Hybrid Taxis in New York City Get Challenged on Safety Concerns

How about everyone else's safety? The gigantic Ford LTD taxis are a menace. If you get hit by one of those babies, you're done for. Taxi drivers are way arrogant and aggressive, and if they're in a smaller vehicle, maybe they'll drive with a tiny bit of courtesy.

maybe the prius, but I find it hard to believe that every single hybrid on the market has these same safety hazards.

What I find interesting is how they question how long the hybrids will last on NYC streets. There's been several test fleets running (SF, NYC, Canada) and the hybrid vehicles being used have done very well.

Given that, the other conclusions made by the engineer become suspect in my eyes.

Alright, now you just need some numbers. What percentage of cabs actually have that partition anyway? It's a weak argument especially when cabbies' driving habits typically show a complete disregard for safety anyway.

The Ford Escape Hybrid taxis, which are the most numerous, do actually have the partition installed as a box around the driver. I have no idea whether or not they are safe, but they don't seem to restrict the passenger leg room noticeably...

This seems like a fairly straight-forward design problem, not a reason to stop a transition to hybrids. Fix the problem and phase-in the hybrids.

What do they do in other countries where cabs are small?

Being an "automotive engineer" does not mean a person is a talented and proven designer known for cost effective, implementable work. Design generally happens these days from "teams" of designers anyway.

Further, being an automotive safety expert is a niche specialty, not often combined with "design engineering" expertise.

At least this wasn't another stupid argument against hybrids stating that they are "too quiet" and causing stupid people to get hurt.

how does a partition become the reason for ditching the hybrid idea?

why not address the issue of making a safer partition instead?

hats off to boston.

If ford were really thinking they would drop some hybrid tech into the CV. Even if its just the mild no engine idle it would still qualify as hybrid under the letter of the law. It would also benefit the police/fire who use them as the extra batteries could power all the radios, put in a system similar to GM's Silverado hybrid with a couple extra ports off the battery for upfitter functions.

Okay, I understand the safety concerns, but that's not a reason to "not use hybrids". That's a motivation to come up with either a better partitioning system between driver/passengers, or find a different model hybrid vehicle.
Ford's Escape, while not as efficient as a Prius, and certainly not meant for city driving would have plenty of legroom and safety with the partitions in place.

Even in a crown vic, that partition is a plastic surgeon's dream. In SF most cabs have removed the partition in favor of a video camera.

Also, how many of the crown vics used in the taxi fleet are the stretched models? Not many, though even the non-stretched models have bigger back seats than a prius.

The main reason I see for the resistance is that the body-on-frame crown vics are stupidly durable, their maintenance schedule is well known, and mechanics who specialize in taxi and limo fleets can diagnose and fix a problem with a crown vic/towncar in a very short period of time.

The cost of fuel is a great reason to switch to a hybrid taxi, but it's only one of the costs associated with running a fleet.

How dangerous is traveling 10 mph?

stradic has a point with their disregard for safety and exactly how safe are crown vic.'s in the first place? I can't imagine that they can't work out a safe partition and it seems the Prius would be immensely safer than the crown with new age crumple zones and what not.

Somehow, I get the distinct impression that a customer as big as the TLC can ask the manufacturer of the hybrids for changes, and get them. Just politely ask Toyota for 5,000 Priuses that are 10" longer in the middle or you won't buy any at all, and you'd be amazed at how accomodating they'd be.

That kind of mandate is stupid,
they should require a minimum fuel economy, not require "hybrids".

Some hybrids are inefficient, some efficient cars are not hybrids.

If safety and size are such important issues, then I'd like to point out there are many different models of hybrid SUVs: Ford Escape, Toyota Highlander, and Mazda Tribute among them. They don't get mileage like a Prius, but their mileage is a lot better than a Crown Vic.
www.hybridsuv.com

@Ernie
Well, you'd have to request more than 5000, I'd think. It's a major deal to stretch a car. There are a lot of engineering challenges to that. There were 200,000 Priuses made in 2007, so to produce a limited run of 5000 special ones would incur quite a premium.

Surely the market for taxis in the USA (and North America in general) is large enough that they could make a specialised fuel efficient vehicle designed to be a taxi. For safety reasons it could separate the driver and passenger compartments (like a London cab). This would make more sense than trying to retrofit safety features to vehicles originally designed as family behicles (whether they are a hybrid or not).

ernie-
Anyone who walked into Toyota's offices thinking they could demand a model change for 5000 cars would reveal themselves to be a fool and laughed out of the office.
Retooling costs a lot of money. A tool for something as simple as a plastic knob can cost $100,000 if not more. To retool for a car costs into the 100's of millions.

We are entering a new industrial age with mass customization as an increasing option, and with the potential of 3d printing technology, maybe some day it would be that easy to just stretch the drawing and print a new version, but it hasn't reached that point, particularly not for something as complex and potentially dangerous as a car.

You can stretch a Prius.

http://www.dieselstation.com/news/automotive/custom-6-door-toyota-prius.html

I don't think it will be too long before Fleet type hybrids will be on the road, it would be stupid not to do it.

First, most hybrid taxis in NYC are Ford Escapes, not Toyota Priuses. I'd like to see an honest comparison of those against the Crown Vics in terms of safety, leg room, what have you.

Second, if safety is really the issue Board of Trade would be far more effective if they encouraged cabbies to obey traffic laws such as speed limits, signaling for turns, avoiding fast, multiple lane changes, driving in a single lane, not straddling two.

Finally, maybe the fleet owners should share the cost of the fuel that cabbies will have to pay for if the fleet is not switched over. If the owners shared the pain they might be a little more willing. The cabbies I've spoken to about hybrids are generally very supportive because of the lower fuel costs.

First the leg room complaint is by comparing the STRETCHed Crown Vic to an unstretched hybrid.
BOGUS!

Second, the partition complaint is to damn the car for an aftermarket add-on that has nothing to do with the car itself.
BOGUS!

Partitions might be better designed but this is a separate issue having nothing to do with the fact that it is going into a fuel efficient hybrid. This complaint should be addressed to the particular style of partition, not the vehicle it goes into.

First the leg room complaint is by comparing the STRETCHed Crown Vic to an unstretched hybrid.
BOGUS!

Second, the partition complaint is to damn the car for an aftermarket add-on that has nothing to do with the car itself.
BOGUS!

The partitions might be a problem and possibly might be better designed but this is a separate issue having

This isn't a surprise, the London and other cab offices have similar restrictions that have supported vested intersts for years.

We now see HEVs and EVs being caught in the issues that have prevented fair vehicle design competition for a long time.

You do wonder what's in it for them??

I wonder how can any cab company oppose hybtrids on the basis ov involved costs. Where many regular driver can't achieve substantial fuel savings to cover a premium of the hybric, cab driver can... with ease... in less than a year.
Taxis drive mostly in towns, they have a lot of waiting time, sitting in traffic jams, lots of starts and stops etc - ideal for hybrids. Under these conditions saving a gallon of fuel per 100 miles compared to a similar size non hybrid is not a stretch, saving 3-4 gallons compared to a CrownVictoria can also happen. Now, with the gas costing 4 bucks a gallon you can save at least 4000$ on 100000 miles compared to a efficient diesel compact car that might get 40 MPG in city. (a 54 MPG Prius would need 1852 gallons for 100k mi, a 20 MPG american-iron needs 5000 gallons) Savings of 10000-12000$ are possible, when you compare against a car that gets 20-25 MPG. A cab can easily do 100000 miles in a few years, probably 200000-300000 during service. That means a Prius will save enough money during that time to get a new PHEV Prius when it is finally obsolete, if you compare it to a larger and non-efficient cab. Hybrid would win in the long run, even if the non-hybrid cabs were ultra efficient TDI compacts (not that You could actaully have them in US). Not to mention the environmental benefits and added bonus of appealing to the customers.
Economics should put the things in perspective and cabbies could be the ones demanding the hybrids when they run the numbers.

If they are not going to convert the taxi fleet until 2015, then this gives them plenty of time to sort out the few minor safety concerns between the hybrids and the Crown Vics. No matter what concerns they have, this is still a huge step forward for making transportation more environmentally friendly.