fart-can. Mebbe someone can chop it onto a fart-can for the best of both worlds.

 

Though it's very economival with the fuel but what an ugly thing that Prius is!

 

Clever little cars ... I'd buy one tomorrow to go to work and back, but pretty expensive.

It is great to see technology moving forward and this is a fairly practical concept.

Will agree that the notch back is fug ugly ... but I've only seen one and thus assume that the owner suffered serious style issues.
Pete

 

I see them everywhere here in boise. Definetly ugly. I prefer the two seater honda insight-more fun to drive better looking (tear drop styling) and mileage up to 100mpg (average around 66-70)

 

I wouldnt be so fast to jump on those high mileage claims. I have been hearing of complaints, and that some of the cars, (Honda, Toyota) are barely getting close to EPA estimates. Also, do you really want a car with 25 car batteries parked in your driveway, or worse, to get smacked with them? I recall someone needed a new set of batteries and they cost as much as a beater 308. I would bet a little Geo Metro could be tweeked on to get phenomenal mileage if someone wanted to mess with it. Its just not much of a car though.

 

Ferrari had quoted the 512TR as having 30.1mpg at 55mph
* as per Dean Batchelor in his " Illustrated Ferrari Buyer's Guide, 4th ed. "

 

that car would look cute under my v10 4x4 excursion.

 

Agreed, I hear lots of criticisms of hybrid technology not being all that it's cracked up to be, but these people neglect to realize that it is still quite new. The internal combustion engine has improved somewhat over its hundred+ years of development, so perhaps hybrids can do the same.

 

My 330 does pretty well on milage, I don't think its any worse than my M3. For highway driving ferraris are relatively efficient (high output per displacement + good CD). That said, around town nothing beats a hybrid.

As for the 'vortex generator' its BS. Engine designers conlrol intake flow and in cylinder tumble and swirl in the design process. If automakers could increase efficiency with a 50 cent stator, I'm sure they would.

Art S.

 

How do these guys retain such high feedback ratings when they're selling absolute BS?

 

Assuming that the feedback is legit, the ebay guys are selling a product. It is shipped to the buyer new in a box as described so they get good feedback. This doesn't mean that the product's claims are real.

Art S.

 

Another thing the tree huggers should consider with hybrid cars. Right now every single engine propelled car on the planet has one lead acid battery that lasts roughly 2 years. So multiply all the cars on the planet by 1/2, and you have quite a pile of car batteries. Now multiply that by a factor of about 2 dozen, and you will have quite a toxic mess. Also, many of these newer batteries contain lithium, and other elements that will make disposal quite a challenge. Seems we would be father ahead building more nukes and producing hydrogen to burn in our plain old piston engines. basically we would achieve zero emissions that way. Or pretty close, if we can just find a place to bury or waste, or a planet or moon or something At any rate, there are a few other things to consider besides "just" fuel economy.

And think of this. My dad is almost 84 yo. He recalls back in the early 30's gas being $.19-$.24 cents per gallon. But, many people, my grandfather among them, would work a 12 hour day for $1.00. Yet he still owned a car and drove it. And a good paying job in the city might have paid $60 - $1.00 per hour. So really, we been so well off for so long, in comparison, we just need to recall how bad things could be. Maybe an upside to all of this will be poorer people parking thier car, and we will have wide open roads?

 

I own a Prius and a Ferrari. (Does that make me bi-polar?)

Have had the Prius for just over one year and 20k miles. Averaged exactly 50 mpg, which I consider quite acceptable. The EPA never claimed their rating system would relate to real life; only that the rating system allows you to compare cars on a standard laboratory test basis. I can get >70 mpg if driving at a constant speed less than 40 mph with no need for acceleration. Of course, such conditions in real life are almost impossible to find.

Toyota warranties the large nickel metal hydride battery for 150k miles and will take the old ones back for recycle.

The car is as large on the interior as a Camry and is very quiet. Handling is adequate, power is adequate. Although that doesn't mean adequate in the Ferrari sense.

 

My colleague drove me around in his a few months ago. I was impressed. It is a real car. Enough room for a tall Norwegian and a large Dutchman. Not my cup of tea, but enough car for the great majority of commuting/grocery getting/ running about urban and suburban drivers.

