Nobody understands the point of hybrid cars [video] | Hacker News Reader

Nobody understands the point of hybrid cars [video]

youtube.com

220 pointsCHB0403085482223 comments

I have all three ICE, EV and hybrid at home. I was hesitant at first when getting the EV because we already had the hybrid, but we needed a second SUV to carry kids. After two years with the EV it became evident to me the hybrid doesn’t make sense. It has some of the gas savings of an EV but you still deal with the inconvenience of maintaining a ICE. My EV has received zero maintenance other than cleaning the cameras. Brakes are still good for many more years and tires maybe need replacing in a year. No oil change, no brake pads, no spark plugs, fuel pumps, seals, plus all the time savings scheduling appointments and driving to the dealer. I do see some use cases where hybrids may actually work better, like very long daily commutes in a region lacking charging stations. I believe they are popular because there’s still fear of going full electric, but as many EV owners would tell you that fear is unreasonable and disappears after a few months owning an EV. I go out and run errands with 10% charge. The first days my hands started sweating when the charge dropped under 40%.

They made sense when batteries were so expensive that decent range was unaffordable. That era is coming to a close, though.

Yep, almost obsolete. Will be entirely obsolete once the semi solid batteries make it out of china in the next year or so

I think the problem a lot of non-Toyota manufacturers have run into is trying to have it both ways, like you said.

For better or worse (I say better), the Prius really committed to hybrid as its own form. Plenty of hybrids really are an electric motor and a ICE tacked together, and with that system, you're going to hit twice (at least) the problems of either one.

The thing I appreciate about the Toyota power-split device, is that it really manages to remove a lot of the ICE moving parts. You have no auxiliary belts, no alternator, starter motor, steering pump, etc, and for me and millions of other drivers, that's made getting to 200k miles a given.

I'm not sure which hybrid you have (and of course, ymmv) but I really think that nobody has done it like Toyota, at least until the 2020s

Ford has had a similar design (sharing patents with Toyota) since the first Escape Hybrid in '04. But they never stuck with a high mpg platform, they're using it to build 34mpg small trucks and SUVs, not 60mpg cars.

It's their ploy to game CAFE averages. High MPG cars don't offset their truck lineup. You can also thank the PT Cruiser for hatchback cars like the Mach-E being misclassified as trucks to enhance the gaming.

I think the biggest reduction is that it essentially replaces the conventional transmission with the hybrid unit. (Planetary gear set and motor-generators.)

It drives like a CVT, but it is not a CVT in the sense people know as far as maintenance and reliability issues. It is just a "differential" and electric motor balancing out the ICE engine output to get a desired output drive effect.

This whole comment change is exactly what the video is about, how the Toyota hybrid system is actually a lot simpler than pure ICE, and mostly exists to make sure the ICE engine always runs at optimal efficiency

How many miles in that two years? I put about 14k miles per year on my ICE and have only needed oil changes for 5 years. I know I have a big 200k service coming up but if I only look at the past five years it’s just oil every 7k and tires. Not THAT different, yes?

If you want it to last you should also be flushing the coolant and brake fluid, changing the transmission oil, air filter and at some point serpentine belt, rad hoses , spark plugs and leads

Sure, but those are every 100k miles in most cases. That doesn't happen very often.

the brake fluid is in the EV as well.

How many kids do you have that you need two SUVs to carry them all? its not common.

In my experience it is that mom and dad both sometimes need to have all the kids and there is no good car swap in between. I drop the kids off for their before school jazz band practice, then my wife picks them up from their after school practice. I really want a tiny car that handles well, but that won't allow the above so I'm driving a SUV that is barely big enough and not fun at all.

My kids are soon to reach driving age and that means they can drive themselves - but only if I have another car.

I wish I lived where transit existed, but that is a different rant.

I'm willing to bet they didn't mean to carry kids that don't fit in two SUVs. Probably meant that logistically, they need two SUVs available. If you aren't American—or are, but don't have kids—you might not be aware that even two kids past 10yo and a sedan is a pretty bad experience. And I'm saying this as someone who loves his sedan, hates large cars, passionately hates SUVs, and definitely never wanted one.

I have three kids under 10. None of them can legally ride in the front of my sedan. So they had to be in the back. Three of them in one bench seat. Physically possible, and we did it for a while, but it's just non-stop screaming and fights, and with very little space for all their after-school stuff. I threw out my back trying to make their sports and music stuff fit with my baby's stroller and diaper bag etc.

And this is the kicker if you aren't American: everything you do in life has to be done with a car, which means even at two kids, you might be transporting loads of gear every day.

I always thought, like my experience growing up, my kids should learn a musical instrument and play a sport. So if a kid picks cello and the sport is tennis, your entire trunk is filled now. And that's not even with a stroller for your third kid that is not self-ambulatory yet. Forget about a tire inflator, jumper cables, or any other standard stuff you should be carrying in your car at all times.

So with three kids (extremely common in the US), a sedan is practically unworkable. (Again, I'm saying this as someone who would only drive sedans my whole life if I could. I hate big cars and think they're a needless risk and expense for most people and wish we could heavily restrict their ownership.)

Now what if one parent is in charge of the morning stuff then works late, but the other parent is in charge of afternoon stuff because they get off work early.

Now you need an SUV for each parent just to manage three kids with a completely normal set of childhood activities.

I drive a ID.Buzz now, the LWB so it seats seven. Life is immeasurably easier. Perfect timing, too, with the gas price situation, and I keep the car at 80% charge every day, a few hours of charging off one 120V plug while I sleep, everything's gucci.

*edit* One thing I forgot to mention is that carpools to kid events are common here. So extra space to be able to drive one of your kid's friend to the after-game hangout is a of high value. Increases community, etc.

This. All of this.

I strongly dislike SUVs but due to transporting the kids around and their friends, my wife and I have switched vehicles during the week: she drives my sedan, I drive her SUV.

Being able to transport my oldest's friends around has resulted in improved relationships for both the kids, and the parents.

"Last minute sleepover after the game? No problem, I'll take your son and his gear in my car. We'll also pick up a pizza on the way back too. Drop off his toothbrush and pajamas at your convenience, after your other children are fed and bathed."

That's a briefer version of the exchange I had with a family last week, and their response was an audible sigh of relief, many thank yous, and an invite to dinner this weekend.

We used to have station wagons for all that. But auto makers couldn't call them "trucks" to get around the mpg requirements.

A Sienna does everything any SUV does the same or better, as confirmed in the video itself, change my mind?

The Sienna is a great rig but doesn’t look cool, which is rule 1 /s

As long we’re talking driving on roads, the AWD Sienna is basically an SUV. It is not, however, something that speaks to guys who want a specific look or fantasy from their rig.

The Kia Carnival does pretty good at looking like an SUV from further away.

It also drives like shit, a giant wallowing land boat. Practical yes. But it’s not just looks.

> If you aren't American

I am not American, and I have had two kids (now adults) and had a hatchback for many of those years. No problem fitting everything in. Split folding seats help a lot.

The biggest car I have had is probably a Citreon Xsara Picasso (small by American standards, I think), and that only for about three years. It was nice to have the space but not essential.

I can imagine needing two cars, and some people I know do, but more than two in all (say one big, one small, and not small by American standards) is rare.

I posit the ideal is three (often used, room for them notwithstanding):

-sedan for commutes

-suv for bench seats/cargo and typical awd/4x4 secondary

-truck for towing toys, bed hauling the things your wife made a deal for at a garage sale, going to the dump, firewood, bla bla bla, going for rides and looking cool when the weather’s nice

Two cars are always available if one breaks down, or bad weather, whatever. Can trade space and hassle for money if you’re willing to deal with repairs if the used rigs are old.

Ok, you hate SUVs and big cars and the sedan is too small. You know there is one other option, the station wagon.

Is anyone even selling those in the US these days? Obviously there's a (dwindling) supply of used ones, but I can understand wanting to put your kid in a new car for safety reasons.

not OP, but apparently all it takes is 2 kids that are independently into multiple sports + both parents being actively involved in the clubs/work schedules that allow us to regularly make every training session and game means we're regularly playing taxi for multiple families and having to split ourselves across locations when fixtures clash. Also all their kit just takes up a heap of space too. I wanted a sedan when we upgraded one of our cars late last year but it just wasn't going to work given all of the above.

I have 1 child and need a big car, such as Honda Pilot. We are active. We travel. My son plays sports. I need a 2 inch hitch for our heavy ebikes.

I also need 5k towing a few times a year.

I do have a 2nd economy car, and I like driving smaller cars anyway, but having one big car is nice.

You don't need any of that, obviously. It really is best to save that word and you'll better appreciate that you can have things way, way beyond what you need rather than living in this eternal state of "barely getting by". It's all in your head. It's completely up to you if you want to be rich today.

You also don't need a computer, and here you are? It is completely up to you if you want to be rich today?

What kind of comment is this?

You're right, I'm rich too.

Technically not needing a car or a computer can mean you’re very very rich indeed.

Usually when one says 'I need xxx' it is followed by 'for yyy'. It seems nothing is needed for the sake of it.

Need is almost always relative; if your house is next door to a 24 hour gas station you don’t meed to have a bathroom in your house as you could walk next door and use the gas station’s - but most everyone would feel this was a bit insane.

It might be more instructive to discuss what missions a particular vehicle or vehicles enables.

I have a van that does all of that better. Seriously.

Mercedes Metris, and I average 27MPG driving it like I do my Leaf.

It's also amazing for going to the water and being able to change in it, going skiing and being able to dress out, etc.

SUV's are hugely overrated. I have a 4WD (GX470) and honestly we rarely ever drive it because even for fire roads the van is more than capable enough.

That said, it IS a niche vehicle. I'm rather sad they didn't catch on more.

Yeah, a van is the real sport utility vehicle.

And yeah, people hugely misunderstand needing 4WD. If you aren't off-roading it's not doing much for you.

Oh god just reading the other responses to this thread I am glad I don't live in the car-dependent place (I did grow up in one though).

Me and the wife just got a baby and we were like "oh my god I am so glad I live walking distance to everything we need, including daycare and pediatrician". To be fair that is not the average where we live either, but kids are already taking themselves to places around 6 years old and most after-school activities are around the school.

In fact we were complaining that now that we have so little time available it is just so boring to _only_ be 3-5 blocks around our home and never go anywhere else. My wife sometimes just take the bus to go anywhere else to walk the baby rather than just doing it around our area.

We have a couple EVs. Great, except for road trips, where range is more limited at freeway speeds, and charging is slow and obnoxious.

Definitely different than raod tripping in an ICE. We road trip in our Model Y and end up stopping often regardless of charging for snacking, stretching, walking the dogs, etc.

I remember talking to a coworker would couldn't accept taking 10 hours to drive somewhere instead of the 8.5 hours you can make it in an ICE. But then again we are definitely people who puts on road trips.

The ratio has been way worse than that in my experience, especially in cold weather. Could easily turn a 3 hour trip from Seattle to Portland to 5-6 hours during winter, when mileage plummets on the freeway.

Obviously part of that is that the EV wasn't fully charged when we started, but that's the thing -- being low on gas for an ICE car barely affects travel at all.

I guess it depends on the EV. We one-shot Seattle to Portland because it's only ~180 miles. I can't imagine spending 2-3 hours charging on that trip.

We'll spend ~20-30 minutes charging on the way home but that's it.

Now if we're talking about the traffic in Tacoma or around JBLM that's a different story!

> We'll spend ~20-30 minutes charging on the way home but that's it.

Just getting off the freeway and back onto it will add ~10 minutes to a trip, and that's assuming the charger is fairly close to the exit, and that you don't have to wait at the charger for an open spot.

> I can't imagine spending 2-3 hours charging on that trip.

Note that "Time that charging requires != time spent charging". If you have to wait for a spot to open up at a charging station, that's not charging time exactly, but it is something that charging occasionally demands of you.

But yeah it fucking sucked. The combination of low temps and freeway speeds tanked our mileage down to like ~50% of the theoretical EPA estimate, and the ID4 seemed to charge pretty slowly too at the Electrify America stations.

I have a plug-in hybrid and, although it was not my initial opinion, I came to think that it is the most adapted tech to my usage:

  - I do 90% of my kilometers to commute to work: 2x40km / day

  - I need my car to drive 7 hours roughly 4x or 5x per year

In my case, I can drive electric to commute to work, as I can charge sporadically (can't do it at home).

When driving long distance, I get to use the ICE while charging stations get jammed e.g. on peak traffic weekends. Consumption is much less than pure ICE.

Breaking pads are spared by the magnetic brake as well.

Why not rent a car for those 4-5x/year?

I used to do that, however depends on where you live.

In Germany the amount you have to pay not to worry about every little scratch from a few mm, means I rather have my own scratches.

Then on the Mediterranean islands usually rental is the only option, unless one likes to pay taxis all the time, and most rentals take advantage of non locals as much as they can get away with. Yes some do have buses, if you want to be stuck in the main cities.

> on the Mediterranean islands usually rental is the only option

It's not like buying an ICE or hybrid instead of an EV helps with this scenario at all.

