Gps Saves more Fuel than Hybrids??

Just because you have a GPS doesn't mean that you will get over 40 mpg on your car. Yes, you could save some gas without getting lost, but if everyone buys a hybrid and a GPS, then we will save millions of fuel per year.

And don't forget, buying a GPS system for $250 is alot easier than spending over $20,000 for a hybrid.

Not necessarily true. Top Gear did a test where they drove a Prius around their track, followed by a BMW M3. The BMW had better mileage in the test. It just goes to show it matters more how you drive, not what you drive. Here's a video of the test:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKTOyiKLARk

Maybe on perfectly flat land, I drove from Cleveland to Ft. Myers Florida Down I-77 to Columbia SC then Over to I-95, down to I-4 across to Tampa then down I-75 to my destination in a Hybrid Toyota Camry. The average was 32 miles per gallon. My Buick Riviera gets 30 on the road and is much more comfortable.

So all the tree huggers can keep the Hybrids because they don't impress me for the two miles per gallon and I don't live on the Bonnieville Salt Flats, I'm going to ride in style and comfort.
For the extra money you pay for a hybrid you sure can buy a lot of gas, not sure it works out at the end. And I hope you only lease the hybrid and don't actually buy it, can't imagine what it would cost when it starts to die (i.e. Batteries, controller, electric motor).

Hmmmm I wonder if Al Gore's Limo is a Hybrid?

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/03/29/al-gore-snubs-earth-ho...

I love Top Gear. Great show.

Top Gear is a great show, but not a true test of everyday driving. If you drive everyday in local traffic and also highway driving, it will be a way different story. I do mostly local driving and I would get about 40 mgp than the M3's 19 mpg. Besides who drives a M3 like a old fart! The folks who drive these are going to run these cars and forgetabout then.

Besides the M3 will cost you over $50K, if not closer to $60K. If I had to buy myself one, I would get a Honda Insight for $20K and some who have tested it were geting over 50 mpg and many getting 60 mpg over a street layout, where you would do everyday driving.

Nomad's subject says it: It's HOW you drive it (not what you drive). A fuel efficient hybrids isn't really fuel efficient if you drive it like a maniac (eg: sudden stops and accelerations). The test is also unfair because the M3 gets a benefit by 'hiding' behind the Prius. There's less wind resistance there.

The point isn't about how the Prius drives around town, and it isn't about the BMW in particular. It's about the myth that simply because you're driving a hybrid, you automatically get great mileage. It simply isn't true. If I was driving a Prius, my right foot would spend most of the time on the floor, trying to choke the life out of the gas pedal (or is it a volt pedal? ). Would I get better mileage in an M3? Probably not. Would I get 40mpg in the Prius? Definately not.

All this has hijacked the OP's point, that gps units may well be saving quite a bit of fuel. I know a couple of occasions where my GPS has shortened a trip considerably, saving me a couple of gallons each time. I wonder just how much this adds up for all the gps units out there?

Holy cow, that's 18 less than I get in my 2009 diesel Jetta. My old 2006 diesel Golf was good for almost 60 on the highway.

I believe the point the OP was trying to make is that there are X hybribs on the road and they save in total Y gallons fuel. There are W GPS units in use and in total they save Z gallons of fuel.

Therefore, since X << W (<<=much less, or there are way more GPSs in use than hybrids) it is very likely that Z > Y and the GPSs save in total more fuel.

However, it is probably also true that Y/X >> Z/W (gallons saved per unit) or on a per unit basis the hybrids save much more fuel.

I am saying that there are Millions of new Gps units in cars now. And not only not getting lost, But not driving around looking for X restaurant,or Y Store. If they can drive more efficiently from point A to point B less fuel is being used.

According to a report from msnbc (see links below), "only" 14% of American drivers have a gps. According to the 2006 DoT report, there were 202,810,438 licensed drivers in the US ('06 is the newest data). That makes about 28.4 million gps users. The hybrid production figures suggest there were 212,000 hybrids on the road in 2005, and an additional 254,545 in '06, making 466545. So there are more than 60 times as many gps units out there than hybrid cars. So for every gallon of fuel saved by a gps, a hybrid has to save 60 gallons just to break even! So how many gallons are saved by a gps or by a hybrid? Someone else can get that one.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26747443/
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/ohim/hs06/htm/dl1c.htm
http://www.hybridcar.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=v...

Nomad's post somehow vaguely reminds me of "... if an eastbound train leaves Cleveland and a westbound train leaves Boston....", but....to the OP's point...

