Is my Rangie more environmentally proper than a Prius?

I used to work as an automotive engineer for a big european truck manufacturer in the UK. Whilst there we built a trial fleet of hybrid diesel/electric 7.5 tonne trucks to send out to about 20 big customer, royal mail etc.
In the official trials the hybrid actually returned LOWER fuel economy than the standard turbo diesel version. It was only by fitting aero aids and special tyres that they managed to get the consumption lower than the official figures for the standard truck (that isnt even considering the whole of life environmental cost of the batteries).
Of course there was no mention of the other modifications in the press release and the fuel savings where attributed to the diesel/electric hybrid!

I wonder how much of the economy of a prius can be attributed to low drag coefficient of the aerodynamic body and the low rolling resistace of the skinny tyres?

The prius is a step in the right direction tho....

imagine if you will its technology as drop in conversions for your vehicle.

available in 3 primary flavors in 4 primary configurations

The flavors being;

• Country Long Range- a more powerful engine and generator with a smaller battery pack. not intended to be externally chargable (so maintenance charging rates only) and capable of very short EV trips (less than 25KM)
• City Stop Start- A less powerful engine but with a higher capacity battery (may also be a higher density battery technology) and intended to be able to operate as a pure EV for moderate (say 75 KM) durations and then charge from external sources
• Urban- The normal sized engine with a normal size battery retaining the ability to take external power and operate for short durations as an EV (maybe 50K)

The configurations being

• Large N/S- Replaces the donk in large vehicles like our landies and some small trucks, basically anything large and rear wheel drive.
• Small N/S replaces the donk in traditional setup vehicles of medium size such as the holden commodores and small vans
  
• Large E/W replaces the EW mounted engine in the medium size FWD cars
• Small E/W replaces the EW mounted engine in small FWD cars.

say your old engine blows up.

you go an buy the new drop-in hybrid unit (in the case I put forwards for this a small aircooled turbodiesel generation unit ), pull out your existing engine and gearbox, scrap it (possibly modding you gearbox as the primary input) and install the drop in hybrid tech.

The key concept difference is that instead of applying power like the prius by coupling the Engine and the Electric motor/generator to the gear box is that the drive line is based off of a diesel electric loco.

A guy i used to work with now works for a company building a hybrid for a military contract.
The vehicle effectivly a diesel generator and 4 electric motors, one at each wheel.
Big advantages for 4wds, no diff clearence to worry about, zero turning circle, no need for differentials or lockers.
I suppose a decent % of the losses in converting roation into electirical back into rotational energy would be offset by not having gearbox, props, diffs, cvs etc sapping power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jitterbug

A guy i used to work with now works for a company building a hybrid for a military contract.
The vehicle effectivly a diesel generator and 4 electric motors, one at each wheel.
Big advantages for 4wds, no diff clearence to worry about, zero turning circle, no need for differentials or lockers.
I suppose a decent % of the losses in converting roation into electirical back into rotational energy would be offset by not having gearbox, props, diffs, cvs etc sapping power.

---

Yes - most military vehicles are diesel/electric or diesel/hydraulic. As you have said, lots of advantages, and lots of redundancy, for a military vehicle (or any 4x4).

In an 8x8 you would need 8 wheel motors to fail before you are immobile!

The prius gets a bad rap for the batteries, however a lot of it is unfounded. Solar panels also get a bad rap for the energy needed to produce them, however it has been proven that a solar panel manufactured OS then shipped to AU has a worst-case payback period of 1.3 years (TAS) to recover the manufacturing footprint.

The manufacturing component of a hybrid's footprint has been estimated at ~5% more than a normal vehicle (based on 150k km life cycle for both).
If you were commuting in heavy traffic, the prius would be using <5l/100 vs the RR's 20L/100 (or close to). Plus the newer prius engine and emissions controls would be better...

However for mainly long distance travel the RR may well come out in front.

As I have posted on here before, I spoke to a taxi driver in cairns who changed from a camry on gas to a prius. He said he was saving a large amount of money with the prius and repliability was good.

It comes down to horses for courses. The prius has been optimised for commuting.

Personally I walk/ride to work and keep the landies for fun ;)

would a pushie or a prius pull my trailer ;)

yep, just not far, fast or economically.... and the command brakes would want to be up to scratch for the pushie or the tail's likely to wag the dog there.

IMHO, an EV is the stupidest idea ever, based on current (no pun intended) generating methods for the public grid.

So I have an EV, battery is flat, I plug it into the public power supply and some time later it's charged.

Magic, you say! Except WHERE does the electricity come from?

Most power stations are FOSSIL FUEL consumers! Either coal or oil!

So what are the options? NONE of the "free" energy sources (wind, solar, water) are being effectively used due to "cost". Show me the vast tracts of useless desert covered with solar panels? IT ISN'T HAPPENING!
Show me those vast wind turbine farms or tidal generator farms? Ditto.

So our powers-that-be keep on pushing for fossil fuel or nuclear power stations. Because SOMEBODY is making sure certain technologies stay expensive. Where is the economy of scale?

So the greenie-beanies that think they're doing a good thing buying a new EV (with all the negative impacts so far mentioned including the raping of the earth for rare minerals and metals) are actually contributing to a FASTER deterioration in our global environment. I say stick with your 30-year-old Defender, because replacing it is a HUGELY negative impact.

Rant over.

Personaly I think hybrids are a load of crap as well as small cars,I love it when someone takes out finance for a new car and then tells me how much they are saving,they are paying $300 a week in repayments but are saving money because they are spending $50 a week less in fuel?.Priuses are for dumb movie stars who want to look responsible for todays enviroment and nothing more,they have a very poor safety record also. Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blknight.aus

The prius is a step in the right direction tho....

I was under the impression that the Prius was never really intended to be the final solution to the problem. I thought that it was just intended to be a research platform. I thought it was just intended to provide the motivation, the interest and maybe some finance to develop some of the technology that may ultimately be part of the solution.

I think it is wrong to see the Prius as the end goal. It is just supposed to be a step towards finding a solution.
... .... ..

you go an buy the new drop-in hybrid unit (in the case I put forwards for this a small aircooled turbodiesel generation unit ), pull out your existing engine and gearbox, scrap it (possibly modding you gearbox as the primary input) and install the drop in hybrid tech.

The key concept difference is that instead of applying power like the prius by coupling the Engine and the Electric motor/generator to the gear box is that the drive line is based off of a diesel electric loco.

---

I have no idea if the technology is practical, but I read something a while back about an attempt to develop the system you describe, but using a turbine instead of the small diesel. My understanding was that the attempts in the 60s (I think) to use turbines to power cars didn't work because of the slow response to throttle changes.

I think the idea was that the turbine would run at a constant speed to drive a generator because that is the way turbines like to operate and are quite efficient when run that way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vnx205

... My understanding was that the attempts in the 60s (I think) to use turbines to power cars didn't work because of the slow response to throttle changes.
...

---

Just hijacking the thread, but my understanding of the problem with tubines in the p4/p5 Rovers were as much the lack of throttle response as well as the unnacceptable level of external noise of the turbines.

IIRC along with rising fuel costs it was part of the reason that killed off turboshaft-electric railway locomotives (GTEL) in the US.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...12/03/1030.jpg