Re: John Haines’ Jan. 17 commentary, “Hybrid cars don’t really work�:
An open car hood attracts men like an open flame attracts moths. Mr. Haines lit a flame with his hybrid thoughts.
I agree with him that removing the generator and batteries between the engine and wheels would give better miles per gallon. But the hybrid is a compromise. Take the batteries away, and you won’t have jackrabbit acceleration, just better miles per gallon.
In the ‘80s, Chevy Sprints were phenomenal gas savers. The successor, the Metro, was bigger and had more horsepower, but miles per gallon dropped to 52. My brother has an ‘89 Metro and consistently gets 48 miles per gallon on his daily commute from Santa Paula to Camarillo. He’s content with its performance, but consumers drive the market and they wanted more zip, thus the hybrid.
The hybrid doesn’t get the miles per gallon of those gas-saving pioneer cars of the ‘80s; however, as one pro-hybrid writer wrote, he could have a top speed of 110 miles per hour.
Imagine being able to travel twice that fast and get better miles per gallon — yep, 228 miles per hour to be exact and 53.8 miles per gallon — and not use environmentally unfriendly roads. It’s an airplane designed by Burt Rutan, the same guy that made Spaceship One and won the X Prize. Using this airplane for a trip from Ojai to Bakersfield would take about 15 minutes and use 1.2 gallons of gas. The same trip in a Prius would take about 2 hours 14 minutes and use three gallons at 41 miles per gallon.
Maybe it’s unfair to use a Rutan design for this comparison. If we used a 1946 Cessna 140, the trip would take 35 minutes and about three gallons.
Either way, airplanes are quicker, and by not needing 120 miles of asphalt and concrete, they are by far more environmentally friendly. The Federal Aviation Administration has relaxed some of its stringent rules, and aviation technology is improving at a rapid rate, with new engines, Global Positioning System navigation, collision avoidance technology in the cockpit, real time weather graphics on the instrument panel — the list goes on.
I guess Mr. Haines’ main point was that in the ‘80s, miles per gallon was pushing 60 with the Sprint and 50 with the Metro, and we now have 41 miles per gallon with the Prius.
My point is that even with 100 miles per gallon, it’s still a car, and you’ll still need lots and lots of asphalt and it takes oil and energy to make asphalt.
Even Ojai has gone backward; it doesn’t have an airport anymore. I guess I’ve gone backward too. I don’t have my 1946 Cessna 140 anymore, but I can buy another for less than the cost of a Prius.
— Pete Mason, Santa Paula
Leave a comment