I drive an 07 Prius paired with an omnipresent
GPS, and there are a lot of things that affect the mileage. Normal city driving nets me 52 MPG, except in summer when running the a/c in Tucson's heat drops it to 43 MPG.

My last highway drive was a winter-time trip to Texas with cruise control set at 80 mph. That trip averaged 45 MPG. Because of its electronic continuously variable transmission (ECVT), a Prius gets higher MPG in city driving than on the highway ... opposite of most conventionally powered cars.

Even in a town I am familiar with, when I have to drive someplace I haven't been for a while I ask my GPS to calculate a route on speed, not distance. More than once I've been pleasantly surprised when the suggested route incorporates some gas-savings twists and turns that I never would have thought of myself.

So I get the best of both worlds.

In my case the gps has saved enough fuel to pay for itself in over a year or two. I drive a 99 E250 van for work. On a best day it gets 16 mpg with a tail wind. Any extra time looking for someplace is costing me money.

That is why I got a 760 for my wife. We use the routing features for drives in town for errands and garage sales. Now there is no more back tracking and hunting for an address for 30 minutes.

So in my case, the efficiency of the gps routing ability saves me money.

Daniel

52 mpg and some less with the A/C on with a hybrid, that's where hybrids work best. If he wasn't doing 80 mph then your average would have been higher.

The Top Gear test was done wrong, not a real world drive as we do everyday.

And yes, I'm sure a GPS will save you time and gas when you get to point A to B without going out of the way.

But gave credit to a hybrid car for the mpg they get at local driving. By the way, I don't have a hybrid, have a Honda Accord V6.

will be in the market for a Volt that has a 30 mile range and costs over $30,000? Don't think you will need a gps in it.

That's a really good example of fractured logic.

Without the answer to the second part, the conclusion you came to is pretty meaningless.

I propose: That only about 1 in 50 GPS units are used in a manner that saves any significant gas so that would put the numbers much closer together
AND
That GPS useage usually saves NO gas compared to judicious use of a paper map.

As I said earlier, we don't drive on flatland as a norm either, I guess if you lived in a area with no hills or mountains they might be okay, add either to the mix and the Hybrid takes a dump.

= one ugly styled machine!

I have a prius and use my gps all the time. Rented a pontiac G6 for a trip to florida as my daughter needed a car to pick up the grand daughter from school. Hated the pontiac. Fuel mileage was horrible, seats uncomfortable and all round bad car. No wonder the auto companies are going bankrupt.

Following your logic, my Hybrid with a built-in GPS should get what - 100 mpg?

Driving a Prius on a road track is the worst example of how to test a Hybrid against any other car. The Prius does best in the city, while the Honda Civic does best on the hiway. Test the beemer against the Honda Hybrid, then consider the results.... I have never gotten less than 48 mpg highway (have achieved 55 mpg) with my Civic Hybrid..AND, I still consistently get 42 around town. Show me ANY beemer that will do that, then you've made your case. Also, the youtube junk was obviously an attempt by the "Greenies" to say that the batteries in Hybrids are "bad for the environment...." Yet more "rubbish"......

Maybe not millions, but a hybrid and urban driving should save fuel, and not getting lost should save fuel.

Let's take this argument a bit further. If we keep this to an urban area, then take a bus. Saves fuel cause we're not driving. Then we use a GPS and save even more! Or is there a problem with the logic? Is that why I flunked the course?

No matter what good or how much mileage you get, some folks will never like a hybrid. So trying to talk to them is a waste of time.

Can't IMAGINE who you could be referring to.........

Once again, however, the American car makers are a day late and a dollar (or two) short because they are engineering by knee-jerk reaction instead of good logical long term planning.

When gas was $4 a gallon and everybody was clamoring for anything that said "hybrid" in the name, they rushed to cram hybrid technology into vehicles that don't benefit from it NEARLY enough to really make it worth while.

Hybrid SUV's are a joke. Just saw a hybrid Malibu last week and the EPA numbers are only 4-5 MPG better than a gas-only model. Hardly worth the extra cost.......even with gas at $4 or more. If gas mileage is your primary consideration, Chevy has at least 2 other models that do better on gas only.

Thus far, the Prius and Civic seem to be the only models where the hybrid really makes sense. Maybe there will be others soon. The VW TDI diesel is rated at 41 mpg though.

