backtop

Auto GM Plug-in Hybrid to Deliver 70MPG
Brandon Hill (Blog) - December 8, 2006 10:30 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 97 comment(s) - last by Alexstarfire.. on Dec 26 at 5:59 PM

2008 Saturn Vue
GM has high expectations for its plug-in Saturn Vue Green Line

Last week, DailyTech reported that GM is set to introduce a plug-in Saturn Vue Green Line hybrid in 2008 for the 2009 model year. The company has been a bit behind in the development of hybrid power trains in relation to Toyota and Ford. The news was a welcomed announcement for the automotive industry. The market for hybrids is expected to expand from around 200,000 units per year in 2006 to 800,000 units per year in 2012.

But while the announcement of a plug-in hybrid was seen as big news for the company, this latest announcement is even more awe-inspiring. GM has stated that its plug-in Vue Hybrid will achieve 70 MPG. Those numbers seem almost unbelievable for a 3,500 pound vehicle -- even for a plug-in hybrid. For comparison, here are some mileage figures for four of the most popular hybrids on the market:

  • Toyota Prius: 60/51 (city/highway)
  • Toyota Camry Hybrid: 40/38
  • Honda Civic Hybrid: 49/51
  • Ford Escape Hybrid (4x2): 36/31

That being said, the industry is abuzz about the implications for such a fuel-efficient crossover. "They may not be as far along the development path as Toyota, but they have to maintain a perception in the market that they are pursuing and will deliver advanced technology," said Robert Toomey of E.K. Riley Advisors.

Japanese rival Nissan is also impressed with GM's new hybrid technology. "GM's plug-in hybrid technology is very exciting. It's certainly something I'd be interested in exploring," said Nissan product manager John Curl. Nissan just recently cut its ties from Toyota in hybrid development and decided to go it alone.

While Toyota is currently leading the field when it comes to sales of hybrid vehicles and is betting heavily on the technology, GM is looking to produce advanced hybrids as a mere pit stop on the way to its ultimate goal -- production hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles. "We continue to make significant progress in this area, and we continue to see fuel cells as the best long-term solution for reducing our dependence on oil," said GM CEO Rick Wagoner.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
question i've always had about hybrids
By lwright84 on 12/8/2006 11:34:06 AM , Rating: 2
does the fact that it's a hybrid affect it's safety rating at all? would a hybrid version of a car with a 5-star crash test safety rating still get 5 stars?

i ask because i've been wanting to get a somewhat large vehicle for my wife to drive and for a family car (large sedan like accord/camry or a mid-size SUV like Vue/Escape) and am almost more worried about safety ratings than fuel efficieny.

anyone have any information on this i would greatly appreciate it.




RE: question i've always had about hybrids
By TomZ on 12/8/2006 11:43:34 AM , Rating: 2
The laws of physics will always dominate star-ratings, which are relative a particular class (size) of car. If you are in a small car and have a collision with a large vehicle, then you are at a higher risk than you would be if you were in a larger vehicle, period.

The only negative concern about larger vehicles is if they are large enough, or poorly designed, to where you are more likely to lose control than a small car. But for most minivans and modest-size SUVs, that is not a concern.

And I am in the same boat as you - I value safety more than fuel economy when transporting my family from point A to point B.


RE: question i've always had about hybrids
By lwright84 on 12/8/2006 11:58:15 AM , Rating: 2
i understand that, but gov't & insurance crash ratings are the only reference point we have other than being in an *actual* accident (or those really cool jetta commercials lol).

i just want to know if all the extra hybrid technology and parts (battery, etc) will negatively effect the safety rating of the vehicle or not.


By Bonrock on 12/8/2006 12:42:20 PM , Rating: 2
I can't give you a definitive answer on the impact that the hybrid technology will have on vehicle safety for every model. However, I can point you to the IIHS (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety) crash test results for the Toyota Prius, which are very good:

http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=641

Based on that, I have to conclude that it's very possible for a hybrid to be safe. Also, in the crash test results for the Toyota Camry, Honda Accord, and Honda Civic, they don't make a note anywhere that the results don't apply to the hybrid versions of those cars, so perhaps the IIHS believes the results would be similar?


RE: question i've always had about hybrids
By FITCamaro on 12/8/2006 5:24:08 PM , Rating: 2
You could just learn to be a defensive driver. You don't have to drive a 5000 pound SUV to be safe. I was rearended in a 87 Camaro by an S10. Guess which one of us drove away.


