Hybrid Vehicles | Page 6 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Hybrid Vehicles

Yes, we kicked around the idea of a small trailer as well. We have gotten by without so far.

When trying to achieve decent fuel economy, towing isn’t typically part of the equation.

I think for our purposes, we will be ok. We did say there will be times we want more room. Just as we do with our current situation. But, it’s not a must have. We can always make due.

For the most part, commuting to London and back and trips to Ottawa with the kids and pups should be ok.

We could go bigger but, driving the majority of the time as a single passenger chews up a lot of fuel needlessly.

We did consider other options but, the price point for new and having a monthly payment isn’t appealing at the moment.

Even if we have to rent a minivan for a week vacation etc. The expense of the rental and fuel for those occasions is cheaper than buying something in the $30k-$40k range.

I can buy something used and outright that has low mileage and should be able to run it for a while with regular maintenance.

That’s the approach we are taking anyways.

We had to examine different options. We can get even better efficiency with a sedan but, that doesn’t work with the dogs.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
GreyGhost said:
My money is on profit margins. Removing the ability to tow from any vehicle other than the high profit margin large vehicles is an easy win for the car companies. Less engineering, less liability and more profit all at the same time.
Click to expand...

Exactly and Europe is the best evidence of that. I guess lobbyist groups in NA had their way .... LOL
 
Lower tow ratings in North America versus overseas is the result of two things;

1- The litigious nature of many in North America, quick to try to blame everything upon somebody else, so if they hook up an overly heavy trailer to anything less than a massive pick up truck and then get in an accident, of course it’s not the fault of their lack of driving skills or anything, it’s automatically the manufactures fault.

2- Different demands on the vehicle. We have a huge variety of terrain here that they don’t have there. Coupled with #1 above manufacturers don’t want people pulling heavy loads with smaller vehicles.

In the end tow ratings are not legally enforceable regardless however, but exceeding them and then blowing out something in the drivetrain (but for 1 example) could certainly negatively affect your warranty. That aside, axle ratings and proper trailer braking (if applicable) are the only things that are legally enforceable.
 
PrivatePilot said:
Lower tow ratings in North America versus overseas is the result of two things;

1- The litigious nature of many in North America, quick to try to blame everything upon somebody else, so if they hook up an overly heavy trailer to anything less than a massive pick up truck and then get in an accident, of course it’s not the fault of their lack of driving skills or anything, it’s automatically the manufactures fault.

2- Different demands on the vehicle. We have a huge variety of terrain here that they don’t have there. Coupled with #1 above manufacturers don’t want people pulling heavy loads with smaller vehicles.

In the end tow ratings are not legally enforceable regardless however, but exceeding them and then blowing out something in the drivetrain (but for 1 example) could certainly negatively affect your warranty. That aside, axle ratings and proper trailer braking (if applicable) are the only things that are legally enforceable.
Click to expand...

I would agree with your argument if it wasn't for the dick measuring contest that is pickup trucks. The rated capacity for pickups can be reeediculous (as you know better than most). If manufacturers were really driven by your points, pickup truck towing capacity would probably be 30 to 50% of current ratings. Obviously with enough profit (or maybe prestige) at stake, manufacturers are willing to ostrich on safety (It looks like the current bar is the Ram with a 31,210 lb trailer on a 7423 lb truck).

EDIT:
I'm all for the SAE and appreciate that they have tried to standardize this mess with J2807, but the largest workout the brakes get is a stop from 20 mph in <45 ft. I want to see what happens to the brakes on a 40,000 lb GCVW pickup/trailer that throws the anchor out at 60 mph (which is not an infrequent occurrence in the GTA). I wouldn't be surprised if the brakes disappeared before you got stopped. There is just not enough mass in them to deal with that much heat.
 
Last edited:
PrivatePilot said:
2- Different demands on the vehicle. We have a huge variety of terrain here that they don’t have there.
Click to expand...

Yeah. There's no roads in Europe that could possibly put the demands from towing on a vehicle like the roads we have here.

Unique-Swiss-Road-Stelvio.jpg
 
FullMotoJacket said:
Yeah. There's no roads in Europe that could possibly put the demands from towing on a vehicle like the roads we have here.

Unique-Swiss-Road-Stelvio.jpg
Click to expand...
That was my thought.

Sent from my SM-A500W using Tapatalk
 
I think in regards to towing ratings in NA compared to Euro specs, it’s more about life style.

Many are one vehicle homes with space at a premium. Not many have the driveway to accommodate large SUVs and pick ups. Or multi vehicles.

And the price of fuel to run them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
FullMotoJacket said:
Yeah. There's no roads in Europe that could possibly put the demands from towing on a vehicle like the roads we have here.
Click to expand...

One can find examples from any country of "extreme" roads, but the reality is RV'ers aren't driving on most of them.