True, lower average speed generally gives higher gas mileage, but anything less than 80 mph between San Antonio and El Paso, and I'd STILL be on my way back home.

Still doesn't work, because of the price of diesel vs the cost of gasoline. Although the VW TDI is tempting, the cost of diesel is the detractor. If diesel were the same cost, it would be a great drive train to consider. I just drove back from Florida (to middle Georgia), and got 50.1 mpg on my Civic Hybrid. Although (at my age) it is a challenge to get out of, while motoring, it is one of the most comfortable cars I've ever ridden in. Last year, I took it across Texas (Grand Canyon to San Antonio), and got 55 mpg, and I was moving with traffic.

If you don't own one, your opinion is hardly valid. Consequently, your opinion is very much like another part of your anotomy - but thank you for your thoughts....

The cost differential where I am is about 35 cents right now. The 41 is an EPA estimate; you appear to be getting more than the EPA number with yours, maybe the TDI would too. At some point, you will need new batteries. Diesels are known (generally) for VERY long life....like 200,000 miles with no engine work.

I don't know what the total life cost difference would be and neither do you. I was just trying to point out that a hybrid is not the ONLY alternative if you are looking for "good" gas mileage.

No wonder the auto companies are going bankrupt.

How about because you bought a Japanese car?
Does that ring a bell?

You very welcome, and my wife likes that part too.

The battery pollution from a hybrids is going to be a dirty mess, and very expensive to replace. I happen to drive a Toyota Camry Hybrid often so I am glad you like my opinions, and my sexy body part, wait your a guy, not my type.. never mind.

I have nothing bad to say about reducing Gas consumption and make the middle east eat sand, however todays hybrids are just a stall waiting for Hydrogen fuel cells, then we can talk about some real fuel economy cracking gasoline.

than either the GPS or hybrid since the eastbound train pulls out of Cleveland at 5:20AM, and would likely be empty.

While I enjoyed a Prius rental car once (eerily quiet), I enjoy my GPS much more, and in fact had a good 'ol American land yacht once (1990 Olds Ninety-Eight), that routinely got 32mpg on the highway and 26mpg city in luxurious velour enveloped, temperature controlled comfort. I considered that a good enough contribution to the world's fuel economy that I never worried about it.

Before I bought the Honda Civic Hybrid, I drove a Camry Hybrid. After about 2 miles, I told the salesman (who was in the back seat) "this is a joke - right?".... That thing wouldn't pull a greasy string out of a cats butt, and the EPA ratings were a total joke (50 city and 40 hiway). I didn't want a Prius - mainly because they are identified as a Hybrid. The Civic is a Civic - with a little blue tag on the back (see moniker), and that is the only way to tell what it is. Don't misconstrue this as me being ashamed to drive a Hybrid, because I'm not. With consistant 42/48 mpg, I'm one happy camper...
BTW, if you read the post, it says neither your opinion OR your butt is valid. Your wifes opinion is hers alone.

I traded in a 98 Supercharged Buick Regal last year that was similar to the description above. Tons of horsepower, and would literally loaf along on the expressways at 80 MPH and get a solid 30 MPG while doing so. 25 MPG in town driving. There are 4 cylinder cars today that don't get much better than that. And there is no comparison between the size of my old Buick and the horsepower that it had and most of today's cars.

11 years of technology and they can't do better than that without seriously downsizing the vehicle size and power? I don't get it.

We currently have a 99 Grand Marquis with about 100k. With the new baby have been thinking about a different vehicle...but am now thinking why get rid of the car? It is getting 22 in town and 25 on the highway. The cost difference to buy a vehicle that does significantly better I can't afford, and they are not as comfortable. I bought the car with about 35k in 2002 and have only had to put tires on it and change the oil. Not all the newer cars ratings are that great for reliability. Why some cars that weigh less get the same or worse mileage was a very disappointing realization.

daniel

Having a GPS will not make your Hybrid get better mileage. I said that due to the millions of them and the Gas saving of getting there the first time saves fuel.

I was just pulling your leg...... I do, however, believe that anybody using a GPS will save fuel over somebody not using one....

hehehe. Interesting and amusing debates. Also got my calculus reviews here.

Not in my case. I drive more after buying a GPS. I travel to places as far as 250 miles from where I live because I want to play with my new toy

I don't know what you were doing to that Camry. I bought my mother a 07 Camry Hybrid, and I drive for them on long trips; the HyCam averages about 38mpg.

My Prius, OTOH, averages 51-52 MPG overall.