By Ringold on 12/8/2006 5:35:08 PM , Rating: 2
I don't doubt you drove away. S10's were built about as sturdy as match boxes, and I've heard their insurance premiums reflected that.

I also had an 82 Corvette for a while. I had a feeling that in a major accident, I've be impaled by a random column of steel jutting out of some part of the car, but in a more mild collision, got the impression it would just giggle.


By masher2 (blog) on 12/9/2006 8:09:59 AM , Rating: 1
> "You could just learn to be a defensive driver...I was rearended in a 87 Camaro..."

No amount of driving 'defensively' will safeguard you from any and all accidents...as your own accident attests.


RE: question i've always had about hybrids
By oneellama on 12/9/2006 12:14:45 AM , Rating: 3
You are correct that the laws of physics apply (can't do much about that), but I believe your use of the physics is flawed. Industry lobbyists have used similar arguments for years to mount successful emotional appeals against Congresss raising Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards (higher mpg standards = smaller cars = more deaths).

quote:
The only negative concern about larger vehicles is if they are large enough, or poorly designed, to where you are more likely to lose control than a small car. But for most minivans and modest-size SUVs, that is not a concern.


Not true. You avoid becoming a vehicle fatality from the combination of avoiding an accident in the first place and being well protected if your avoidance efforts fail. The former involves many factors, including driver visability, maneuverability, braking distance, rollover risk, and even driver psychology. Factors in the latter include application of active and passive restraints, the design of crush zones in the vehicle, center of gravity, and (yes, finally) mass.

Many studies have been conducted to evaluate the combined and parsed effects of these (and other) factors on vehicle fatality rates. These studies raise lots of questions without necessarily providing consistent answers. For example, it is definitely true that all other things being equal , a large SUV will "win" in a collision with a subcompact sedan (your physics argument). But the puzzling thing is there are lots of data showing that more children die in SUV accidents than in smaller sedans, even when adjusting for sales penetration and mileage. One explanation is that the smaller sedan drivers tend to be better at the first issue -- accident avoidance -- than the SUV drivers. Some of that comes from the vehicle design (e.g., maneuverability, better road feel data fed to the driver) and some from the driver "design" (e.g., evidence that SUV drivers have a false sense of security, and thus making driving choices that impede accident avoidance). For an interesting article on this effect, see http://www.gladwell.com/2004/2004_01_12_a_suv.html

I think the bottom line on crash safety is that you need to look at individual models. You can view crash ratings of current hybrids at http://www.automotive.com/new-cars/safety/27/hybri... and see that today's new hybrids stack up very well against their conventional counterparts, but a future model is an unknown.


RE: question i've always had about hybrids
By masher2 (blog) on 12/9/2006 8:47:42 AM , Rating: 1
> "But the puzzling thing is there are lots of data showing that more children die in SUV accidents than in smaller sedans, even when adjusting for sales penetration and mileage..."

I've seen similar figures many times, but while they are usually adjusted for market penetration, I've never seen a set adjusted for mileage...there is no data on that. There is also another crucial missing factor-- passenger riderage. People with large families tend to buy larger vehicles. I've seen more than one news story about an SUV loaded with 7, 8, or even 10 people being involved in an acciddent. You don't tend to see that often with a Honda Civic.

Still, there is a bit of truth in such statistics. Larger SUVs excel in multicar accident safety. However, in single-car accidents (which make up a large portion of the total), smaller, better-handling autos tend to perform better.



RE: question i've always had about hybrids
By oneellama on 12/9/2006 7:49:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I've never seen a set adjusted for mileage...there is no data on that.


I'll take your word for the first part of this statement, but not the second.

The NHTSA study http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/regrev/evaluat... is a relatively recent example (I worked with others, in a previous life...). It illustrates one of my points, which is things are not always cut and dried. Regression analysis showed a positive correlation between a weight reduction of 100 lbs and an increased number of fatalities in vehicle-to-vehicle collisions in 1991-99 MY vehicles (Table 1). On the other hand, when data from the same database were sorted into ten subcategories (covering both cars and light-duty trucks) and normalized for vehicle miles traveled, midsize 4-door SUVs had a higher fatality rate than all of the other categories except the very smallest of the cars -- average curb weight of just 2,100 lb (Table 3); also, not shown in the table is that the sample size for that very light category is small.

My primary points were that (1) this is an issue where the information is often contradictory, (2) vehicle fatalities depend upon many factors, not just on vehicle mass, some of which favor larger vehicles and some that don't, and (3) hybrid vehicle safety is better examined at the model level than relying solely on the physics of mass. Do you agree?



By masher2 (blog) on 12/10/2006 1:39:26 AM , Rating: 1
> "I'll take your word for the first part of this statement, but not the second. The NHTSA study..."

Interesting read; thanks the for link. But I stand by the assessment that accurate data on miles travelled by vehicle type doesn't exist. This study admits such-- they are extrapolating based on a sampling of odometer readings from vehicles actually involved in crashes. This is valid only if one assumes the uniform distribution of the sample set (those involved in crashes) is representative of the population at large. I submit that it is not. For example, large SUVs are driven by two wildly disparate sets-- one, a low-risk, high-mileage set of suburban dwellers with larger families, and a high-risk, low-mileage set of younger urban dwellers, driving Escalades and Hummers primarily for curb appeal. That second set has as much as five times the accident risk of the first, yet averages perhaps half the mileage.

Another skew factor is the quality of miles driven. Every long-distance commuter in my acquaintance with an SUV uses a small passenger for their normal daily commute. They use the SUV evenings, at night, around town, or when commuting in inclement weather (snow, ice, etc, under the belief it lends additional safety). I think this is a fairly common pattern for those with an SUV *and* multiple passenger cars. But since all the above instances have an elevated risk, it obviously distorts the data further.

Another flaw in the study. When comparing fatality rates on SUVs to lighter vehicles, they specifically removed from consideration all two-door vehicles -- the highest risk category of all. I understand their reasoning for doing so...but it's still going to skew the data. Every teenage driver in America is either behind the wheel of their own car (almost definitely a two-door) or the family car (very likely a SUV, or at least a larger, heavier vehicle.) Yet if they have an accident in the first instance, the data is ignored. Their crash is only counted if they happen to be behind the wheel of their parent's car.

However, my flat statement that "no data set has been corrected for miles travelled" is indeed incorrect. The DOT is at least attempting to do so, even if the methodology is suspect. I thank you for the correction.

> My primary points were...[snip]...Do you agree?

Certainly. Crash safety is a complex subject with many factors. A heavy, poor-handling vehicle may be less safe than a lighter, well-handling one. But even this study admits that vehicle mass is a crucial factor in a multicar collision.


By drank12quartsstrohsbeer on 12/8/2006 11:55:30 AM , Rating: 1
Another concern I have is the safety of the batteries in a crash. Will they come flying into the passenger compartment?

Will rescue workers get electrocuted if they cut through a power cable, trying to free an occupant?

Would acid leak from the batteries if they are damaged?



By TomZ on 12/8/2006 12:14:56 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think you have to worry about these things. Hybrid cars are still engineered for, and have to follow, safety regulations. Power cables aren't in close proximity to passengers to where they would become a concern in an accident, and the types of batteries that are used don't have liquid acid that could leak. Post-accident fire would be the main risk, as with today's vehicles.


By Kuroyama on 12/8/2006 12:50:36 PM , Rating: 2
At least in the Prius the battery is under the center rear seat, so if a collision were to be bad enough to knock the battery out of place or crack it then you'd already be dead anyways. As far as rescue work is concerned, I cannot say, although there is a cable in the engine which you are supposed to unplug to make everything safe.


By Anonymous Freak on 12/8/2006 2:34:50 PM , Rating: 3
The batteries are perfectly safe. They are so firmly mounted that, as someone else mentioned, if the crash was hard enough to knock them loose, you'd be dead already.

As for cutting through a cable? At least in the Prius, if the car detects a crash, it shuts off the power at the battery, so the high-voltage cables don't have any power flowing through them.

They are 'solid' NiMH batteries, not liquid, so nothing will 'splash' on you. And they are not Lithium Ion, so you don't have to worry about them exploding.


RE: question i've always had about hybrids
By mlittl3 on 12/8/2006 12:54:53 PM , Rating: 2
I love how you guys are worried about the safety of hybrid car batteries and voltage even though every car ever produced (except complete electric) have a tank of highly explosive liquid strapped to the bottom of it. Worry more about that and not the extremely unlikely event of a danger due to the battery.


By slashbinslashbash on 12/8/2006 1:39:56 PM , Rating: 2
Except that gasoline is NOT highly explosive in its liquid form.

http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/

See the sections on "Flaming Cars" and "Cigarettes as Lighters"


RE: question i've always had about hybrids
By masher2 (blog) on 12/8/2006 1:40:23 PM , Rating: 2
You've been watching too many Hollywood movies. It's actually quite difficult to get a gas tank to explode under the conditions of a typical accident. The action-movie scenes of two cars colliding and going up like firecrackers are pretty much straight fiction.