 

up to 100 is not a real world number. http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=39&article_id=3237

Dissociative Identity Disorder might be more accurate
http://www.sidran.org/didbr.html

 

We saw a bunch of Priuses running around Tokyo last week and I have to admit, for what it was designed for, it's a pretty good looking $hitbox.

 

A local dealer of Prius here is a very good friend of mine and he always reiterates that it really does save fuel at certain crusing speed and the fuel consumption feedbacks that he gets from his customers are excellent.
But it does not help the fact that it's pretty ugly!

 

.. but is any customer going to admit that they get suckered into the Hybrid myth? I think not!

Dave posted a link to what is generally called "The Tornado".. It serves no real purpose, and is generally the butt of jokes in any automotive circle. I can't believe you guys took the bait.

C.

 

CMY,

The Hybrid concept is real (may not yet be worth the purchase price, but that's a different argument). The efficiency comes in three ways:

1. recapturing some of the momentum lost during braking - electric motor acts as a generator to assist in braking thereby charging the battery.

2. reduction in idle - once the gas engine has warmed up, the idle is eiminated and the engine stops when you come to a halt.

3. reduction in engine size for a given performance level - although our cars are rated at XXX horsepower, we usually only use X hp. The hybrid has an engine that can only produce XX horsepower but the electric motor can assist it, making up the extra X hp when needed (hard accelleration).

These gains are most effective in low speed stop and go traffic, which is why the gains are more significan in town than on the highway.

With all of this being said, the added efficiency of the hybrid does not offset the extra costs.

Regards,

Art S.

PS. regarding the 'tornado', as far as I can tell, none of us took the bait.

 

I think many of us who own, or lust for a Ferrari, are well educated people. As such, we probably all realise we should consider our environment to some extent, so that while we want a go fast fun car, we also dont want to be super wasteful the rest of the time. I for one cant stand filling up my Expedition just to drive around getting 12 mpg with gas at $3 a gallon. Yet I wouldnt hesitate to fill up the 308 and go rip around in it.

I am also thinking of something more fuel efficient, but I am not impressed with this hybrid technology. While people want to use the argument for diesel train locomotives, or diesel electric submarines, those are not fair arguments. There are logical reasons for those two to be propelled that way, and why a car doesnt need to. The train uses that power system because it needs to get millions of tons of rail cars moving, and the engine produces its greatest power and efficiency at full throttle and full rpm. The only way it could do that efficiently is through a generator. And a diesel sub engine cant run underwater, so it runs on batteries.

But even back in 8th grade, we leaned that anytime we change energy from one form to another, we lose efficiency. Steam engines are less efficient that a gas engine for that same reason. You burn coal, to boil water, to make steam to drive a piston to propel a wheel. In a gas engine, its one step. Now if you take a gas engine, and drive a generator, only to convert it back to mechanical force, you have lost efficiency.

If they would take the same car, an Insight, or a Prius, and get rid of the batteries and put in a smaller more efficient engine, you would see far better fuel economy at the same speeds. I have personally seen as high as 75 mpg in a Renault R5, rolling along at speeds around 70, being really light on the throttle. I used to get as high as 45 mpg with my MGB-GT, and I got as high as 65 MPG with a rabbit diesel. But it takes concentration to drive that way. Using the same concentration I can muster 22 mpg with my Jeep Cherokee at a 60 mph average. I think if someone built a fairly aerodynamic car, with an efficient powertrain and a fuel efficient engine, we could easily have cars that got 100 mpg if driven correctly. But the truth is, with all the EPA rules currently in effect, I dont think engines are able to be as efficient as they were 25 years ago. Hydrogen fuel would change that drastically.

 

Chuckles arise when people read the bumper sticker on my silver 2005 Prius: MY OTHER CAR IS A FERRARI. You can almost hear them say, "Right!"

 

Let's start a club. I also own a Prius and a Ferrari. The Prius doesn't get as good mileage as is advertised and there are lots of things for a gear head to criticize. But, we took it on a trip to the mountains with 3 people and a dog and our luggage and got 53mpg so I'm happy with it for what it is.

 

LOL!!!

Pete