backtop


Print 35 comment(s) - last by EVdriver.. on Sep 20 at 10:32 AM


Prius v

Prius Plug-in Hybrid
Toyota's newest hybrids get priced

We've talked about the Prius Plug-in Hybrid and the Prius v on a number of occasions here on DailyTech. Now, we have official pricing for both of the new hybrids.

The Prius v will start at $27,140 when it launches in the U.S. this fall. The Prius v uses the same hybrid powertrain as the standard Prius, but has a larger cargo area behind the rear seats (34.3 cu ft versus 21.6 cu ft). The Prius v weighs 200 pounds more than the standard Prius, so fuel economy suffers. Combined fuel economy for the Prius v is 40mpg instead of the loftier 50mpg for the regular Prius.

The Prius Plug-in Hybrid will be priced from $32,760. The new lithium-ion battery pack in the plug-in variant allows the vehicle to travel up to 15 miles on battery power alone (at speeds up to 62mph). After the 15 miles is exhausted, Prius Plug-in Hybrid will operate exactly like any other Prius hybrid. 

Toyota says that the Prius Plug-in Hybrid can be charged in 1.5 hours using a 240V outlet or 2 to 3 hours using a 120V outlet. 

The Prius Plug-in Hybrid also qualifies for a $2,500 federal tax credit.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Please, allow me to clarify...
By EricMartello on 9/17/2011 12:27:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
This is effectively no different than the current administration's decision to "loan" (read: lose) public funds at risk to a private corporation (Solyndra) in pursuit of similarly non-economically feasible "green" initiatives. Except in this case there is no claim that the money spent will ever be recouped.


I've said this many times before - electric cars and hybrids are not the solution to anything. They're less efficient than current turbo-diesel engines and have comparatively lower performance. As for fuel, they would only shift the dependence from petroleum to coal if they were widely adopted.

Almost all of the "green" energy and products are worse than the "dirty" tech they claim to be improving upon. Most people involved with anything "green" are just in it to bilk grant money or easy loans from the government.

quote:
Hey, I've got a great idea: why don't we return to the ideals of our founding and start behaving as those the Constitution means something. Restore the Republic!


The vast majority of the people will not lift a finger to do anything until they feel like they have nothing left to lose. As bad as things have become economically in the recent years, people still have not hit rock bottom and still live more comfortably than someone in a third-world country.


By bjacobson on 9/17/2011 1:35:19 AM , Rating: 1
on the bright side Chevy is only selling a few hundred per month so we needn't worry about the cost to the general public.


RE: Please, allow me to clarify...
By HotFoot on 9/17/2011 10:42:22 AM , Rating: 3
Agree. Golf TDI fully loaded is in this price range (got one earlier this year). I'm getting ~6 L/100 km (39 mpg) city and 5 L/100 km (47 mpg) highway, plus diesel doesn't spike in price as badly as gas, at least in Ontario.

The odd longer trip I'm at 4.6 L/100 km (51 mpg), but my usual driving habits push it up.

My friend owns a 2 year old Prius (his 2nd Prius, the first lasing him 8 years). The car is pretty good around town and he gets slightly better mileage than me. But everything else - fit and finish, handling, looks (IMO) go to the Golf.


RE: Please, allow me to clarify...
By idiot77 on 9/18/2011 1:09:42 PM , Rating: 2
Really? It's not a problem until we're competing with 3rd world countries?

You're insane. We use to strive to be the top, now not being at the absolute bottom is okay?

By the way, we're already getting smoked in health care. Why not add to it?

The income disparity will be the end of the US as we know it. With the American Taliban and Wall Street folks running things, I expect us to look something like Saudi Arabia.


RE: Please, allow me to clarify...
By Solandri on 9/19/2011 9:07:10 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
I've said this many times before - electric cars and hybrids are not the solution to anything. They're less efficient than current turbo-diesel engines and have comparatively lower performance.

They are more efficient that diesel. You have to remember that 1 gallon of diesel = 1.15 gallons of gasoline when refined from the same source.

There's also the issue of which fuels are cost-effective to refine from crude oil. In a nutshell, 100% diesel is most expensive, 100% gasoline is less expensive, and a mix of diesel and gasoline is least expensive. So any comprehensive energy strategy seeking to minimize cost will use both gasoline and diesel solutions.

And there is nothing preventing you from sticking a hybrid electric drivetrain onto a diesel engine.

quote:
As for fuel, they would only shift the dependence from petroleum to coal if they were widely adopted.

That's the point. Not that I like coal, but the U.S. is the world's Saudi Arabia of coal. It has some of the most extensive coal deposits in the world.


RE: Please, allow me to clarify...
By Dr of crap on 9/19/2011 10:49:06 AM , Rating: 2
Really??
You want us to burn MORE coal?
That's better than burning gas or diesel?
I know they have cleaned up in the smoke stacks, but there is NO WAY coal is better for our air quality than gas or diesel.
You don't get black lung from getting oil out of the ground or making gas from crude oil.
Make bio-diesel and burn that and you're way better than EVs in all respects!


RE: Please, allow me to clarify...
By Gurthang on 9/19/2011 4:31:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You want us to burn MORE coal?

Not really but there are other ways to produce energy and coal can be made cleaner. If you don't mind the additional costs.

quote:
That's better than burning gas or diesel?
I know they have cleaned up in the smoke stacks, but there is NO WAY coal is better for our air quality than gas or diesel.

You realize even with all the emission control devices and restrictions on sulfur in the base fuel for our cars now there is still a smog problem. In general it is easier to contol the polution of a few highly efficient generators than it is to control the output of millions of vehicles which may get little or no maintence.

quote:
You don't get black lung from getting oil out of the ground or making gas from crude oil.

No you get oil rigs blowing up, tankers spilling, piplines bursting, etc. Black lung is a little old school, not that it can't happen now but lets just say both have risks and neither has a perfect saftey record.

quote:
Make bio-diesel and burn that and you're way better than EVs in all respects!

While I prefer bio-diesel over dino-diesel for emissions reasons I still lump it in the same category as corn-ethanol. (Sounds good when you are using a waste stream for you stock but far from a solution for the whole fleet.)

As to electric vehicles and most plug-in hybrids unless you only drive very short distances they just don't make sense in this generation. 100% electric is ultimatly the most efficient way to go, the trick is how you get the power.


By EricMartello on 9/20/2011 12:28:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not really but there are other ways to produce energy and coal can be made cleaner. If you don't mind the additional costs.


If the majority of the world's electric power was coming from modern nuclear power plants, EVs and plug-in hybrids would actually be worth considering if the goal is to reduce fossil fuel dependence...but due to the general "fear" of nuclear power, most electricity comes from coal-fired plants. Yes, there are ways to burn coal more cleanly than the old days, but retrofitting old, dirty plants isn't high on the priority list.

quote:
You realize even with all the emission control devices and restrictions on sulfur in the base fuel for our cars now there is still a smog problem. In general it is easier to contol the polution of a few highly efficient generators than it is to control the output of millions of vehicles which may get little or no maintence.


Smog as a result of vehicle emissions has largely been eliminated due to the catalytic converter...and industrial emissions are already 'regulated', yet they still contribute to the majority of the pollutants in the air today. Did you stop to think about the costs involved with scrubbing the emissions of a power plant that runs 24/7/365 vs a car that drives 12K-15K miles per year?

quote:
While I prefer bio-diesel over dino-diesel for emissions reasons I still lump it in the same category as corn-ethanol. (Sounds good when you are using a waste stream for you stock but far from a solution for the whole fleet.)


The alternative "bio" fuels did not improve on emissions; they were primarily concocted as an alternate source. Bio-diesel is not in the same category as corn-ethanol because bio-diesel can be produced from bio-WASTE material whereas corn-ethanol takes away from a resource we already depend on - corn and corn-based products.


RE: Please, allow me to clarify...
By EVdriver on 9/20/2011 10:32:13 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I know they have cleaned up in the smoke stacks, but there is NO WAY coal is better for our air quality than gas or diesel. You don't get black lung from getting oil out of the ground or making gas from crude oil. Make bio-diesel and burn that and you're way better than EVs in all respects!


You're flat out wong too.

http://www.electroauto.com/info/pollmyth.shtml


By EricMartello on 9/20/2011 12:15:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
They are more efficient that diesel. You have to remember that 1 gallon of diesel = 1.15 gallons of gasoline when refined from the same source.


That is not a measure of efficiency and I'm not even sure it is factually accurate...but it is a fact that diesel fuel contains more energy per equal unit of volume than gasoline, which means you can burn less diesel fuel to get the same power compared to a similar gasoline engine. In other words, diesel is fundamentally more efficient.

quote:
There's also the issue of which fuels are cost-effective to refine from crude oil. In a nutshell, 100% diesel is most expensive, 100% gasoline is less expensive, and a mix of diesel and gasoline is least expensive. So any comprehensive energy strategy seeking to minimize cost will use both gasoline and diesel solutions.


The reason diesel fuel is higher now than it was about a decade ago is due to the "ultra low sulfur" requirement being imposed on it, which requires additional refining. Diesel engines are quite flexible about the types of fuel they can operate on. As long as the fuel has enough stored energy and appropriate octane value.

quote:
And there is nothing preventing you from sticking a hybrid electric drivetrain onto a diesel engine.


Because making the drivetrain more complex for little added benefit is the way to go to "minimize costs", right?

quote:
That's the point. Not that I like coal, but the U.S. is the world's Saudi Arabia of coal. It has some of the most extensive coal deposits in the world.


So my original point stands. Hybrids and EVs are nothing more than an attempt at a paradigm shift to make the US the worlds energy dealer. They do nothing to improve the environment or reduce dependence on fossil fuels as their propaganda touts.


RE: Please, allow me to clarify...
By EVdriver on 9/20/2011 10:24:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I've said this many times before - electric cars and hybrids are not the solution to anything. They're less efficient than current turbo-diesel engines and have comparatively lower performance.


Ok, then you're flat out wrong:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySR0flj6QnQ

Please educate yourself before spreading complete BS.


"People Don't Respect Confidentiality in This Industry" -- Sony Computer Entertainment of America President and CEO Jack Tretton














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki