Honda Insight Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,819 Posts
"Even my 03 Ranger is as clean as our Insight’s and the MDX and Corolla are even cleaner in terms of SMOG based emissions."

Um, can we revisit that point? I always thought that emissions standards were based on percentages or parts per million, not on the absolute volume of HC, CO, & NOx. If that's indeed the case, then those numbers are only half the story: you also have to factor in the volume of exhaust emitted per mile. That's directly proportional to MPG.

That means that if your Ranger has the same emission numbers as the Insight, but gets say 25 MPG vs 75 for the Insight, then it's actually producing 3 times the emissions per mile driven, right?

As for the alleged performance shortcomings of the Insight, I have to say that I don't see them in my day-to-day driving. When I'm e.g. leaving a light, most of the time I'm well down the road before the car in the next lane has crossed the intersection. I can, and do, drive down the freeway as fast as anyone else. (Indeed, this week alone I've passed two Prii trudging along in the slow lane, me doing 70-75 and showing roughly 95 mpg.) I can drive up the Mt. Rose highway (4400 ft climb in 12 twisty miles), and still spend most of the drive swearing at the damned traffic-blocking flatlanders. What would I want with much more performance? I have better uses for my money than paying traffic tickets, you know?

And cost? Why do you keep harping on that? Sure, you can by cheaper cars - how much would a used Yugo go for these days? - but at $20K list the Insight is pretty well down at the bottom of the price charts. What are Porsches, Beemers, and the like going for these days, $50-100K or so? If people are willing to pay that kind of price for whatever intangible qualities one of those labels give them, why shouldn't other people with different values be happy to pay far less for a car that reflects those values?

Bottom line, if all a person wants is cheap, fairly dependable transportation, then they should buy a '85-95 Honda or similar, and drive it 'til it breaks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,819 Posts
"The 2 fastest Hybrid’s including the 5-speed Insight and the 04 Prius (this is with fully charged packs) are actually quite miserable in comparison to most other automobiles..."

So the conclusion seems to be that most people are paying extra money for performance capabilities that they choose not to use, 'cause I DO go faster/quicker in my Insight than most.

"___And again, the thread was involving someone looking for a daily driver for an ~ 150 mile round trip commute."

And again, if the goal is simply to minimize cost, they should buy that 10-year-old Honda Civic :)

As to emissions, perhaps I confused the EPA standards with what the state uses for its smog test. Those are purely concentrations, not totals.

"___I believe I travel in more heavily congested conditions on a daily basis yet my lmpg is possibly a bit higher then yours?"

This is almost certainly true :) As I've said before, I didn't buy my Insight for its mpg or emissions rating (though I do appreciate them), I bought it because I wanted a small, quick, two-seat hatchback like my old CRX. I don't set out every trip with the intention of getting the absolute highest possible mpg, I want to get there quickly, in reasonable comfort, and have as much fun as possible on the way. That I still manage a reasonable 70-75 mpg per tank is a bonus!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,819 Posts
"I've never said it was the cleanest, only that it is cleaner than most."

That's the way I feel. I figure that with the Insight, even driving as I do, I'm beating 99% of the population on both fuel economy and emissions - and that's not even counting the time spent on the bikes :) So I'm not much interested in arguing whether some other car or driving technique might boost me to 99.9%. I'd rather stay the same, while the world around me changes so that I'm just average...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,819 Posts
"...an aluminum structured automobile uses..."

Isn't that calculation based on aluminum refined from ore? That of course is a very energy-intensive process. However, aluminum lasts longer - you poor souls in the northeast won't see your Insight full of moth holes in a couple of years - and is more effectively recycled.

"...0 - 60 in 10.5 seconds at best does not make a performance car."

Which brings that argument around in a circle again. You say it's not a performance car, while a lot of us find that in the real world we get off the line and go down the road faster than the average driver does.

Doesn't that say that a) the Insight is about as fast/powerful as a car really NEEDS to be - though of course I wouldn't actually complain about a bit more performance :) - and b) a lot of manufacturing resources are going into building cars with a level of performance that most people will never use.

Indeed, as I think on it, that's a whole unaddressed field for energy/resource conservation: the building of things that have far more power than their owners realistically will ever use. Like the Hummer that only gets driven to the store, or the people who buy a computer with the latest, fastest processor, then install Windoze and go web surfing :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,819 Posts
"___The one area I find the Insight’s power lacking is when climbing 50 - 100’ high hills."

Guess we have a difference of opinion on what constitutes a hill :)

For the basic freeway overpass type rise, I just keep constant throttle and bleed off a bit of speed. Anything bigger, and I drop into 4th or 3rd. Yes, it kills the mileage on the way up, but I get it back on the way down. I manage to maintain 70 mpg+ except in the dead of winter, and regularly do 2000-4000 foot climbs.

You're right that the Insight doesn't have the power needed to take such hills in 5th, but I think that's part of the philosophy of having only what engine is needed. The great majority of the time you can cruise along in 5th, often in lean-burn, and get exceptional mpg. When you need more power, you drop a gear or two, and the engine produces it by going to higher rpms. Of course it burns more fuel in the process, but even going up a fairly steep, winding, 4400' climb I probably average around 30-35 mpg. Then on the return trip I get near-infinity mpg thanks to the fuel shutoff, so the average stays around 70.

And for Jeepnut, I think your best option at this point would be to find a good used CRX, or Civic if you need the four seats. Lot less cost upfront, decent mpg, and no worries about battery replacements. And if you run into another rockslide, you can buy another for less than $6K :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,819 Posts
"...I have driven this route in 7 other automobiles and none of them needed to be downshifted..."

But what's wrong with downshifting? Other than that it takes a bit of getting used to, of course. I felt the same way for the first week or so :)

Maybe the problem is that other IC engines can't/aren't built to handle high rpms for more than occasional brief spurts, so people get used to driving along in a high gear with the engine not revving much.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top