Ferries exist.

Sure: a cabin + a car between Barcelona to Mallorca cost 500€.

Most of the available rental cars are crap. Even if you make an advance reservation there's no guarantee that they'll have what you want in stock when you show up. For solo business travelers that doesn't matter as much but I wouldn't want to take the risk when planning a family road trip.

Maybe I could cope with the inconvenience of queuing 45 min to get a car from a leading rental brand that, although they see me regularly, always need to re-enter my documents in their system (go figure...).

But the main reason is that those 4-5x/year are when everyone goes on week-end or vacations. Therefore prices are sky-high and availability is not guaranteed.

So hertz can report your car stolen after you return it, landing you in jail?

Renting a car comes with extra worry, even taking that extreme case out of consideration.

You’re driving around a break in magnet, advertising that it contains suitcases.

It comes with highly restricted rules - technically it violates Avis’s rental agreement to pull off onto a dirt median even if you have a flat tire or ever need to drive on a dirt parking lot - strictly anything unpaved like a national park campground site’s parking.

And you’ll reserve one particular car type, who knows what they’ll actually give you. And the tires may be sketchy too (had that)

And they’re be trying ti upsell you all sorts of horrible deals when you reserve and then pick up

Another consideration is your local climate. It can get down to -40C here. Both ICE and EVs pay a range penalty in those conditions, but it compounds the problem with charging station density that EVs have + the time it takes to charge. And at least with an ICE, all that engine heat can be put to good use trying to keep the interior warm.

Having a heat pump for heating is then really important, as compared to a simple resistive heating element

Heat pumps work up to a certain temperature delta. They don't heat so good in -40.

Yep. I put a heat pump in my house last year. It doesn't function at all below "only" -30C and doesn't make economic sense vs my natural gas furnace until around 0C. I got it instead of a plain air conditioner only so I had a backup to my furnace.

The number of cars that experience -40F(C) in a year is something like 3% of all cars. In the US that number is more like 0.5%. And even within that 3%, the average number of days where cars experience that temperature is on the order of a 3-6 at most. We spend a lot of time worrying about edge cases.

Cold soaked batteries are definitely less ideal but if you can plug in at home, planning your charge times and pre-conditioning the car while plugged in significantly reduces the range effects (and preheats the cabin for you!)

These problems are (imo) vastly overblown for the way most people drive. The only time the cold temperature reduced range / reduced charge speed are relevant is for long road trips where you’re driving > ~200mi at once. Otherwise, you just charge up at home overnight and easily recoup any normal driving range you used during the day, regardless of the temperature.

Norwegians have apparently figured this out. Despite being pretty damn cold, they’re buying EV’s almost exclusively now (97%).

Norway is not damn cold. It sits next to a warm, Gulf-stream ocean. Rarely gets much (<-10 Celsius) below freezing.

Finland, that's another thing.

Around 38% of new cars sales in Finland in 2025 were EVs [1], so they apparently have figured out how to make them work. PHEVs were another 20%. Gas cars were around 39%, and diesel cars were about 4%.

[1] https://alternative-fuels-observatory.ec.europa.eu/general-i...

EVs work in cold weather, just the range is reduced.

If it is a second car in the family, used for short range commuting ... or if your lifestyle does not involve frequent long-distance trips, EV is perfectly suitable even in Finland.

In those countries most people own a house so they can plug in every night.

Where I live it's all apartments (without parking because they were built before cars existed) and there's maybe one charging station on the street per 300 spaces or so. A few more in parking garages but you pay hundreds a month to access those.

I don't think an EV will work here until every space has a charger.

Sounds like you might live in a sensible place where you probably don’t need a car at all. That’s the ideal! Unfortunately, much of, e.g., the U.S. (outside of ~4 cities), “cities” are built around individual car ownership. There, where a car is pretty much necessary, and you likely already have a dedicated spot to store it, it often makes sense to choose an EV version.

As others said, Norway isn't that cold - the ocean is pretty warm. That does mean, however, that the temperature varies greatly with how far you are from the sea. Go far enough inland and it can get cold. -30C or, even these days, some places much colder, though only for shorter periods now (global warming). Most places are barely as cold as -10C, which isn't much of a problem for batteries. And it's often a bit warmer.

at -40C you need to start plugging a block warmer into the ICE when you park, something that an EV doesn’t need, although it can benefit from the same plug for the block warmer into Fairbanks parking lots.

Yep, I know all about block heaters. But that's a separate issue from range.

It says a lot about the viability of ICEs in really cold temperatures though. You are just trading one problem for another. An EV can be kept plugged in while idle and the cold weather tech can probably manage better than an ICE would, especially with what the Chinese have been developing in Harbin and Mohe.

Lithium batteries perform terribly at that temperature and cannot be charged at all without permanent damage. They basically need to have a block heater hooked up to the battery if you ever want to charge.

I believe modern EVs have battery heating built in for exactly that reason.

Which uses the energy from the battery, so if they did that, you better not go out of town for a couple of weeks or you'll come home to a dead car.

You just keep it plugged in when you are gone, what’s the issue?

This reminds me that in Yakutsk, you put your car in a big sock while it’s parked and the car will occasionally start on its own to keep the block from freezing (they don’t have plugs outside, so no block warmers, no EVs). If you leave your car parked long enough, you’ll run out of gas and your engine will probably be hosed.

It’s a solved problem and built into the car. You can do an AI lookup on Chinese EVs in Mohe/Harbin to get a summary of the tech they’ve developed.

Besides breathless or from universities, all I could find is articles like this (https://www.channelnewsasia.com/east-asia/china-electric-veh...) talking about the exact problem I described.

Can you stop hinting at things google can’t find, and just provide sources (not AI, since that is necessarily an unreliable secondary source)?

The cold problems are not as overblown as most people who live outside of these environments think. Yes, for most commutes the reduction in winter (sub-freezing temperature) range when home-based charging is available is not significant.

For my anecdote, my (occasional) commute distance is enough that I need to change my driving habits to have enough range/safety margin to make it back home during this cold period. In these conditions, my EV gets roughly 175 miles of range while driving 60-65 MPH with some (resistive) cabin heating. This makes my 150-mile roundtrip not exactly an afterthought like it is during the summer when I have 240-mile+ range ignoring the speed limit. If I couldn't fully recharge at home every night, preheat the car (even garaged it's still bitter cold)

Statistically maybe these edge cases are all irrelevant... But it is a hard limit on what you can and can't do with an EV that ICE vehicle users do not have to ever think about. Maybe once we start getting commonly-available and affordable EVs that come standard with ICE-like range - 300 miles all-season at the minimum - this will change.

