AutoWeek editors hate hybrid cars
Check out the homepage of autoweek where the main story is on the Lexus RX400h hybrid, and the caption states, "Most of my driving was on the highway, so this fuel mileage number would be disappointing if I owned this. Maybe the excessive heat this weekend had something to do with it; the engine rarely shut off. When I drove this at the launch we actually motored around parking lots at slow speed on the electric motor alone. The steering seemed off on this car, heavy with a pretty bad feel. This car also had a hard time on the grooved freeway pavement, jumping all over."
Yet, if you read the whole article, another AutoWeek test driver really liked the Lexus hybrid.
Every time that Autoweek puts a hybrid vehicle on its cover, it focuses only on negatives, yet it can put the H3 on the cover and only find reasons for praise. Obviously, AutoWeek has an agenda and is not an objective company.
How can AutoWeek justify its smear campaign of hybrid cars? Obviously anything objective might offend advertisers.
AutoWeek is definitely not the place to go for objective automotive research. If you are interested in objective automotive research, especially regarding hybrids, don't waste your time with the hacks at AutoWeek. The blatant bias of their editorial staff is simply unprofessional and unacceptable.
Labels: electric cars, Hybrid Vehicles, Lexus hybrid
posted by Dahcredyns at
12:33 PM
6 Comments:
Hybrid cars require a different method of driving. The best mileage wont be had when one punches the gas pedal when starting from being stopped.
AutoWeek seems to be more into what were once called 'muscle cars' and luxury cars.
Hybrid cars do require a different method of driving to achieve premium fuel efficiency - there is no doubt about that. Nonetheless, when driving in the city, or in congestion, hybrids function pretty well without any change in method.
Oh yeah, its a liberal bias in the media. Furthermore to state "hybrid cars do require a different method of driving to achieve premium efficiency" is absolutely ridiculous. All cars need a different method of driving to match the EPA specs.
What the reviewer said was spot on correct. Hybrids are not as good on the highway as they are in the city. There is nothing incorrect in that statement. Furthermore, since the reviewer stated that most of "his" driving is done of the highway, he wouldn't be gaining very much from this hybrid.
This model (RX400h) costs $7,000 more than the RX330. Secondly, the RX400h only bests the highway EPA rating of the RX300 by 3 mpg. Over the lifetime, its not economically intelligent to pay $7,000 for 3 mpg.
I have nothing against hybrids, I actually applaud them but just because a reviewer showed some faults in the product because it didn't fit his lifestyle, does not mean that its not objective.
No Aventius, I would not call it a liberal bias, please. I would call it an advertising revenue bias.
GM is by far the biggest automotive advertiser, and since AutoWeek's parent company makes all of its money off of advertising revenue, keeping a steady flow of GM ad revenue coming in is certainly a factor.
Additionally, AutoWeek has a sports car mentality. AutoWeek likes gas guzzlers.
More important, I check out AutoWeek everyday and I used to respond regularly to its Forums. The majority of AutoWeek members are either pro-GM, pro-Ford, or just anti-Japanese.
Thus, EVERYTIME AutoWeek displays a hybrid on the homepage, which are typically Japanese, the caption has to include something negative. That's called shaping perception in my marketing handbook.
This sells for AutoWeek, but still qualifies as subjectivity in my book.
As for the cost of the Lexus RX400h versus the 330, I find your argument lacking. Number one, the Lexus RX400h goes a second faster from 0 to 60 than does the 330, thus comparing the mileage between the two isn't fully accurate. Also, why is it acceptable to pay for higher horsepower in conventional vehicles, but not hybrids?
Second, the Lexus RX400h is a performance hybrid, not a hybrid built for fuel efficiency. Therefore, somebody whom happens to think the environment and pollution are important issues, but whom also has an affection for performance, could purchase the Lexus RX400h to fulfill their needs.
Third, your statement, "Furthermore to state "hybrid cars do require a different method of driving to achieve premium efficiency" is absolutely ridiculous." All cars need a different method of driving to match the EPA specs.", is lame.
Of course all cars require a different driving method to achieve maximum fuel efficiency.
So, why does AutoWeek consistently talk about hybrids missing their EPA estimates, when the problem is found in all vehicles, a fact which AutoWeek likes to ignore?
The point is NOT about how to achieve maximum efficiency, the point is that anyone who drives with a lead foot, or 85 miles per hour down the freeway can achieve the worst fuel efficiency in any vehicle.
Consequently, if one sets out to prove that hybrids don't achieve their EPA ratings, the way they drive it can have a huge effect on the outcome. That's a valid point, especially when talking about AutoWeek staff that prefer horsepower over fuel efficiency.
One final note. To test a full hybrid during mostly highway miles is simply biased.
First, congestion is considered one of the major problems facing every majory American city and even many smaller cities.
Second, this congestion problem is supposed to intensify significantly in the next couple of decades.