The countries are also freakin tiny in comparison to ours - you can cross the entirety of most European countries in an hour or two. Here, a 2 hour drive will get you to....London, or Kingston.

europevstexas.jpg


One very important factor I forgot to include is that they actually have good drivers. Their driver training is very stringent and thorough, so the quality of the drivers on their roads is just far superior to the "pulse and a crayon" requirements that will grant you a DL across most of North America.
 
I very much doubt the calculation of towing capacity involves variables such as distance to cross an average country, or average driver skill. More likely the different results for the same vehicle are explained by a variable called 'marketing', which disadvantages North America due to litigation costs and the profitability of light trucks.
 
PrivatePilot said:
Lower tow ratings in North America versus overseas is the result of two things;

1- The litigious nature of many in North America, quick to try to blame everything upon somebody else, so if they hook up an overly heavy trailer to anything less than a massive pick up truck and then get in an accident, of course it’s not the fault of their lack of driving skills or anything, it’s automatically the manufactures fault.

2- Different demands on the vehicle. We have a huge variety of terrain here that they don’t have there. Coupled with #1 above manufacturers don’t want people pulling heavy loads with smaller vehicles.

In the end tow ratings are not legally enforceable regardless however, but exceeding them and then blowing out something in the drivetrain (but for 1 example) could certainly negatively affect your warranty. That aside, axle ratings and proper trailer braking (if applicable) are the only things that are legally enforceable.
Click to expand...

1) does play role .... insurance/litigation involved in America is what Europeans spend a lot of time laughing about. But hey, they cannot buy AR15 .... but they can tow legally a smallsize trailer with their econo boxes.

2) Does NOT apply ... terrain has nothing to do with that, once you rode on both continents, you know ....

3) Marketing does apply, which you alluded to by your note at end of point #2, but you didn't mention the correct causation ..... which is the need to sell higher margin p/u trucks and SUV's


If the above is not true, how otherwise would you explain this scenario? ..... Volvo V60 vs. Volvo V60 CrossCountry (jacked up version of the first with some fancy alloy protective cladding down low). Even though the rest of the vehicle is 100% identical, one can legally tow in Canada the other one cannot. But, but .... they will sell you OEM hitch and wiring (minus TCM module which handles function of sensors), but they will not install it, even though verbally they will confirm that it works 100% and many people have done it whether themselves or through independent shop. BTW, the V60 can tow legally 2500lbs and I cannot get anything here. Also, many many SUV's can tow 1000lbs less (sometimes more) than identical car in US and Canada ... feels like gravity has some different affect I guess in this part of the world, right?

This is what you call marketing induced BS, not engineering triggered standard or reasoning coming into play.
 
I would just add that we are talking about specific percentage of customers, who have a need to tow lighter things about 20 times a year. More less seasonal requirements. Of course, if someone tows every week, all kinds of light and heavy stuff, I'd get probably a bit larger vehicle to accommodate such need. But this is not one of those scenarios ....
 
918 Spyder. 29 km range on the electric motors............but you can do those 29 km in 19 minutes.
 
Last edited:
Messed up my math. 11 minutes.
 
You can have a maximum range or you can have a maximum speed. But not both ...... I hope there will be one day battery which consumes less the faster you go ... hopefully someone can finally re-write the damn laws and get on with it.
 
mxs said:
You can have a maximum range or you can have a maximum speed. But not both ...... I hope there will be one day battery which consumes less the faster you go ... hopefully someone can finally re-write the damn laws and get on with it.
Click to expand...

IIRC, at one point in the past (I'm not sure if it is still true) a Tesla consumed about 1% charge for each second at full throttle. On the street that isn't a big problem as any more than 3 seconds full throttle at a time and you are in ticket territory. Also the enforced cooldown after each launch would keep you from draining the battery too quickly.
 
nobbie48 said:
Still a tortoise vs. hare situation.
Click to expand...

After 7 weeks there's still a dozen vehicles in contention. Might as well add another one.
 
GreyGhost said:
IIRC, at one point in the past (I'm not sure if it is still true) a Tesla consumed about 1% charge for each second at full throttle. On the street that isn't a big problem as any more than 3 seconds full throttle at a time and you are in ticket territory. Also the enforced cooldown after each launch would keep you from draining the battery too quickly.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure, what you are describing only happens when in "ludicrous" mode. Not in regular mode which is plenty faaaast. Plus,they have made changes since than as well, so even in ludicrous mode, I don't think it needs a cool down after every launch.
 
Funny Tesla observation: One of the reasons Tesla sued Top Gear/Clarkson (and the reason Clarkson refused to review any Tesla for many years afterwards, only recently having changed that in a recent episode of Grand Tour...with the car full of lawyers LOL) was because when they reviewed the Roadster it only got 55 miles of range.

That hurt Teslas feelings, despite being reality. You drive an EV hard, you use a lot of battery. Their famous Bugatti Veyron top speed run emptied the fuel tank in 12 minutes, though..but Bugatti didn't sue the show over it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom