Toyota 'Pious' Vs BMW 520D in MPG contest.......
Discussion
sniff petrol said:
Dimski said:
JamesK said:
I knew what would win but am still amazed by the performance of the BMW - 0-60 in 8.3s and 177bhp whilst still acheving that economy in a car of that size WITH a particulate filter that heavily affects economy, is staggering.
I may buy one
I keep thinking this.I may buy one
TBH I was amazed that the 520d is that fast. An E46 320d on an empty motorway lost out to my ST TDCI, so to hear that a new 520d is 1 second quicker to 60 is a surprise. (Mine is an estate, so over 9 sec to 60, book figure IIRC)
And My problem with the 520d is, I am sure it is a great car, but I would always regret not spending the extra on a 530d.
Oh. And Woofs airbag thread.
The 520D would appear to be a very good car for an entry level mobile.
P,
I am not defending the Prius, it failed and will continue to do so as it does not suit European driving. If a 520D beat it what would a 320D do? Closer in price as well.
NASA tested moon rovers in the late '60s early '70s. So that is 35 years out of date. I don’t think the ‘dead zone’ exists now. A lot of the land has been reclaimed with only some of the spoil heaps remaining, and they are getting planted with trees and grass.
How much nickel goes into the manufacture of other cars anyway? For example: Cupro-nickel brake pipes, some stainless steels can have quite a high percentage of nickel.
There was major deforestation around Sudbury when timber was used as fuel for the smelting plant and some was supplied to rebuild Chicago after their great fire in 1871. Both a long time ago.
I realise that this link is for a General Motors site but there are some real before and after shots.
Mr Dave said:
Prius is partly driven by a battery which contains nickel. The nickel is mined and smelted at a plant in Sudbury, Ontario. This plant has caused so much environmental damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used the ‘dead zone’ around the plant to test moon rovers. The area around the plant is devoid of any life for miles.
NASA tested moon rovers in the late '60s early '70s. So that is 35 years out of date. I don’t think the ‘dead zone’ exists now. A lot of the land has been reclaimed with only some of the spoil heaps remaining, and they are getting planted with trees and grass.
Mr Dave said:
The plant is the source of all the nickel found in a Prius’ battery and Toyota purchases 1,000 tons annually.
As there is about 25lb of nickel in a Prius battery pack where does the rest go? There surely isn't that much waste in production?How much nickel goes into the manufacture of other cars anyway? For example: Cupro-nickel brake pipes, some stainless steels can have quite a high percentage of nickel.
Mr Dave said:
Dubbed the Superstack, the plague-factory has spread sulfur dioxide across northern Ontario, becoming every environmentalist’s nightmare.
“The acid rain around Sudbury was so bad it destroyed all the plants and the soil slid down off the hillside,” said Canadian Greenpeace energy-coordinator David Martin during an interview with Mail, a British-based newspaper.
True the acid rain around Sudbury was bad but building the Superstack in 1972 reduced it dramatically. This had the effect of spreading the pollution across a wider area. However the amount of sulphur dioxide emitted has since been reduced by 90%. There are plans to reduce it further, 97% by 2015.“The acid rain around Sudbury was so bad it destroyed all the plants and the soil slid down off the hillside,” said Canadian Greenpeace energy-coordinator David Martin during an interview with Mail, a British-based newspaper.
There was major deforestation around Sudbury when timber was used as fuel for the smelting plant and some was supplied to rebuild Chicago after their great fire in 1871. Both a long time ago.
Mr Dave said:
All of this would be bad enough in and of itself; however, the journey to make a hybrid doesn’t end there. The nickel produced by this disastrous plant is shipped via massive container ship to the largest nickel refinery in Europe. From there, the nickel hops over to China to produce ‘nickel foam.’ From there, it goes to Japan. Finally, the completed batteries are shipped to the United States, finalizing the around-the-world trip required to produce a single Prius battery.
Can’t argue with that scenario but there are probably lots of other examples of crazy transportation models because of the global business systems.Mail on Sunday said:
It has come to our attention that a story originally published in the Mail on Sunday has apparently been misinterpreted by some of our readers.
In order to prevent further misinterpretation, we have removed the article from our website. The following letter was published in the Mail on Sunday on May 13, 2007:
Your article about the Inco nickel factory at Sudbury, Canada, wrongly implied that poisonous fumes from the factory had left the area looking like a lunar landscape because so many plants and trees had died. You also sought to blame Toyota because the nickel is used, among countless other purposes, for making the Prius hybrid car batteries.
In fact any damage occurred more than thirty years ago, long before the Prius was made. Since then, Inco has reduced sulphur dioxide emissions by more than 90 per cent and has helped to plant more than 11 million trees.
The company has won praise from the Ontario Ministry of Environment and environmental groups. Sudbury has won several conservation awards and is a centre for eco-tourism.
