I don't think that a hybrid version would bring much to the table. Needless complication and cost for the minor advantage of regenerative braking.

Hybrids can bring a lot more to the table than merely regenerative braking. We're reapidly moving the designs of hybrids toward the Lovins defined "hypercar" concept here: drive by wire for weight shedding and friction elimination; advanced composites for more lightweight and safety; very low drag; etc. If you put the top ten features of hyper car design in a list form and examine all the best mileage performers on the road or as prototypes, you'll see that they all are headed toward converging on integrating a majority of those ideas...hopefully soon.

Looks a bit like Bucky's Dymaxion doesn't it?

This is another example of how the US is behind in fuel efficiency technology. While here in the States people decry diesel as a polluter, the Europeans are making hyper-efficient cars like this. It's a fabulous car, I hope I can buy one someday.

"This is another example of how the US is behind in fuel efficiency technology."

And what is the price of gasoline in Germany?

GM just announced that they will be shutting down plants (based on specific models), and the most notable cause is the decrease in sales for large SUV's and large pick-up trucks due to the higher cost of gasoline in the US.

The US automakers have been behind in almost all aspects of automobile technology since the 1960's, so this is no surprise.

"...friction elimination; advanced composites for more lightweight and safety; very low drag..."

All of which can be equally applied to, non-hybrid vehicles with the same benefits.

This is just their move to show, "hey, we CAN make a car that is better, really". It is just for show. They don't want to take the heat that the americans are getting for not having an alternative energy agenda. They won't actually build this car. It's just like when Ford made that soy SUV, for the anniversary of Washington Carver's birthday or whatever. It was a totally soy plastic biodiesel car that they will never actually produce. The new concept car market is all just environmental PR.

Henry Ford actually got pretty far making composite materials out of soy, and for awhile I think some soy parts were actually in production, but then were dropped as new petroleum based products came down in price

Diesel technology is already extremely efficient, as they can shut off the engine when it is not in use- meaning no fuel burning at idle. Making this type of system hybrid actually wouldn't provide much advantage if any at all.
It is unfortunate that this is purely a concept car with no intention for production.

I think it's interesting that Henry Ford actually wasn't a fan of gasoline at all. He made alcohol-fueled cars! He thought gasoline was too dangerous.
The automobile fuel wars started with electric vs. steam power. Alcohol and then gasoline were introduced into the mix later. Now we're moving back toward electric and steam power (very slowly), while they are now being termed "alternative fuels." It's interesting to see things coming full circle.

"Diesel technology is already extremely efficient, as they can shut off the engine when it is not in use- meaning no fuel burning at idle. Making this type of system hybrid actually wouldn't provide much advantage if any at all."

On the highway, maybe.

But in city driving, hybrids bring many benefits other than the stop-start feature (which is important); cruising in electric-only mode at low speed, using the electric motor (which has tons of torque) to accelerate from speed at which the diesel engine isn't efficient (low rpms) and keeping it in the sweet spot for max efficiency, regenerative breaking (just count how many times you break in a 15 minutes trip in the city).

That adds up to quite something. Hell, the Prius beats in mpg and efficiency the Toyota Echo Hatchback (not sold in US) which is much smaller (sub-compact vs midsize).

There are numerous misunderstandings of how a hybrid works in posts above.

Gasoline engines have certain RPMs that work best, and they waste tons of energy that does not move the vehicle forward. What the hybrid does is attempt to capture as much wasted energy as possible while tending towards keeping the RPM of the gas engine at the optimum.

Then it stores that energy in batteries for use at a time that works best overall. Computers do all the work.

Regen brakes is just one small factor.

Folks.

As long as we are not talking about electric-only vehicles, the only measurement that matters is mpg. How much fuel does the vehicle use to travel a given distance? Engines on, engines off, regenerative braking, hybrids, direct injection diesel, etc are all just different paths to that end. Today, the VW Golf diesel is a more efficient vehicle than the much vaunted Prius.

The best next step for the commercially available hybrids is to offer the overnight plug-in option.

The VW diesel is a nice car and gets great mileage on the highway. I get mixed reports for city driving where traffic snarls are involved though. We drive the majority of our miles in city traffic and that's where hybrids all excell.

Moreover, I looked into getting a diesel by VW and found that they are in general not well stocked on dealer lots and that the dealers are absolutely clueless about the upcoming diesel emission standards for 2007.

Comparing Consumer Reports for reliabiltiy and customer service, I noted that Toyota products, Prius included, get top of the list rank. Wish the same could be said for VW products here in the US. Great engineering, nice styles but......

Final issue is fuel availabilty. For folks who live far from an interstate hwy, diesel is hard to come by and at least in my area when I find it it costs more than gasoline by several percent.

John,

All very valid points. I have owned VW (diesel and gasoline) and Toyota products, and the reliability and overall quality of the Toyota is indeed measurably superior. Further, the price difference between the Prius and Golf is minimized after tax incentives.

I am wondering why a Prius and not the Honda Insight which is approximately the same price yet with better actual fuel efficiency?

Adding hybrid technology to a vehicle that's already fuel efficient doesn't really save that much fuel.

Taking a vehicle that gets 5MPG (like a city bus) and improving its efficiency by 20% will save a lot more fuel.

Car (assuming 20% efficiency gain)
-----------------------------------
20K Miles / 41MPG = 487 Gallons
20K Miles / 50MPG = 400 Gallons
Savings = 487 - 400 = 87 Gallons

Bus (assuming 20% efficiency gain)
-----------------------------------
20K Miles / 5MPG = 4000 Gallons
20K Miles / 6MPG = 3333 Gallons
Savings = 4000 - 3333 = 666 Gallons

Next time you're in a city pay attention to how loud and smelly the busses are.

"the only measurement that matters is mpg"

Not quite. Emissions is also very important, and I don't think that some VW diesel is even in the same league as a Prius.

"I am wondering why a Prius and not the Honda Insight which is approximately the same price yet with better actual fuel efficiency?"

The Insight is an all-alluminum two-seater, very expensive, sells about a two-digit number of units a year.. I don't think it should be compared to the Prius unless there are lots of caveats.

Kurt,

That's true, but you also have to take into account the volume; there are many more cars than there are busses..

Hybrid city busses actually make considerable sense, in that they are the ultimate in stop-and-go driving experiences. Most of them run on diesel, with CNG and Propane as distant second and third. They run their engines constantly, even when stopped for loading/unloading passengers. I've seen numbers indicating as high as a 60% increase in fuel efficiency for the new hybrid Tri-Met bus here in Portland, OR. Considering the number of miles they drive every day, that's a huge fuel savings every year.
When I look at the numbers, I don't see much improvement if the "bionic car" were to become hybrid. It's already getting 70mpg average. The hybrid Prius gets around 55mpg average, according to some friend who own them. The Insight gets around 62mpg acording to the dealership. With a system that's already hyper-efficient, how much do you really think it's going to improve?
As for why not the Insight? When the Insight came out, it was _severely_ underpowered. It didn't realize anywhere near the fuel savings it was supposed to achieve. That may have changed with the newer generations, but that poor performance impression will be hard to get away from. I even know a guy who disliked the performance enough that he converted his to pure plug-in electric!
Finally, in response to the diesel emissions being important, I agree. Emissions are an important factor. It says in the article that the "bionic car" exceeds the most stringent of European emissions standards already. As I understand it, when you add bio-fuel to petroleum diesel, emissions improve- right up to the point of running pure bio-diesel. I could easily have been mislead on this, but when you can make biodiesel for $0.30 per gallon in your back yard (with a brewer's license where applicable), I say go for it. Reducing dependence on petroleum products is a good thing, and $0.30 per gallon beats $3.50 per gallon any day!

Sorry to break into this thread, but can somebody help me out with this general question?

As I understand it, the beauty of a hybrid is that it supplements a small internal combustion engine when necessary with electric power.

But what does "when necessary" mean? Everything I've read suggests that the electric motor just helps out with non-critical performance urges like fast get-aways from traffic lights. So if a hybrid can do 60 mpg, wouldn't you get the same mileage if you disabled the electric motor and used a light foot on the gas instead? And if you went the whole hog, and dumped the heavy batteries, couldn't you aim for 70 mpg on gas alone?

It sounds absurd to buy a Prius and then junk the electrics, but that seems to be where the above logic leads. So what's wrong with the logic? Something must be...

There are two primary variations on hybrid technology:
1> electric is primary drive system, with Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) assist/charging

2> electric is supplemental drive system to ICE.

In scenario #1, the savings can actually be greater, since the ICE can be run at a constant speed, maximizing it's efficiency. The big advantage with both systems is that you can use a smaller, more efficient ICE.
The reason so many vehicles see an improvement in mileage is because the ICE in both hybrid scenarios spends more time in the most efficient part of the power curve, and less time struggling to get up to speed. Going light on the pedal will not necessarily get you efficient performance from the ICE.

The Prius uses scenario #1 for the most part, sees a significant improvement in mileage, and can run on pure electric at certain speeds (the modified-for-plug-in hybrid models do even better).
The first generation Insight used scenario #2 primarily, and didn't see nearly the mileage increase in real-world use as they were supposed to. The one I test-drove averaged around 37 mpg real-world, while the window sticker claimed 62 mpg. I'm not sure what changes have been made, but I believe the newer models have been significantly improved.
Diesel engines, however, are a little different from gasoline ICEs, in that they can actually shut themselves off and save the fuel they would normally burn at idle. Most of them do not, because it causes some lag at stoplights, and there's probably other reasons as well.

Please correct me if I'm wrong on any of this- I'm offering this up from my potentially faulty memory.

Aloha! Here in Hawaii, gasoline prices never got back down below $2.50 per gallon and are up to just under $3.00 per gallon and still rising. As conscious consumers and Earth-activists we are REALLY concerned with transportation and its effects and costs (obvious and hidden. The islands are SUV and pickup-truck saturated, with unfortunately, many HUGE jacked-up, gas-gizzling macho rigs. Much of the lifestyle is still rural-focused, many of us are farmers, fishermen, surfers, etc, and need a vehicle that can provide what's needed. We drive an older small Nissan 4 cylinder pickup-to our jobs in Hilo, from our farm located 15 miles up towards Volcano- but see that the "golden age of the automobile" HAS to change. We are living barely above poverty level, so can't afford any nice new hybrid, etc. What can people like us do? Being surrounded by thousands of miles of ocean makes access to many alternative options very limited. Ideas?
With much aloha and appreciation for TreeHugger and all the hope for the future that it gives...

The biggest problem with diesel, really, is the emissions. Availablity could be fixed, noise issues can be fixed, and all that.

But face it, diesel, as it stands right now, produces some nasty things. It gives off many known carcinogens, NOx, sulfides, and a high percentage of particulate mass. All of that makes diesel exhaust very environmentally dangerous and a health hazard besides, even if diesels themselves are more fuel efficient than gasoline engines.

Luckily, however, things are changing. With an increase in the use of biodiesel (Which has, if anything, negligible trace amounts of sulfur), and a move to ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel), the sulfide content of diesel exhaust is dropping dramatically. This allows the manufacturers of catalytic converters to better filter out the other waste products, since the sulfide content demanded a more rugged and durable converter than such fineness could be put into.

Improvements in fuel quality and filtering have lead to a decrease in particulate matter, and the move to direct injection from indirect has also helped tremendously by promoting more complete and controlled combustion, but the fact still remains that the US operates on second-grade diesel fuel. Only so many advancements can be made using #2 diesel fuel.

Personally, I'm a fan of diesel technology, and a supporter of the biodiesel movement used in conjuction with fuel conservation efforts.

And also a strong supporter of bicycling, which, of course, beats any hybrid's gas/diesel economy anyday.

What are they waiting for? I would purchase one of these cars immediately. It sounds like it should be almost a perfect car for the times.

JOHN ARE YOU SURE HE DID THAT WITH SOY??? THERE ARE MILLIONS OF HEMPERS OUT THERE WHO SHOW PICTURES OF FORD SMASHING HIS HEMP POLYMER VEHICLE. NOT TO MENTION THAT HE LIKED HEMP OIL MORE THAN PETRO AND EVEN AFTER THE MARIJUANA TAX ACT OF 1939 HE STIL GREW HEMP AS AN ACT OF DEFIANCE...? Where did he get the soy?

In this discussion of hybrid vs. non-hybrid drivetrains we are forgetting to mention transmission.

The insight came with a manual, the prius comes with a CVT (Continuously Variable Transmission)

The CVT is responsible for keeping the engine in it's "sweet spot." The electric motor has nothing to do with it.

Plenty of cars now come with CVTs as an option (audi A4, nissan versa and murano, etc)

Educate yourself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuously_variable_transmission

--
editor note: The electric motor does help keep the ICE in its sweet spot by handling peak torque demand. A non-hybrid with a CVT doesn't get the same benefits from it as a hybrid.

Biodiesel is usable in mercedes engines, my 1983 240d runs 100%, emmissions are biologic, almost completeley non toxic, and its a RENEWABLE fuel soure, which petroleum based gas engines are NOT. The fuel is also CO2 neutral as the co2 in it was extracted by plants, from the atmosphere, in ADVANCE of being burnred...

emmissions are biologic, almost completeley non toxic

That's a total fabrication.

http://www.epa.gov/OMS/models/analysis/biodsl/p02001.pdf

The fuel is also CO2 neutral

Not unless the whole process from the well is run on carbon-neutral energy.

If people do their easy homework on the bionic car, they will find that there are NO PARTICULATE emissions because of the usage of ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel) allows special catalytic converters to be used. ALSO, you can forget about NOx emissions being a problem because this car sprays a urea solution into the exhaust that reacts with the NOx molecules and render them harmless. The tank for the solution is under the trunk and needs to be refilled only every 15,000 miles.

As for making this car a hybrid, it would only be an advantage if someone drives completely in stop and go traffic... which if you look at the overall population in the U.S., more people drive on the highways to commute to their jobs than do people who live and work in the city AND have a car. If they made a hybrid option for this car, IT WOULD NOT SELL! It would make the car MUCH heavier (thus reducing the 70mpg hwy figure drastically), it would cost a LOT more, and honestly its not needed.

My cousin used to be the head of Bosch's diesel department who engineered and sells the CRD (Common Rail Diesel) systems to auto manufacturers. Trust me, diesel/biodiesel is the future fuel. It takes energy to make hydrogen and that energy has to come from somewhere. All of our energy ultimately comes from the sun, and biodiesel is the best way of harnessing that energy for automobile use.

Hello..........
OPINIONS? The world is going into the tank
and we are supplying opinions. Huh? How
about contributing critique and collaborative
solutions.

I've also heard that when you stop, the engine shuts off like a computer on hibernate.