Och

iTrader: (3)

E85 simply stores less energy than petrol, so it is to be expected that you get lesser mpg. It would be OK if it was 3 times cheaper than petrol and available in abundance. But its not so like you said it yourself, its a waste of time. The only reason manufacturers even make their cars "E85" compatible is probably to get some tax credits from the govt.

LexFather

I'm just pissed b/c I like corn and popcorn and I don't want to see it in my car.

So if a hybrid used E85, it would be a total waste as a hybrid is already SULEV compliant and no other cars are.

SLegacy99

Let's do it. We'll use the RX FWD. I used Lexus.com to determine the base prices of the vehicles when equipped with the same features. Note that the base price of the RX450h didn't change.

450: $41,660 (32/28/30 MPG)
350: $38,125 (18/25/21 MPG)
a difference of $3535.

15,000 miles a year
450: 500 gallons of gas consumed each year
350: 714 gallons of gas consumed each year
a difference of 214 gallons

So, I guess we shall do this with premium fuel, though if anyone's interested I haven't found a difference in fuel grades and performance with the 400h, anyway
if 93 octane is $2.89 a gallon
450: $1445 spent each year
350: $2064 spent each year
a difference of $619

Thus it would take roughly 5 years to recoup the cost difference of the hybrid, assuming your state offers no tax rebates, which mine does so it would be 4 years in Pennsylvania just FYI. So if you were purley buying the vehicle for fuel savings and not for say power, then you would need to keep the vehicle about 5 years to break even. Not too shabby.

But lets do it again just to see what these numbers would look like if gas got back up to $4.00 a gallon

So, $4.00 for 93 octane, driving 15,000 miles a year
450: $2000 for the year
350: $2856
a difference of $856.

Divide $856 into $3535 and your payback period is reduced to just a hair over 4 years.

In conclusion, it makes more sense from a fuel savings standpoint to purchase the RX450h over the 350 than it did to purchase the 400h over the 350 (sec. gen.).

SLegacy99

Brazil seems to making their system work well.

DASHOCKER

iTrader: (2)

There are a number of things "not to believe" on the internet. That is why pics & links add validity to an arguement... I will let you do the honors Och.. I live in Cambria Heights, NY zip 11411 type it in this link & see what you get. No, the filling stations are not in the Brooklyn basement..

http://www.biodiesel.org/buyingbiodi...s/biomaps.shtm



Diesel can be had at almost every Mobil in NYC. Hell, the same can be said of BP, Shell, etc around the country. Pay close attention the next time you fill up.

Once again, biodiesel & E85 are alternative fuels. Owners of diesels and E85 compliant hybrids are not limited to standard diesel & standard gasoline. The choice is there for those who seek it. Add any scenerio you wish from oil fields in the Middle East burning down, gas prices shooting to $6.00 a gallon because Obama does not like gun owners. At least folks with compatible vehicles will have no worries pumping alternative fuels into their eco ride.

Och

iTrader: (3)

So I followed your link and there are one station in Brooklyn, one in West Babylon (LI), one in the Bronx, one in New Rochelle (NYS), and one in New Hyde Park (LI). The one in New Hyde Park is listed three time under three different names, but they are all at the same address.

So basically the whole NYC has two stations - one in Bronx and one in Brooklyn. Where do you get four in your immediate area?

And I highly doubt that these are your familiar, convenient stations. They are fuel oil places, probably just a warehouse where you can buy a jug of biodiesel.

Until theres a convenient readily available infrastructure of biodiesel fuel stations, it is irrelevant.


Well petrol is still more available than diesel. There are five gas stations in my neighborhood, and only one carries diesel (Lukoil)


By no means am I saying advocating foreign oil dependency, but alternative fuels are not a solution at all until the infrastrure is in place. Out of all available alternative fuel, E85 and biodiesel will never become relevant. Hydrogen has a chance if they ever find an energy efficient way to extract it.

Stormforge

speaking of hydrogen, i recall seeing a documentary that stated there are pros and cons of hydrogen power. yes it's clean, but it is inefficient source of energy, in that you need to use energy to convert the raw energy source into hydrogen. so from a "green" perspective, you are still contributing to greenhouse gases (correct me if i'm wrong here).

ideally, sources of "clean" energy should rely on natural sources - like solar, wind, and wave energy. we shouldn't use energy (like gasoline or coal) to create energy, it's a waste of time, money, and resources.

Och

iTrader: (3)

Well, hydrogen is only used to generate electricity in hydrogen car such as Honda FCX. The car itself is powered by an electric motor. And with the current technology there is no efficient way to extract hydrogen - it take more electricity to extract it from water than the electricity it generates.

A simple battery pack is more efficient than hydrogen, but hydrogen has an advantage over battery pack is that a tank of hydrogen will provide a longer driving range than a battery pack, and that it could be refueled fast, if the infrastructure is there, whereas it takes hours to recharge batteries.

But the battery technology is advancing fast, and soon enough we might see batteries that can provide longer driving range than hydrogen. And there can also be battery exchage/recharge stations that will make recharging a non issue. Therefore I dont think hydrogen will ever become a viable alternative fuel unless someone comes up with a way of extracting it that uses much less energy than it can generate.

