Dust to Dust Vehicle Energy Cost

Lost Canadian

Expedition Leader
DesertRose said:
Some of the folks out there are claiming that GM funds CMR but that's not verifiable as far as I know and just sounds like sour (green) grapes.
They may have a point. Just look at these estimated life cycles for pickups.

Frontier- 171,000 miles
Tacoma- 173,000
Mitsu. Raider- 175,000
Dodge Dakota 172,000

GMC Canyon 188,000
Chev. Colorado 184,000

First both the Mitsu Raider and Dodge Dakota are pretty much identical in terms of their running gear. Same goes for the Canyon/Colorado. Strange that the numbers differ. Also, all these trucks with the exception of the GM trucks fall below industry standard in terms of longevity. Biased?
 
Last edited:

DesertRose

Safari Chick & Supporting Sponsor
Yeah, that is suspicious. I noticed the Tacoma right off, of course - mine's at 188K and feels just barely broken in, with about $800 over 7 years into it, including synth-oil. Hmmmm. Za plot thickens!
 

DesertRose

Safari Chick & Supporting Sponsor
grahamfitter said:
These are all interesting and valid observations. I knew it was worth taking the first post plunge with something a little controversial!

Absolutely! You are brave - most of us just started posting with lame things about cool modifications or trip reports!

grahamfitter said:
Can I still peer down from my Ivory Jeep Wrangler at those unfortunate souls driving Toyota Corollas and so on down the list? Or should I start calling it faded white again? Either way, I'm not going to be replacing it anytime soon so the answer only affects my state of mind.

I'm still leaning toward thinking our older trucks being more economical and ecological in the end . . . but like you, wish there were better data (take a look at the MIT site). Member WD40 pointed out that modern composites in the newest vehicles are next to impossible to recycle at all - where the old metals can be compacted and re-utilized in some way.

Welcome to the fun mileu of ExPo - a great way to have fun when we can't be out exploring, or we'd rather not be working!:smiley_drive:
 

Erick Lihme

Observer
I'll follow and be brave like the first poster and speculate a bit.

Reduce performance requirements (speed and comfort to the level of a 90's Geo Metro, 3cyl. 1L) and the series-parallel type hybrid used in the Pirus could improve it's mpg greatly.
There's huge competition in hybrid market with a variety of different types of hybrids being developed not only to improve economy, but just as important, to allow the model to use THE 'hybrid' label. He who holds the right patents MAY dominate, yet an inherently inferior design if profitable, could be refined and survive, and possibly do well, allowing the manufacturer to stay in business. Different designs must be used to avoid patent infringement, and some are better than others. If you believe the first to market has the advantage, and is inherently the best possible design from which to succeed in the long run, in at least one segment, i.e. the Pirus, ATTACK IT, subvert it, down play it's importance, or whatever! Keep customers and investors on your side.

Vehicles are going though a radical change and ya gotta wonder how 4X's will be effected. I think it not so bad. I've watched the 'series'-hybrid diesels HUMV's develope. It's basically set up like a diesel/electric locomotive. The motor/generator only runs to recharge the batteries and provides no power directly to the drive train. Although with this type of hybrid, acceleration in the econo box might be unacceptable by today's standards, it appears to be the most efficient, just slow that's all. Battery technology will be a major factor in the improvement of these designs. It's mostly about weight.

Although I prefer something rugged and simple (read cheap and easy) to fix, hence an old 85' Toy, a series hybrid type diesel would be my choice. Imagine the useable low end torque of an electric motors on wheels, the control and power, and the ability to turn like a tank if you'd like. The electric motor(s) could drive the vehicle for 20 + min without the engine running, and the diesel/generator is built in ready to power all the toys, while doubling mpg or range! This HUMV is reported to get 16 mpg, over the previous 8. This improvement is huge for logistics.

I believe the series type of hybrid does best in large heavy vehicles because the batteries are heavy. The reason is that a higher GVWR truck can haul more weight efficiently than a smaller vehicle, even though it's mpg seems terrible. A tractor trailer (18 wheeler ) can get 8 to 12 mpg hauling 50,000lbs. That's allot of goodies.

There will be all kinds of flavors, but the diesel 'series' type of hybrid will have it's day. That's what I hope. It'll allow for some powerful and nimble rigs.
 
Last edited:

dieselcruiserhead

16 Years on ExPo. Whoa!!
Not much to add but I was watching a documentary and one of the Ford execs was talking about vehicles and the environment and profitability.. And said it takes nearly 50,000 lbs of material to create the products to make a 3,000 lb car.. Saying if they could eliminate that, imagine the reduction of costs alone, yet alone the consumption...
 

Forum statistics

Threads
188,471
Messages
2,905,523
Members
230,428
Latest member
jacob_lashell
Top