Major Problem With Hybrid Cars Discovered

[gumby6371]

Forget all the deadly/noxious chemicals used to produce them etc....

No engine sound and no exhaust output means you walk straight passed them when they're about to pull out of a parking space!!!!
Luckily for me it hit the Tesco trolley and not my legs but I still sh*t myself

The driver was none to pleased but I couldn't see the reversing light as it was daylight and I was approaching from the side with cars either side of it. I'm sure he wanted to say 'didn't you hear me' which of course I didn't.

No damage done to me or the car so no harm done but still.....

[scotty73]

As the bikers would say "loud pipes save lives"

Glad to hear your ok.

[steve_earwig]

Glad you're ok too.

It sounds to me like it was the guy's fault not looking where he was going. What if it was a normal car and you were listening to an mp3? Or deaf even?

I know it's not a hybrid but the Tesla is all electric and the first one was written off because someone didn't hear it...

[Welly]

I've seen Toyoyo Smugmobiles creep away in car parks and thought "oh sh*t that cars rolling away" only to then see the smug driver operating the 'controls'

I still don't understand why people buy them - they cost a fortune and you'll never recoup the fuel savings. If you really don't like cars then don't have one and if it's fuel economy you're after then buy a Polo Bluemotion or something

[highlander]

They're as green as Battersea Power Station was in its heyday

- The batteries are very toxic to produce and take a lot of energy to manufacture - and the factories aren't powered by wind turbines or wave generators

- Components are manufactured in plants around the world and are shipped to one or two final assembly plants (meaning tonnes of bunker fuel are used shipping the parts to the factory, and then more tonnes are used exporting the cars to their destination countries)

- The batteries are very heavy, making the combustion engine harder to drag all that extra weight around (increased engine wear and fuel burn)

- Range on batteries and time-to-charge means that the combustion engine is running more often than it's not

- Battery life-cycle for individual cells can be as little as a few thousand charge/discharge cycles before they either crap out entirely, or their ability to hold a charge is degraded - and when was the last time you replaced a fuel tank because you couldn't fill it up any more? And even if you did, did that fuel tank cost thousands of pounds?

Bloody stupid things, hybrids. And all-electric cars. They're not practical with today's battery technology.

They also mostly look like sh*t (the Tesla Roadster excluded, but only because it's largely a Lotus Elise), which doesn't help. Stupid bloody Renault Twizy, horrible Peugeot iOn, fugly Nissan Leaf, etc... wouldn't be caught dead driving any of those.

Hydrogen fuel cell cars (like Honda's FCX Clarity) are the way forward.

Hydrogen fuel is produced by cracking water (passing a high voltage through it to split the bond between oxygen and hydrogen) and capturing the hydrogen. You could do this at existing nuclear or hydroelectic power stations. The fuel is compressed and can be pumped from forecourts directly into a tank in the car in much the same way (and same amount of time) as you do with petrol/diesel/LPG.

The car doesn't have built-in batteries - it just has an electric motor (or four - one per wheel, if you like) which is fed electricity from the hydrogen fuel cell. The fuel cell turns hydrogen fuel into electrical energy and, best of all, the only waste product is water.

Honda say you can get a few hundred miles out of a single tank of hydrogen, and since filling up takes just a few minutes (rather than 16 hours for a plug-in battery-powered car), this makes the fuel cell car truly practical. You even drive it like a normal car; it has comparable power output to a normal 4-cylinder engine (about 120 HP), so it's not a slouch.

The ONLY thing missing right now is infrastructure. The manufacture of hydrogen fuel (currently only done on small-scale), distribution of the fuel to forecourts around the world, and the ability of the forecourts to store and dispense the fuel. Once that particular nut is cracked, hydrogen-powered cars can be a success.

[Welly]

Highlander for President

[highlander]

Meh, I'm happy with petrol, to be honest. Just wish the fuckers didn't tax it so heavily so I could run a dirty great V8

If the planet really does need saving, then hydrogen-powered cars are a good place to start.

And anyone who bought a Prius "to do their bit" needs shot, if not for the sheer smugness of them, then only because the damned things look sh*t too.

[Busman]

I've seen Toyoyo Smugmobiles creep away in car parks and thought "oh sh*t that cars rolling away" only to then see the smug driver operating the 'controls'

I still don't understand why people buy them - they cost a fortune and you'll never recoup the fuel savings. If you really don't like cars then don't have one and if it's fuel economy you're after then buy a Polo Bluemotion or something

This has always been exactly my argument, from an enviromental point of view, they're pointless. As Welly says, if you're after fuel ecomimy, whats wrong with these zero taxed modern diesels?

[highlander]

if you're after fuel ecomimy, whats wrong with these zero taxed modern diesels?

Given how much more expensive they are than petrols (in certain cases), and how the particulate filters mean they are unsuited for use as city cars (no time to warm up on short journeys, so the filters just get clogged), I'd much rather have a simple petrol engine.

You get decent mileage out of these Ford Ecoboost petrol engines, but I'm not fond of the idea of trying to force a small engine to produce a lot of power.