From: Mike Hunter on
Next time do a trade through. By not doing a trade through, when you sell
your old clunker, you are paying higher taxes than needed, dummy


"DH" <dh(a)> wrote in message
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2(a)> wrote in message
> news:seKdne_fGqw6wxPbnZ2dnUVZ_r6vnZ2d(a)
>> Are you really that slow witted? Of course the dealership can screw you.
>> How do you think you could screw the dealership?
> If I want a new car, then the dealership will get the opportunity to make
> a profit on the sale. But, since I own highly desireable cars that resell
> well, I'll sell them privately and avoid getting taken on the trade.

From: Jeff on
Mike Hunter wrote:
> In general hybrid use a small engine to move the vehicle when not much
> torques is required and to generate electricity when required. The electric
> motor is used when torque is required to get the vehicle going and to keep
> it going on a grade.
> We hear of the great mileage while driving at slower speeds in a hybrid but
> one can not continue to do so for long before the engine will need to run to
> recharge the batteries,
> provide heat and AC
> Seems to me we should be looking to improve the newer technology, that
> permits several of the cylinders to be disengaged when torque is not
> required. That is a better solution to lowering ones average fuel
> consumption since the majority is mileage is accumulated
> where torque is not required.

I have to disagree with you on this one.

To me, it seems that no running an engine at its most efficient speeds,
as the hybrids do, and storing energy as electricity and using that in
such a way the efficiency is maximized will make a better combination
than cutting off cylinders.

Even buses in NYC use hybrid technology rather than disengaging
cylinders (or in addition to it). And the Swedes are working on hybrid
garbage trucks.

Plus, but using a hybrid design, you can have a smaller and lighter
engine than with an engine that has a variable number of cylinders. Of
course, the technologies are not mutually incompatible.

> Several manufacturers are offing that technology and obtaining well over 30
> mpg, with V8 engines, on the highway and still offering the larger, safer,
> more powerful vehicles that the buyers prefer.

What manufacturer offers a V8 that gets well over 30 mpg?

OK, some V8 get close to 30 mpg highway, but none get even 30 mpg
highway, at least in the 2007 or 2008 model years:

> Cylinder deactivation does
> not add much to the price of the vehicle as apposed to hybrids that cost
> much more to build and add to the wealth of batteries to be build and
> recycled.

It's a trade-off. Some people prefer a bigger car, some prefer one with
a smaller environmental footprint, which hybrids may or may not have (I
haven't seen a good accounting of the environmental costs of the
batteries and other technology).


> mike
> "Bill Putney" <bptn(a)> wrote in message
> news:5f59k4F35r4qqU1(a)
>> B A R R Y wrote:
>>> who wrote:
>>>> In article <VzZii.7981$7k7.3835(a)trnddc01>,
>>>> Jeff <kidsdoc2000(a)> wrote:
>>>>> There is no indication that the life of the batteries are a limiting
>>>>> factor to the life of the car. All indications are that the batteries
>>>>> do not wear out.
>>>> Dream on.
>>>> Currently rechargeable batteries start going down hill at about 3 years.
>>>> The fact that they are much weaker between 5 and the 8 yr guarantee
>>>> point would not be that noticeable as the Prius battery is very large.
>>>> A Prius might then be running as a mild hybrid, not going so far on
>>>> battery only.
>>> Which would cause the gas mileage to drop.
>>> My in-laws are still driving a first generation Prius, a 2002, with over
>>> 100k. The MPG is the same as it ever was.
>> Ha ha! But Toyota slipped up by uncluding in that article that it would
>> not even go a mile on battery only. That says that the battery is a small
>> factor in its overall economy. And in most driving situations,
>> regenerative braking probably barely (or doesn't quite) make up for the
>> extra weight of batteries and controls it is carrying around. (IOW - the
>> economy is from a small, optimized-for-efficiency IC engine.)
>> Bill Putney
>> (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address
>> with the letter 'x')
From: dh on
"Bill Putney" <bptn(a)> wrote in message
> Jeff wrote:
>> Cars can also have electrically powered water pumps, power steering
>> pumps, valves, and compressors for the air conditioners, although I don't
>> know if any do, yet.
> An honest question: All those things suck energy whether mechanically or
> electricaly powered (and the power has to ultimately come from the IC
> engine). For each one, is the electrical version inherently more
> efficient than a mechanically powered (belt or gear driven) one?

Efficiency questions aside, another advantage is in packaging. You no
longer have to place the power steering pump, a/c compressor, etc, where
they can be driven by a belt from the engine; you can put it anywhere it's

Also, the belts and pulleys weigh something. Removing them helps offset the
increased weight of the electric motors you'll need.

> Bill Putney
> (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address
> with the letter 'x')

Posted via a free Usenet account from

From: Jeff on
Mike Hunter wrote:
> One should know by now that our fried Jeff likes prefers others do his
> homework. ;)

Sorry, but if one makes a claim, it is up to the one making the claim to
support it, not me.

Expecting one to support his own claims is not the same as not doing my


> mike
> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000(a)> wrote in message
> news:CEfji.7467$fw2.4379(a)trnddc04...
>> Bill Putney wrote:
>>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>>> In article <5f5catF3bdrnjU1(a)>,
>>>> Bill Putney <bptn(a)> wrote:
>>>>> You know - I find it particularly and disgustingly dishonest for a
>>>>> person to ask me specifically why I don't give some authoritative
>>>>> information (in this case on NiMH battery life), and then when I do
>>>>> exactly that, that same individual says I (therefore) am a know-it-all
>>>>> and that his part in the discussion is essentially over.
>>>> I'm sorry, I wasn't paying attention: what authoritative information
>>>> did you give?
>>>> And what authoritative sources did you cite?
>>> More dishonest tactics. The jig is up.
>> Yeah, you've got that right.
>> You claimed that you cited authoritative sources, yet you can say what
>> they are.
>> Jeff
>>> Bill Putney
>>> (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
>>> address with the letter 'x')
From: Tomes on
"C. E. White" ...
> "DH" ...
>> I'll have to ask one of the Prius owners around here (Frostbite Falls,
>> Minnesota) if the car was comfortable in the winter.
> I saw one reference where they commented on the excellence of the
> heater. I don't think you need to worry.
> I wonder why they don't use one of the heat storage devices to keep the
> water warm so they don't have to run the IC engine just to warm the
> water back up -
> . Or they could use a separate gasoline powered heater for the same
> purpose - .

Prius owner since January 1 here. The heater does indeed use the engine
heat as the heat source, no electric augmentation. We had plenty of heat,
and the heat came on as quickly as it does in my Jeep, which is considered
to be rather fast and strong. It does lower the gas mileage

See, whatever it needs heat for, it gets it from the gas engine. There is
no other heat source. This is why the gas engine comes on upon startup -
to heat up the emissions system so it performs optimally, then it shuts
off and is used as needed (sometimes only to reheat that emissions system
stuff in the winter).

Now, regarding
> "why they don't use one of the heat storage devices to keep the water
> warm so they don't have to run the IC engine just to warm the water back
> up"
they actually do. The Prius uses a thermos to where it pumps a good
percentage of the engine coolant when the vehicle is turned off (keeps it
warm for when the car is restarted without much of a delay). That is what
the whirring sound is at that point, and why there is about a 5 second
delay upon turn-on before the engine turns on (it pumps the fluid back
into the engine system). Once the car is running, it does not pump it to
that thermos, as the engine must reengage instantly when needed.