But the biggest issue, is that neither an electric car or a hydrogen car is clean. The electricity that is used to recharge batteries or extract hydrogen is generated at power plants by burning fossil fuels, mostly oil and coal. So boys and girls, petrol isnt going anywhere any time soon.

shyguy16

i guess you and i are the only ones in this thread that haven't drank the koolaid.

you just cannot ignore the fact that the RXh is a hybrid and compare it to a gas powered smart or fit and say it even beats economy cars!!!111!!1
kudos!

anyway, still waiting for a response on the escape hybrid.

shyguy16

and the soul/fit/yaris/3 are similar to the RX right?
yet mike still compare them.

DustinV

Clearly you have no idea what you're talking. If you're quoting EPA figures then stop, because ML Bluetec owners have reported up to 28 mpg or higher with these cars. If you don't think that is impressive for an almost 3-ton SUV that doesn't have the benefit of an electric motor to reduce fuel consumption in stop-and-go conditions then you really are beyond help.

What are you going to say if Mercedes brings out an ML Bluetec Hybrid, theoretically speaking. With an electric motor that handles the initial acceleration fuel economy should rise dramatically. I wouldn't be surprised if this ML Bluetec Hybrid would surpass the RX450h in gas mileage.

What are you going to say? Bluetec = FAILURE?


Let's turn this statement around in reference to the GS450h and LS600h. The mere what? 2 mpg the LS600h gets over the LS460 is worth it?




Don't bet. Show me proof.



All diesels sold in Europe must pass the EU emission controls. Diesel cars that don't pass have to be retrofitted or their owners are taxed higher.

Classic diesel cars are exempt from this rule.



False. Diesel cars are generally more expensive than their gasoline counterparts. Owning a diesel is also more expensive because of tax and emission charges.



Diesel fuel is either cheaper or close to the price of gasoline. Government subsidies have nothing to do with it. A common misconception.



Generally, yes.


Yes.


False. Last time I checked the sales of diesel cars in Europe have overtaken those of gasoline vehicles. The diesel market share is now roughly at 56% if I recall correctly.

Your last statement about people willing to pay more just so they don't have to drive a diesel is complete and utter BS. Owning a diesel in Europe is actually more expensive because of the diesel tax and emission taxation. Put it pays out if you drive long distances (say over 9,000 miles per year). In that case the mileage of a diesel can't be beaten.

When I had my C200 CDI diesel and was touring Europe, it wasn't uncommon for my car to return 5.3 liters per 100 km (44 mpg) at a cruising speed of 120-130 kph.




It's funny. You accuse me of trying to downplay the achievements of the RX450h, yet here you are calling Bluetec a failure and your arguments are nonsensical and weak.

A Mercedes isn't a value purchase. Right. But that doesn't mean somebody buying one doesn't want good fuel economy. People are willing to pay for expensive cars but they also want fuel economy, especially nowadays.

It is really narrow minded if you claim that nobody buying an expensive car will care about fuel economy just because they can afford it. It doesn't work that way. There are people who enjoy expensive cars but want good gas mileage.







Oh please. The E class handles better than the GS. This has been proven and stated often enough. The last generation E class handled worlds better than the GS and was also more comfortable according to many reviews. The same is true for the current E class.

Maybe Lexus can catch up or exceed the E class when they release the new model.




So let's assume that this is Honda's second attempt at a hybrid. Obviously they have ways to go to match or exceed Toyota.

That's no reason to call the Insight a POS. How about a "good effort"?

LexFather

1. A stock GS handles better than a stock E-class. The E-class handles better with the AMG sport kit and clearly a AMG 63 will destroy any GS. Though not sure why there is some German rainbow that "sport" automatically means better. The E-class is used as a TAXI, trust me, most are not sporty. Both are stellar cars and the E-class with the 5 series is bread and butter and do exceptionally well for their brands.

2. The Insight has been panned in most reviews for being a pretty lethargic attempt. Its not like Honda rushed it they had YEARS to make a Prius killer. Instead we get a knock-off looking Prius that gets worse MPG than the old Prius with less room and less performance.

Clarkson said it best.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/dri...cle6294116.ece

LexFather

I've noticed when someone has no facts to support their posts, they accuse the other side of drinking "kool-aid". Its okay to disagree with the original post but you continue to ask for a RX competitor WHEN I COMPARED IT TO ITS DIESEL COMPETITION. You continue to conveniently OMIT this.

So since you are so much the debate champ, tell me, name a direct competitior to the RX 450h. I mean you want me to compare it to one right.

So find it and post it and we can talk about it.

Find and post a 295hp or somewhere in that area a luxury SUV that gets 30 MPG and is a hybrid that is not the RX but its competitior.

When you post that, then you can say your previous post(s) have some merit. Otherwise you simply want to disagree with what I presented.

Which again, is fine.

We are waiting...

LexFather

Well I checked the 09 Highlander Hybrid, 26 MPG avg.

pagemaster

The 09 Highlander Hybrid is an older gen system. The Rx400h and Highlander compare. The 450h is a newer system.