The picture that was used in the Mail on Sunday article was from 1994 In order to prevent further misinterpretation, we have removed the article from our website. The following letter was published in the Mail on Sunday on May 13, 2007:
Your article about the Inco nickel factory at Sudbury, Canada, wrongly implied that poisonous fumes from the factory had left the area looking like a lunar landscape because so many plants and trees had died. You also sought to blame Toyota because the nickel is used, among countless other purposes, for making the Prius hybrid car batteries.
In fact any damage occurred more than thirty years ago, long before the Prius was made. Since then, Inco has reduced sulphur dioxide emissions by more than 90 per cent and has helped to plant more than 11 million trees.
The company has won praise from the Ontario Ministry of Environment and environmental groups. Sudbury has won several conservation awards and is a centre for eco-tourism.
I realise that this link is for a General Motors site but there are some real before and after shots.
w
eLex said:
eLex said: i quite fancy buying a prius just because its so unenviromentally friendly.
Get a bumper sticker "I hate the environment" put on?But directly on topic, wouldn't a 118d/120d/123d or 320d have been a better comparison - surely in the same conditions any of these would have performed better than the 520?
clonmult said:
weLex said:
eLex said: i quite fancy buying a prius just because its so unenviromentally friendly.
Get a bumper sticker "I hate the environment" put on?But directly on topic, wouldn't a 118d/120d/123d or 320d have been a better comparison - surely in the same conditions any of these would have performed better than the 520?
Quite. The fact they tested against a 5 series was giving the Pious a headstart frankly - and it STILL lost.
I agree there is some middle ground regards battery production and the Prius' real strength is in city driving not on a long haul BUT the blinkered nutters who swear by the Prius as the messiah never occupy the middle ground either!
I agree there is some middle ground regards battery production and the Prius' real strength is in city driving not on a long haul BUT the blinkered nutters who swear by the Prius as the messiah never occupy the middle ground either!
JamesK said:
Quite. The fact they tested against a 5 series was giving the Pious a headstart frankly - and it STILL lost.
I agree there is some middle ground regards battery production and the Prius' real strength is in city driving not on a long haul BUT the blinkered nutters who swear by the Prius as the messiah never occupy the middle ground either!
The other thing is if the Prius is really only designed as a city car then that means you need two cars or have to rely on public transport for non city driving. So then it becomes really not that environmentally friendly and clearly adds to the UK wide parking problems/people pacing over their front lawns to create parking spaces rather than as either to drain away the rain water and losing the CO2 absorbing plants which they are replacing.I agree there is some middle ground regards battery production and the Prius' real strength is in city driving not on a long haul BUT the blinkered nutters who swear by the Prius as the messiah never occupy the middle ground either!
BMW's Im afraid have it licked in every area & they are working on a TDI Hybrid now that will be a remarkable bit of kit and given their current 118D dos combined 60mpg & Extra Urban of 75mpg I can easily see the 100mpg TDI Hybrid a reality.
Kevin 996C4 said:
It does beg the question - Why are these hybrids not diesel/electric......
Because the Hybrid cars were initially made by Honda then didnt make diesel road cars and followed by Toyota.Also rememebr the largest car market in the World is the US they have much stricter emmissions and as such even today only one or two diesel engines pass (BMW if your wondering) and hence zero demand. Europe it used to be that diesel was so cheap the savings would take so long to recover there woulndt be any point for the higher purchase cost /R&D cost of Hybrid diesel.
I think VW are also working on Diesel Hybrids too - to me it seems the most logical stepping stone take an engine which on average is 55% more efficient than petrol and then hybridise it rather than take the least efficient engine and Hybridise it to try to match diesel economy.... pointless IMHO.
Just re-reading the article and one other thing was certainly true was that mpg in the Prius plummeted once you reached motorway speed, to the tune that at 70mph it was getting under 30mpg. Which is ste frankly. The Prius is a city car, at low speeds it's very good on mpg and being only a 1.5 petrol has low emissions. But an all-round car it is not.
te frankly. The Prius is a city car, at low speeds it's very good on mpg and being only a 1.5 petrol has low emissions. But an all-round car it is not.catso said:
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_styl...
But it was not enough. For all my defensive driving, slippery bodywork and hybrid technology, my average fuel consumption was 48.1mpg. I’d lost to a Beemer and I was disappointed; I had never driven so slowly or carefully for so long in my life.
Thats a good write up !But it was not enough. For all my defensive driving, slippery bodywork and hybrid technology, my average fuel consumption was 48.1mpg. I’d lost to a Beemer and I was disappointed; I had never driven so slowly or carefully for so long in my life.
I have often read that in these days of making cars substantially of aluminium, that the overall amount of energy used in the entire making of a car is somewhere in the region of 10 to 12 times the amount of energy it will ever consume in its useful life of approx 100,000 miles.
Aluminium smelting consumes vast amounts of power, let alone all other stages of production needed to put together a modern car. Even if this figure wrong and its more like is x5 or x15, it dwarfs any argument about marginal improvements in fuel economy in new cars as the impact of producing the car is far far worse than its consumption.
So surely we should be encouraged to keep older cars in better shape and run them for longer ?
I have a 2002 Audi A6 estate with a remarkable 1.9 TDi engine. Its currently showing 124,000 miles yet its amazingly 100% reliable all day everyday. It feels like driving any other 2 yr old car. Mid range overtaking punch is surprisingly good, and theoretically its capable of cruising at 130mph. I suspect it’ll go on for at least another 50k miles, maybe a lot more given some of the 2nd hand adverts for high mileage ones I have seen.
What’s interesting is that in everyday driving including pottling around town or sat in central London traffic jams caused by the TFL strangulation scheme whilst pumping out emissions, I get an average of 48mpg, and on a motorway run at 75/80mph, I get a whopping 54/56mpg. And this is a big heavy comfortable car laden with extras.
Much as I admire the thinking behind the Prious, wheres the incentive to buy one ?
Why buy a new car and discard an old one, especially when you consider both the latent environmental concerns behind its production, as well as the cost of ownership of a new car ?
I vote every time to buy an older car and maintain it until its just not fit for the purpose.
I would, however, consider buying an electric Tesla roadster. But because the govt haven’t yet come up with a convincing reason to tax it to death, they cannot yet be legislated for use in the UK which is completely daft. If we all drove around in cars like this the cost to buy would be much cheaper than any current car, and there would be an enormous reduction in environmental impact much quicker than any refinement of combustion engines.
Stealth-wagon said:
catso said:
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_styl...
But it was not enough. For all my defensive driving, slippery bodywork and hybrid technology, my average fuel consumption was 48.1mpg. I’d lost to a Beemer and I was disappointed; I had never driven so slowly or carefully for so long in my life.
Thats a good write up !But it was not enough. For all my defensive driving, slippery bodywork and hybrid technology, my average fuel consumption was 48.1mpg. I’d lost to a Beemer and I was disappointed; I had never driven so slowly or carefully for so long in my life.
I have often read that in these days of making cars substantially of aluminium, that the overall amount of energy used in the entire making of a car is somewhere in the region of 10 to 12 times the amount of energy it will ever consume in its useful life of approx 100,000 miles.
Aluminium smelting consumes vast amounts of power, let alone all other stages of production needed to put together a modern car. Even if this figure wrong and its more like is x5 or x15, it dwarfs any argument about marginal improvements in fuel economy in new cars as the impact of producing the car is far far worse than its consumption.
So surely we should be encouraged to keep older cars in better shape and run them for longer ?
I have a 2002 Audi A6 estate with a remarkable 1.9 TDi engine. Its currently showing 124,000 miles yet its amazingly 100% reliable all day everyday. It feels like driving any other 2 yr old car. Mid range overtaking punch is surprisingly good, and theoretically its capable of cruising at 130mph. I suspect it’ll go on for at least another 50k miles, maybe a lot more given some of the 2nd hand adverts for high mileage ones I have seen.
What’s interesting is that in everyday driving including pottling around town or sat in central London traffic jams caused by the TFL strangulation scheme whilst pumping out emissions, I get an average of 48mpg, and on a motorway run at 75/80mph, I get a whopping 54/56mpg. And this is a big heavy comfortable car laden with extras.
Much as I admire the thinking behind the Prious, wheres the incentive to buy one ?
Why buy a new car and discard an old one, especially when you consider both the latent environmental concerns behind its production, as well as the cost of ownership of a new car ?
I vote every time to buy an older car and maintain it until its just not fit for the purpose.
I would, however, consider buying an electric Tesla roadster. But because the govt haven’t yet come up with a convincing reason to tax it to death, they cannot yet be legislated for use in the UK which is completely daft. If we all drove around in cars like this the cost to buy would be much cheaper than any current car, and there would be an enormous reduction in environmental impact much quicker than any refinement of combustion engines.
I for one cannot understand why anyone would buy a petrol A to B car with up to 2.0ltrs (excl hot hatches) these cars are slow do not sound nice when rev'd are not tha economical and due to being a smaller engine they are pushed harder during their life and as such their max milage capacity will be lower. i.e. say a 1.3ltr with a top speed of 96mph (Ford Ka Hyundai Accent etc) driving at motorway speeds your engine eill be reving at at least 4500rpm out of a range of 6000 noisey slow unpleasant.
Going to bigger cars / sports car end yes I can certainly see the benefit of a nice petrol sounds great and has stunning performance but why of why have a run about which when it gets older has the ignition system to go wrong will not do 150,000 let alone the 450,000 miles a diesel can do without a rebuild.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff