Bump: updated with comparison chart

I just can't figure out why Honda stopped making the Insight in the first place. Now they are playing catch up. I thought I heard somewhere that Toyota may keep around the 2009 version of the Prius (Prius v1 and Prius v2 ?) with a lower price to compete with the Insight.

I'll at least have to see the Insight. I'm curious about the dealer sales pitch. When comparing the Civic hybrid to the Prius, one of the big differences, to Honda anyway, was that the Civic was more "normal", especially to start up.

interesting that the new insight has exactly the same engine (1.3 liter 8-valve) that my 1984 civic had. except the civic had slightly better overall gas mileage. i suppose the hybrid technology is offsetting the extra weight and accessories - power steering, door locks, airbags, etc. - that the civic didn't have.

I went to the bank today to deposit my stupid paper check, and they had a flyer advertising an extra .50% off their normal rates when you financed a "green" car. This is US Bank, and she told me they were the only bank doing this. Who knows.

I like both the Prius and Insight, but am too poor now to think about buying either. Going to buy an older Accord or Civic soon though, gas mileage should be better than my van.

The talk about calculus in another thread led me to remember that the only useful application I had for calculus was I made a chart for MPG and the chart showed an inflection point around 24 - 25 MPG. It's a good thing I kept that chart because I could never recreate it, but the conclusion I arrived at was that after 25 MPG there is a point of diminishing returns that flattens out around 35 MPG.

The best way to picture this is to recall the car talk puzzler where the husband got his truck tuned up to get 11 MPG rather than 10 and the wife traded her 25 mpg compact for a 50 MPG prius. It turned out he was the one who saved more gas.

OTOH, the hybrid puts out a lot less pollution so there is that justification.

and looks cheap and light, which it is, and Prius looks and feels solid and anything but cheap. That is RELATIVE to EACH OTHER. But both are swell cars.

Come on. These aren't cars. I had a 1980 Dodge Colt hatchback that got 50 mpg. These kludges with twice the complexity of a standard car cost so much to make, design and sell that they will never be as efficient economically as a base-model 1972 American Motors Gremlin. Interesting that the calculations never take into account the massive subsidies from government that make these cars saleable. Other drivers are paying for the "green" savings.

I've been to Europe 4 times in the last five years. I've never seen one hybrid over there. Too expensive, too stupid.

I had a 1980 Dodge Colt hatchback that got 50 mpg.

Are you sure? Maybe highway miles at a constant 45 MPH? And good luck selling a 1980 Dodge Colt to modern Americans.

Just got back from a trip out to WestKnox. Took the tank (Ford Freestyle, curb weight 4,112 lbs.) because we were planning on hauling some stuff back.

When we got off PP/I-140 at Kinston Pike, the MPG meter was 31.2. After some stop and go traffic and a couple of other stops, we came back via Kingston Pike and Alcoa Highway. MPG for the round trip was 27.4.

So it is possible to make big heavy, luxury tanks get decent MPG. Unfortunately, Ford screwed up the Freestyle when they renamed it the Taurus X (bigger motor, dropped the CVT transmission among other things) and ruined the MPG.

P.S. the yellow light at Morrell Rd. and Kingston Pike at West Town was about 3.5 seconds judging from my "Mississippi one, Mississippi two" timing. We pulled over and watched it again just to be sure. Somebody should go over there with a video camera. Next time I'm out that way I will be sure to do that.

weight is also purveyed as a safety feature.

Remember "road hugging weight"? Believe that was Ford's amazing boast about the (lame engineering of their) Pinto, IIRC.

The new Prius has no belts. All pumps are electric, even the water pump.

That's efficiency.

...just checked the original sales info on my '84 civic and overall gas mileage was listed as 42 mpg in a range (for similarly sized vehicles) of from 9 mpg to 50 mpg. so yes, there were vehicles in the 80s that averaged up to 50 mpg.

But that wasn't obtained MPG. That was the EPA's bogus system meant for comparison purposes. They've retooled the dyno test numerous times since then. My 1981 Fiat X1/9 had 75hp and weighed about 2400 lbs. It averaged about 26 MPG in overall driving, maybe 35 just highway. But it was fuel injected and ran clean. Aced the California smog tests. The Civic CVCCs were also clean in the day, and probably got better mileage through newer engineering and less weight, about 1800 lbs IIRC.

Today my BMW 5-series wagon weighs 3600 lbs and I average north of 28 MPG. Besides skb, I know several other people with large Fords who get surprising gas mileage. Right after I got my beemer, I was bragging about its mileage to relatives who were driving a '93 Lincoln Town Car (4.6l OHC V8, I think). We were going to dinner and I was sitting in front. So I asked what they were getting and punched up their trip computer. Their average was something like 25MPG. That was probably mostly highway, but that car is heavy and huge. The big GM hybrids are still obscene, but they do get the city mileage up above 20.

The new Ford Fusion is awesome for someone who wants something more traditional. 191hp, 41 MPG city, up to 47MPH on electric only, starts at $27k. Where is the wagon version??