Since the majority of Americans now live in these congested areas and in the future the far majority of American will live in congested areas, driving in congestion should be the most important criteria in any modern test drive, not driving on the open highway.
In congestion, conventional vehicles perform their worst, especially if you have a lead foot, and not just regarding fuel efficiency, but pollution as well.
In congestion, even hybrids like the Lexus RX400h, excel compared to their conventional counterparts. In terms of reality and especially in terms of the future, congestion is THE standard.
The fact that AutoWeek ignores this fact when testing hybrids is inexcusable.
First of all, if you honestly believe that you are helping Americas "gas crisis" and stoping "pollution" by buying a Hybrid car, YOU ARE A MORON.
Fact 1 - A Hybrid car STILL uses GAS. Your not saving american soldiers in iraq, your not telling "Big Oil" to screw themselves, All your doing by buying a hybrid is adding to the gas crisis by showing that you don't care if you only get 15to20mpg more than a non-hybrid car, especally when you spend $10,000 or more to have that coveted "Hybrid Car".
Fact 2 - Hybrids get what 50mpg to 60mpg if that, wow, non hybrid cars such as Volkswagon diesels get 40mpg to 50mpg as well as honda civics and other toyata non-hybrids that get well over 30mpg, without having to use the much vaunted "electric engine" and with a cost that is thousands of dollars less than a hybrid.
(What a concept, if you by a car that gets 20mpg LESS than a hybrid, for say $5000 LESS than a Hybrid You now would not have to worry about gas seeing that $5000 in your pocket is worth at least 3 years in gas. "But if I buy a Hybrid for $5000 more I will save on gas!", Sure you will, If your a MORON. You will pay thousands of dollars more for car that saves a couple 10-20mpg,
SIMPLE MATH = Can a Hybrid save money?
Non-Hybrid car - I can buy a $5000 non-hybrid used car and put $2000 away for gas for 2 years, Now I have a car for $7000 with gas for 2 years.
Hybrid car - $20,000+ and add the gas for 2 years to that, only $1500 for gas for 2 years compared to $2000 for a non-Hybrid because hybrids get "such" better gas milage.
So in conclusion - Does the hybrid car "really" save you money? hum, $7,000 compared to $20,000 plus.
Fact 3 - How much pollution is put in the air from the production plants making these completly worthless Hybrid cars.
Conclusion - Some people think that by buying a hybrid car that they are helping save Americans, the communtiy, the planet, etc.
THIS IS ALL BULLSHIT.
Please see through the "HYBRID HYPE" and REALIZE that HYBRID CARS STILL USE GAS!!!
And if you are still using GAS you are not solving any "problems" related to the gas crisis, you are only further perpetuating the current gas crisis.
thetruth-
Perhaps I am a moron. You would know because when one looks up "moron" in Webster's dictionary, your name and picture appears.
Give me a break.
You didn't provide one alternative, not one solution. That's brilliant. You must be a genius?
A hybrid car still uses gas? Wow! Unbelievable. Did you put that together yourself. What's your answer? water, air - probably gas because you're full of it!
Fact 1 - If the American fleet achieved the fuel economy of a Prius we could end foreign oil dependency based upon today's gasoline consumption.
Not a bad first step, considering the best of hybrid technology is yet to come.
Fact 2 - Hybrids are an emerging technology. The commodore 64 didn't cause the computer revolution of today, but it was a step. Lithium based hybrid technology offers significant improvements over today's hybrid technology. So, a hybrids 20-30 percent improvement in fuel efficiency will jump to 30-40 percent, maybe even 50 percent. But, yes, you are right. Even a 50 percen improvement in fuel economy will still use gas. Even a 200 mpg hybrid might still use a little gas - so why even try, right - based on your argument?
Further, in terms of cost - economies of scale will make hybrid technology cheaper.
Additionally, hybrid technology, as it moves toward lithium batteries, actually increases hybrids ability to run on self-generated electricity. This isn't coal generated electricity. It is regenerative breaking-created electricity - creating energy from wasted energy. What an unbelievably stupid idea, huh?
In terms of value, almost every major auto rag has determined that hybrids actually can be a long term value, but you're the expert, right?
Fact 3 - Hybrid production does incur a bit more pollution because its a new production line with new componenets with fewer suppliers - meaning greater distances and less efficiency in supply chains. This happens with every innovation, every new way of doing things.
So, what's your problem? Are you mad you can't still run around like a caveman?
After further review, I think you are the biggest Moron I've ever met on the Internet, and I've met many.
You can define all the problems in the world, yet not offer one solution. Awesome, don't buy a hybrid. Don't buy any vehicle that uses gas, or any fuel that has any ANY connection to gas - which is basically all fuels and forms of transportation directly or indirectly.
Instead, follow the moron to moron-land on flying carpets.
You have no vision, thetruth. If the species had been led by you out of Africa, we'd all still be in Africa. Now that's 'thetruth'.
Post a Comment
<< Home