Your 150 mile daily commute seems like a much bigger factor in this dilemma than the cold temperature range reduction. That’s over 3x the average American daily commute distance! For the huge majority of Americans, the cold weather thing just will not be a factor at all. And yet, it’s probably the #1 fact they know about EV’s.

https://youtu.be/ebGLFVzvdfM?si=kJNHWJ5zuF3s9JIb

Turns out it’s not a major thing

norwegians seem to not mind

> ..that ICE vehicle users do not have to ever think about.

Well.. the comment you replied to said "-40C" (which is about -40F too, AFAIK), and, back in time before global warming really hit, a friend used to live and work in an area where it was -40 nearly every day, from late October till March. At least that year I visited that place. I and friends arrived at nighttime and he picked us up at the airport and brought us to where he lived. His car was a small utility car he used for work.. a diesel car. When we unpacked and went inside, he didn't turn off the engine.. when asked, he said he had done that mistake in October (this was now late February), and had to tow the car to a garage, as the diesel fuel had all turned into wax (and this was diesel with cold-weather additives). So, since then, he never turned off the engine. It ran 24/7, for months at the time.

(These days it's much much warmer there, not cold at all, so the above is an anecdote from back in the old days, by now).

Current generation EV batteries solve this problem but you can’t buy them in the US :(

Hybrids do make sense, but like everything else, for specific use cases. I do a lot of road tripping, so a hybrid is ideal. Charging is still way too slow to do multiple times per trip.

This is the reason why I got a hybrid. Many of my trips are on routes that don’t have good charging access and charging is just too slow for the length of trips.

Also, I bought a rav4 hybrid which is one of the most common cars on the road here and therefore mechanics have a lot of experience working on these vehicles.

Just to qualify "log daily commutes", hybrid is really most beneficial, compared to ICE, for "city" driving. Long in duration with lots of speed changes and stopping, rather than as a highway cruise.

If you include the other efficiency tweaks like aerodynamics, wheel choices, etc., then an ICE car can also do very well in those highway conditions. But, the optimized or "right-sized" ICE for highway cruising may feel underpowered in some conditions. The hybrid also helps here, much like a turbocharger, by boosting power output temporarily to mitigate this.

1. Are you able to charge at home?

2. Are you aware that many people cannot charge at home?

> After two years with the EV it became evident to me the hybrid doesn’t make sense

In some places in the US the hybrid can have lower energy costs per mile. Using the average price/kWh of residential electricity and the average price/gallon of gasoline in each US state as of maybe a year ago (I haven't updated my spreadsheet in a while) a Toyota Prius would beat my EV (which the sticker says is 129 MPGe city, 103 MPGe highway) on the highway in 15 states: Alaska, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Texas, and Vermont.

The Prius would win in city driving in 8 states: Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

For people who do not have home charging or cheap destination charging and have to rely on public DC charging stations the Prius wins in most states even with today's super high gas prices. If DC charging costs $0.40/kWh for example, the Prius wins on the highway if gas is under $7.33/gal and in the city if it is under $5.85/gal.

If anyone wants to check it for their particular electrify and gas prices, compute the ratio of gas $/gal to electricity $/kWh. E.g., if gas is $4/gal and electricity at your home is $0.20/kWh the ratio is 20.

The Prius beats an EV with the MPGe of mine on the highway if the ratio is under 18.325, and in the city if the ratio is under 14.625. To adjust for your EV multiply those thresholds by my MPGe divided by your MPGe. To adjust for non-Prius hybrids or ICEs, multiply the threshold by the other car's mpg and divide by the Prius mpg (56 highway, 56 city).

Many states also tack on an EV specific registration fee that applies regardless of miles driven, over $200 in some places.

> ... a Toyota Prius would beat my EV (which the sticker says is 129 MPGe city, 103 MPGe highway) on the highway in 15 states

I posted a not dissimilar comment in reply to someone else: I ran the numbers and in a country with high electricity the savings of an EV simply aren't that stellar compared to an ICE car. It's not clear at all if at the end the TCO is lower or not: basically the savings on gasoline / oil / brake pads may not be sufficient to offset the higher price and faster depreciation of the EV.

MIT has a site called Carboncounter that lets you do this for lots of models at the same time.

http://www.carboncounter.com

You can customize the costs for various thing and it has state level presests. You can also set PHEV utilisation factor etc.

I'm not sure how up to date it is, I see 2025 model cars listed but you can tweak gas cost, tax credits etc. if they have changed.

The very cheapest cars seem to still be ICE, not hybrid or EV but different state incentives/fuel costs varies it dramatically.

And you have to consider some other things like is the Nissan Versa ICE a comparable car to the Nissan Leaf EV? The former seems cheaper to run in the USA.

Wow -- Nissan TITAN and Chevry BLAZER doing their part to guzzle gasolina!

I used this to compare hybrid Camry v. RAV4 – both are clustered on the opposite side of the diagram.

Thanks for the neat link! I went from a turbocharged Subaru to a Toyota hybrid... and the performance is similar with 2.25x the mileage (and no premium gas)! It's neat getting 50+ mpg and still being able to accelerate.

> For people who do not have home charging or cheap destination charging and have to rely on public DC charging stations the Prius wins in most states

I'm guessing you are assuming that either (a) your time is worth. $0/hour so that waiting time for charging costs you nothing or (b) you have a situation where you can charge while doing some other needful activity.

Filling with petrol is relatively quick and gas stations are everywhere. But still wastes some time.

Plug-in hybrids also have their interesting use cases. If you do live in an area with cheap electricity, that 20-60 miles of electric-only driving can produce savings.

You also get regenerative braking with hybrids.

Until charging times get better at most chargers, many people will prefer the convenience of gas fillups.

I can tell you live in a city.

I live in the boonies and routinely do multiple hundred mile trips, in bad winter weather.

Also, the hybrid shown, Toyota's Sienna, maddeningly doesn't come with a plugin. WHY.

> No oil change, no brake pads, no spark plugs, fuel pumps, seals, plus all the time savings scheduling appointments and driving to the dealer.

ICE here, goes to the dealership, what, once a year? 13 years in and 135 000 km done with the car (which I bought used, when it was 4 years old).

I ran the numbers yesterday: savings on gas when moving to full EV really aren't that stellar in my case (about 10 000 km/years now: I drive a bit less than I used to) and I have a gas guzzler. Electricity in my country is one of the highest in Europe.

Instead of paying, say, 2000 EUR / year in gasoline I'd pay 1 000 EUR in electricity (much more if using the pricier supercharger).

So I save 1 K EUR / year on gas. OK, but car depreciation? EV vehicles prices apparently do fall like a very hard rock.

Not only that: apparently EV prices do fall even faster than ICE and morever brand new EVs tend to be, compared to a similar brand new ICE car, more pricey. So the fall is even harder.

So as for now I'll keep the yearly dealership trip to deal with those "pesky" oil changes, spark plugs, brake pads, etc.

I mean: it's not as if since my parents (the boomers) and my grand-parents we didn't have ICE cars ownership pretty much figured out. And some of the modern ICE engines are proven to be extremely reliable (so if you DYOR you can buy a used ICE car and be pretty reasonably sure it'll be a good workhorse).

The "you'll save money" argument seems dubious. Your "no oil change" argument seems a bit light too.

I understand the "you'll save the planet" a bit more but I'm a "show me the money (savings)" person.

> I do see some use cases where hybrids may actually work better, like very long daily commutes in a region lacking charging stations.

That's exactly it, and why hybrids are very common in China outside the urban areas. Here in Japan there are still a lot of hybrids, and I and my spouse drove one (a rental) for a few days, in an area just like that - no charging stations, and, as we were basically tourists, no home charging options either. It was like any other car most of the time, except for the display showing how the battery got recharged whenever braking.

The interesting part came when we were finished with the trip and, as one has to, filled up the tank to 100% on the rental.. and it was almost nothing. Just had to top it up a little bit, that was all.

“Just get an EV” is the “let them eat cake” in disguise.

If I had a house and could charge EV at home, and had 1-2 kids, I might consider Tesla. Public charging has iterated roughly to what gasoline costs (because that’s what people are willing to pay), and once you need 5 full seats, there is just a handful of options, and they (eg. Kia EV9) easily costs 3x more than lightly used MPV of a same size.

I always thought the problem with hybrids was the complexity of the drive train, but this video is challenging that notion. It argues that the hybrid pack (minus the battery, perhaps?) is more compact and simpler than a manual gearbox, even. It consists of two electric motors and a planetary gear set, which is seemingly simpler than clutch packs, gear sets and belts of regular transmissions, including CVTs.

Time codes 3:06, 37:07, 43:57, 43:36 (note on the eCVT naming), and 44:17.

There are other, more focused (also arguably better at explaining) videos on explaining how it works. Here is one: https://youtu.be/dxmxIsoV_Xo

It took a while and several explanations for it to completely click for me. The e-cvt mechanism does seem to be quite clever and simpler (at least mechanically).

Interestingly, iForceMax drivetrains in Toyotas seen in Tundras and derivatives are the “other” kind with conventional transmissions.

This does not appear to be a packaging issue, as the late 2000s LS 600h had a V8 with rear-wheel drive (and then AWD) with an “eCVT” in a “conventional” longitudinal package.

Yes, but specifically about the Toyota's hybrid system. Other systems are more complex, they have a traditional engine and transmission and an electrical system on top.

Ford has been making very similar hybrids for 20+ years. The old Escape, the Fusion, CMax, Maverick. These are all the same general layout as the Prius.

I probably should have said Toyota-like hybrid system, to include manufacturers that either licensed Toyota's system or developed something similar themselves.

This is why there have been Prius taxis that were in service for 1 million km.

On a completely tangential note, has anyone ever tried a hybrid that was like a diesel-electric train? The engine just charges the battery. IIRC it can be much simpler, no need for gearing at all, the engine just runs at a constant speed and the battery handles delivering variable amounts of power.

one of the primary arguments of the video is that ecvt is a strictly superior solution. (and that diesel electric exists for massive torque conversion in trains, but loses efficiency)

Called a series hybrid, and it has been done. However gears are more efficient than a generator -> motor, and charging a battery adds even more losses. Thus if the engine is running anyway you are better off just mechanically connecting it to the wheels.

Trains don't do the above in large parts because the gears needed either wouldn't fit in the allowed space. (we may not be able to make them large enough either - that problem is solvable but may not be worth it)

I wonder if fuel efficiency just doesn't matter enough for trains, since they're already so efficient at turning motive energy into motion. Other costs may dominate.

Cost matter, but the dominate costs are important. The steam engine was more efficient than diesel when they scraped all the steam engines for diesel - steam engines need a lot more labor and so were more expensive despite using less fuel.

At that scale I think ICE engines preferably run at the same RPM continuously, and a gearbox and a clutch would be massive and require a lot of maintenance. The electric motor gives you the huge amount of torque you need to get a train going from stand-still. Not sure what actually tips the scale though.

This is correct or close too. The small steel on steel contact surface has so much less friction, that some conversion losses are fine in exchange for massive torque, and less moving parts (The diesel electrics replaced steam locomotives over maintenance cost/operation not pulling power).

The main thing for them is torque. Need a whole buttload of that to get it going. The efficiency of the train then comes from steel wheels on steel rails really. Electric motors is for the torque.

I have understood that idea as with some ships using similar systems is that this allows generators to run at optimal speed for efficiency which is rather tight band when you are looking for few of the last percentage.

With cars the speed range is much larger.

Series hybrids, where only electric motors drive the wheels, are becoming more common: Nissan now sells many models under their e-POWER brand.

Efficiency seems to match or exceed conventional hybrids in city driving, and only slightly less efficient for highway driving. And people like the instant torque and the smooth “EV like” driving feel.

I've got a Nissan Epower Kicks. I bought it exactly because the technology was different than standard Hybrid cars.

Here in Mexico there's no infra for fully electric cars, and they are still way too expensive.

The Nissan setup is pretty cool in that the generator is quite small, and the car doesn't need all the mechanical parts of an ICE car. It also gives us the range of a standard ICE car. So far it has been pretty good.

Series hybrids do have efficiency advantages in some situations -- for example, they can run in EV mode at any speed, and they can also have more freedom to run the engine at speeds independent of the vehicle speed, which can enable it to be programmed to prefer running it at speeds dictated by efficiency rather than by the drive wheel speed.

The place where they fall behind is at steady state on the highway -- but all of the series hybrid systems on the road have a solution for this problem too! They typically have clutch that engages a one-speed direct drive from the engine to the wheels. This skips the double-conversion losses at highway cruising. Then if you give it some gas to accelerate, the clutch disengages and you go back to full double-conversion again.

These are range extenders, and were used with the Fisker Karma, BMW i3 (as an option) and, most recently, the Mazda CX-30 with a Wankel engine.

The latter was sold in the UK/EU and was on the market for two years only.

That's called a series hybrid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vehicle_drivetrain#Seri...

Rumor mill, but the Mazda RX9 may have their rotary engine powering the battery, which then delivers energy to the drivetrain.

"In that concept, the rotary engine functions as a generator to produce electricity for the battery and electric motor, rather than mechanically driving the wheels."

Excited to see if this becomes a reality

more: https://uscarcover.com/blog/2026-mazda-rx9-review-rotary-is-...

Related: Honda's 2 Motor Hybrid System Explained. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-P_VChtMGK8

That is a series hybrid.

The Chevy Volt was one and the current Honda CRV is another. Both of them work mainly by the gas engine driving one of the electric motors as a generator while the other motor drives the vehicle. They have a simple eCVT transmission. However, both vehicles have a mode where they directly engage the engine to the transmission at highway speed cruising because that is more efficient.

Nissan has a series hybrid system that they have used in the Note that is only the series hybrid without the direct connect mode. That saves some money.

The Chevrolet Volt and Honda’s recent hybrids work this way. They are mechanically even more simple than Toyota’s drivetrain.

The engine doesn’t run at a constant speed though, it responds to the amount of electrical power needed.

And the BMW i3. It had a 2-stroke engine that allowed you to charge the battery.

However, in the USA, in order to get EV status, it was nerfed where it was only allowed to use its engine to charge the battery once you went below a 30% state of charge, and next to that, the fuel capacity was electronically limited.

A neighbor of mine had one, and the engine couldn't keep up with charging the battery to move the car on the freeway + running the AC, because it wasn't powerful enough.

In the EU version, this wasn't a problem, because you could set up the motor to run to maintain a charge (instead of only allowing it to run below 30%).

Edit: 30% state of charge, not 10%.

RAM and Ford are about to launch range extended EV pickups with 609 miles of Range and 14,000lbs of towing

https://expeditionportal.com/the-extended-range-ev-influx-is...

This was addressed explicitly in the video. It's far less efficient end-to-end, even though the gearing is theoretically simpler. Trains do it because diesel engines just can't produce the torque you need to move a train (at least, in the form factor of a locomotive), so they need to use electric motors.

He makes that argument but IMO it's not particularly well founded. He talks about his old Chevy Volt and guesses about the new Nissan series hybrids while ignoring Honda's current lineup of series hybrids. The Civic hybrid* meets or beats the EPA ratings on both the Corolla and Camry hybrids when on the same size wheels (18").

I agree in principal that there's efficiency to be gained by minimizing conversion losses, but Honda may be clawing that back with larger and more efficient motor-generators that only package well because no planetary gear set is required to connect everything.

* Honda hybrids do have either one or two clutches to mechanically connect the engine to the wheels at fixed ratios for highway cruising, but their city EPA numbers are still very competitive.

Ford is replacing their Lightning EV with an “EREV” gas generator.

There's so much variety in hybrids that's hard to discuss as a single category.

I think the most important question is whether the system requires a regular automatic/manual transmission or forgoes one entirely. The Toyota planetary gear system forgoes one, as does the modern Honda and Nissan approaches. Not having a transmission in the traditional sense saves so much complexity that the overall system is net simpler imo even with the additional complexity from having a motor and engine.

Then there are systems that have a full automatic drivetrain and some extra clutches to couple to a motor-generator. And there's even systems with an electronically controlled manual transmission instead. Those systems are going to be incredibly complex and fragile.

Well for quite a while, this has been a Toyota specific design, per their patents, but they ceded all royalties to those a few years ago [0], and to me, this seems like such a fundementally elegant design.

[0] https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/corporate/27512455.html

There's a lot of memes about how dumb it is to have all of the ICE moving parts, but they're just memes. We know how to make engines and they are cheap to mass produce. The complexity argument is aesthetic.

I don't know much about cars, but I have to assume that fewer moving parts means less wear and repairs.

That's a fair assumption that doesn't prove itself in practice. In practice, a Prius engine lasts forever. Someone will jump in to complain about some anecdotal failure but the fleet statistics are strong. They even outlast other non-hybrid Toyotas. There are a lot of reasons for this but a significant one is the lack of belt-driven accessories, lack of friction clutches, and ability to avoid high-stress operation because of the electric side of the power train.

This is exactly correct, and I can't count how many times I've had to have this argument, thank you for pointing it out.

My hybrid (not a Prius, actually) doesn't have a dedicated starter motor, the traction motor starts the ICE engine. The climate control is electric and powered by the hybrid battery (with the added benefit of being able to run the A/C while the ICE engine is off). The power steering is electric so there's no hydraulic power steering pump to fail. I'm sure there's more I'm forgetting. Mechanically, it's just simpler than an ICE engine alone.

> ability to avoid high-stress operation because of the electric side of the power train.

This one is huge, also, and people always forget about it, so thank you for raising it. ICE hate being heavily loaded at low RPMs (also known as "lugging"), and the electric motors alleviate a lot of that low-end workload. It's a big win not just for efficiency, but also drivability, as almost all non-diesel engines make terrible torque low in their RPM range.

I could go on and on about the enhanced reliability features of my hybrid. One reason why it will last forever is that when the engine needs to start, the ECU grabs the crankshaft with the MGU and spins it up to 1000 RPM, and doesn't deliver fuel until oil pressure is verified. The cam phaser also keeps the valves wide open so there's little compression while starting. And, unlike other ICE engines that are forced to operate at certain speeds depending on what the car is doing, the ECU in my hybrid can detect oil dilution and simply fix it.

Yeah, there’s just so much you can do (or not do, depending on how you look at it) when you have a well-integrated ~50hp electric motor and decent sized battery.

It may be aesthetic now but it will become economic soon enough. There is just no way a complicated hybrid system stays price competitive with a dumb simple electric motors and some batteries. Hybrids will end up more expensive as batteries drop rapidly in price - the gas engine and system costs are mature and thus fixed and will not decline. Batteries get substantially cheaper and better every year. Hybrids have a short economically viable window whose days are numbered (I personally think 2026 is the last year they’ll compete in many markets)

>> It argues that the hybrid pack (minus the battery, perhaps?) is more compact and simpler than a manual gearbox, even.

Having worked in the field I've been of that opinion for 15 years or more. Two motors and a planetary gear are simpler than a regular transmission. More efficient also, and more reliable. The inverter and small battery may add some cost, but the MPG improvement is more than worth it.

Hybrids are an awesome improvement over plain old ICE, but they tend to get an unnecessary price premium due to their advantages.

It might be simpler than a regular gearbox, but so what? That tech is already commoditised, and generally very reliable. The engine - not the transmission - is the biggest pain point with ICE vehicles. It’s what needs constant maintenance and fluid changes.

> The engine [...] neds constant maintenance and fluid changes.

I drive my ICE to the dealership once a year, and one hour later the above is all done (in the meantime I drink coffee and read a book nearby). Once a year. I wouldn't call that "constant maintenance and fluid changes". It's "yearly", as in "once a year".

I will be getting an EV in the future (we're setting up our house with solar and a V2H system - Vehicle To House), but that's not because an ICE needs constant engine maintenance. It doesn't.

The title doesn't match the point of the video. What he is trying to show is the world would be a better place if we could establish that hybrids come in two flavors: Toyota and non-Toyota. There's really no better hybrid design. Unfortunately that means they aren't scrapped after decades, and Mongolia has become a dumping ground for them.[1] So it still is the best hybrid drivetrain in the world, but much like plastic or PFAS or some other very long term problems, the old battery cannot be cheaply scrapped. Toyota's new lithium models like the Sienna in the video have solved that, but now you're just half-assing a conventional EV until solid state systems are ready. By 2030 I expect the last Toyota hybrid to be announced.

[1] https://cna.asia/3PS4lrN

> Since early 2025, the government has made battery exports illegal.

This seems like a self-imposed problem, especially in a country with no advanced battery recycling capacity.

I'm still not sure about the shoehorning of Mongolia into the discussion, but what these sorts of comments often fail to discuss is what the supply chain into new things looks like, because that can be equally destructive to the environment.

Generally, recyclers will pay for scrap that has minerals which can be recovered from the scrap.

Toyota Siennas use liquid Ni-MH batteries. It is likely these batteries as scrap aren't being exported, or, if they are, they are exported to foreign recyclers (in this case, many of those recyclers are actually less polluting that U.S. recyclers simply because they built their plants this century and new technology pollutes less). Also, Ni-MH can be replaced one cell at a time to produce "rebuilt" battery packs sold to economy customers, and "spent" cells, which simply fail performance tests, can often be used in other applications that are less demanding than hybrid vehicles. There is a cottage industry here in the U.S. doing these things. Ni-MH that is exported is usually completely dead cells going to a recycler (smelter), or at least that was my experience when I worked in that supply chain.

Li-ion using Cobalt is highly sought after by recyclers due to the expense of virgin Cobalt, so experiences a similar supply chain to Ni-MH. LMO chemistry batteries were the ones nobody wanted to touch, as they have no value, and they are all of the cheap replacement batteries people buy on Amazon for $15, and likely will be the chemistry people will use in their EU mandated replacement battery phones for some nightmare future mass pollution disasters.

You're right about the Sienna. I was thinking about the Pacifica hybrid lithium battery. I think the greatest concern here is the fact that lithium batteries are the future and the NiMH systems turn into legacy trash once they lose balance in the 2030s and everything is lithium or solid state. Nobody will be interested in reviving the packs when lithium batteries are cheaper, better, and prolific.

Ford's hybrids come from the Toyota tree, although they've diverged.

The new Honda hybrids are more like a generator + ev, which is also pretty interesting.

Toyota’s system is good but I personally prefer series hybrids which have power delivery more like an EV.

The video makes the argument that there is a lot of efficiency loss by converting to mechanical energy twice.

In general, that is correct. But there are also efficiency losses by running the engine at higher speeds off-throttle, which is a weakness of the Toyota design. Hybrids run in many different modes of operation under a wide variety of load and speed conditions, and there are strengths and weaknesses to each.

africa imports a lot of used Japanese vehicles as well - majority of vehicles on the road in RHD countries r ex-jap.

I think - that's still a good thing though - as long as the used ex-jap hybrid vehicle can still save fuel.

Chinese EVs n hybrids will probably make that less common as they're cheap enough.

So this is specifically about Toyota's hybrid engines (which is very different from e.g. Honda's engine, not to mention plug-in hybrids or "mild hybrids"). The explanation of the mechanics starts around the 36 minute mark.

I always found most explanations of Toyota's Power Split Device too abstract, until I found this page where you can play with the sliders to see how the power is actually split between the ICE and the MG1/MG2 electric generators: https://eahart.com/prius/psd/

Fun story: I used to own a Prius, and it turns out they expose the speeds and torque values of MG1, MG2, and the engine independently on the OBDII port.

What this means it that you can set up an app like Torque[0] and add widgets that show you how fast each of the motors are spinning, live, and watch what happens when e.g. the engine starts: MG1 and MG2 both torque the engine forward, MG2 just enough to stop the car from attempting to roll backward in response to MG1's torque through the planetary gearset, and then MG1 spins up with the engine and then stops torquing it once the engine reaches idle.

Battery charging while idling is similar: MG1 turns itself into a generator, fighting the engine and generating electricity in the process. The throttle opens considerably, as if you'd pressed the accelerator halfway to the floor, but MG1 and the engine work together to keep the engine's RPM around ~1,200 so you'd never know it - it's as if you're driving up a really steep hill that stops you from accelerating even though you have the gas pressed halfway down. And then MG2 torques backward to stop the car from rolling forward any more than the Prius's normal "simulate a normal gas car's tendency to roll forward when the user lets their foot off the brake" would have it do.

It was fascinating to watch, and I kind of regret not building an app similar to the parent comment's link that showed what my car was doing in real time with the gears drawn out like that.

[0]: https://torque-bhp.com/

Note that Ford's plugin hybrids (using the same 2.5L engine as the full hybrids) also use the same technology (due to them having a cooperation and patent sharing agreement with Toyota) though they do differ a tiny bit due to the engine.

The tool is interesting though the Ford system can run independently on MG2/MG1 alone up to about 130kph (~80mph) depending on requested torque and load.

Only thing Ford screwed up is the battery (or Samsung since this time it's the cells).

The Prius model is basically how the new Honda hybrid power train works. (I'm gearing up to buy a new Civic once my insurance gets me my payout.) It has a two motor system (traction and generator) coupled to an Atkinson cycle engine with a planetary gearbox.

However, it's a 2L engine and the whole thing puts down 200hp, netting acceleration that beats a Civic SI and ~50 miles per gallon.

They first trialed it in Japan and Europe as the Civic EHEV a few years ago, and as of 2025 it has replaced the Sport and Sport Touring trims' former turbocharged 1.5L power train.

Hmm - I’m not an expert on this, but I thought the e:HEV system was quite different.

More like an engine connected to a single very long gear (like top gear), to avoid converting from physical motion to electricity and back to physical motion, at motorway speeds. And also a clutch, to disconnect that system completely, in which case the combustion engine can drive a generator, and send electricity to another motor driving the wheels. Plus there’s a battery involved, and the motors can assist or regen when the physical drivetrain is connected.

It’s all very cool, and I expect even more efficient than the Toyota system on the open road, but a little less during city driving. I can go into why I think that, but I’m not even sure I’m right :)

https://global.honda/en/tech/two_motor_hybrid_system_honda_e...

Edit: I just wanted to add, that Civic with this drivetrain always seemed like a good choice.

I’ve tried to test-drive a Honda with this setup twice. Once the dealer misunderstood me and I drove some boring mild-hybrid CVT Insight or something. I would have even been happy trying out the dual-clutch hybrid they were using in some models then. I’d already driven their mild hybrid a few times. It got good mileage, but not as good as Toyota’s system, and didn’t have anything else going for it. The second time I hadn’t realised that they didn’t even bring this Civic into the country. We drove the regular CVT anyway, but it was a huge disappointment, knowing other countries had the e:HEV.

2nd edit: I incorrectly called the combustion engine “the motor”, which is something I do all the time, but need to avoid when talking about hybrids

Just in case, this video has more detail than you're likely to want on how the E:HEV works:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLUIExAnNcE

The toyota hybrid transmission is genuinely brilliant. Probably one of the most important and broadly overlooked innovations in automobile technology this century.

https://eahart.com/prius/psd/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxmxIsoV_Xo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppyK3ZlUbtM

For anyone who is concerned that this only applies to Toyota drivetrains (which was true for quite some time), Toyota made nearly all of their HEV patents (24,000 of them) completely royalty-free in 2019 [0].

At this point, I assume the only thing stopping manufacturers is their pre-existing investment in other technology.

[0] https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/corporate/27512455.html

From what I know (granted I’d rather have a bev, but alas) this also applies to the Honda hybrid system, I’m sure there are others.

Ford Kuga (EU) / Escape (US) is built from those patents. It’s basically a copy of Toyota’s hybrid system. And it’s actually quite great, until it catches on fire.

> until it catches on fire

minor details

but does it catch fire and halt?

> It’s basically a copy of Toyota’s hybrid system

That is a myth which refuses to die. Ford developed their own system, and cross-licensed with Toyota over 20 years ago due to commonality of design.

Similarly the cmax transmission is great unless you got an early one and it bores a second output shaft from the inside (bad bearing)

My whole draw to hybrids is low overall cost and longevity. Just two days ago I bought my son a 2007 Prius with 194k miles for $6k; and three weeks ago, a 2008 with 225k miles for my sister for $2.5k. Both should last another 200k if they don’t abuse them.

And if gas goes over $6 I’m buying one for myself, too. I sleep in my car twice a week for work, and being able to run the AC on hot Florida nights will be the cherry on top.

The 2007 is like new except it’s the original battery, so son and I will swap the modules inside the battery pack in a few weeks for some refurbished modules with a warranty. Aside from the battery, the ABS pump is fragile but it is a DIY replacement if you have the time and patience.

Other than that, they just go and go and go, saving money mile after mile.

My 2010 Prius has out of the blue started burning oil last year, like it's going out of style.

It's a common problem with them. But otherwise, it's a very reliable car.

Yeah 2010-2015 all had that issue—or I should say it is far more common in that generation. In 2016 they finally fixed it and the fourth generation is really the best one, though the fifth might prove to be as good or better given enough time.

Watched this when it came out. I felt like it had that typical Technology Connections problem where it will take one under explored point along a Pareto frontier and conflate it for the global optimal design.

At least that was my experience with the toaster, microwave, and dishwasher detergent episodes.

While Hybrid System II is very clever and non-intuitive coming from an ICE or EV frame of reference there are reasons even Toyota hasn’t placed all their chips on this bet. In fact as Japan’s largest manufacturer they want to have a bet on every point of Pareto frontier which is why Toyota makes cars with their own competing iForce hybrid design (I’m a big fan of the generator + torque assist), hydrogen cars, electrics, plug in hybrids, diesels, propane and yes gas.

Specifically Hybrid System II is best if you can 1) only have one car 2) don’t have a place to charge it 3) do lots of starts and stops driving around town.

I saw some parts of this video, so I'm not sure it was mentioned, but the key parameter that is optimized at all times in a hybrid is brake specific fuel consumption:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake-specific_fuel_consumptio...

This is possible (and done) in any automatic, but in hybrids it was taken to the extreme, with electric motors covering for situations when either the RPM or torque are not where desired.

In fact, my experience is that during highway driving it's actually slightly off the optimal point, charging the battery in the process. I speculate that it's so that the surplus power can be released immediately by just making the electric motor stop acting as a generator and go into, well, motor mode.

The CEO of Toyota Research Institute, Gill Pratt, had some good (albeit self-serving) points about the benefits of hybrids and PEVs to complement EVS a few years back that I bookmarked and keep coming back to:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210727090309/https://medium.co...

https://web.archive.org/web/20210825054702/https://medium.co...

> Maximizing the benefit of every battery cell produced requires that we distribute them smartly.

> This means putting them into a greater number of “right sized” electrified vehicles, including HEVs and PHEVs, instead of placing them all into a fewer number of long-range BEVs, like my model X. This is particularly important because presently it is difficult to recycle the kinds of batteries used in BEVs. If we are to achieve carbon neutrality, we must pay attention to all parts of the “3R” process — Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle.

> For example, we hardly ever put gas into our RAV4 Prime PHEV, which has a battery ⅙ as large as our Model X BEV. For the same investment in batteries as our single Model X, five other RAV4 Prime customers could reduce their carbon footprint too.

I'm not sure about this, because a smaller battery pack with fewer modules needs to work much harder.

PHEV batteries are discharged at higher rate (C) while a BEV can spread the load across many more modules. EV range of PHEV is so small that the battery gets fully cycled daily, while a BEV with similar commute distances and charging can easily keep batteries at a more comfortable state of charge.

The recycling thing doesn't make sense to me. For getting raw materials back the difficulty is the same (get the cells out and grind them), and having more cells per pack should amortize labor cost better.

BEV batteries aren't recycled at scale yet, because there aren't many to recycle. They're easier to reuse for grid storage, since BEV packs already have many modules hooked up to a single BMS.

So this sounds more like Toyota is just supply constrained on batteries.

I have a conventional (not plug-in) hybrid Toyota Corolla as otherwise I'd have to pay loads to drive it in the city.

It does get crazy mileage and drives well so I can't complain. They are more expensive than standard cars though and you can't leave it in neutral which is a problem in some car washes.

Can you power off and leave in neutral?

No: at least in my 2023 Corolla, in order to power off it must be in Park, and then, when you power off, the lid on the shift-stick is blocked.

You can leave it in neutral and exit the car, obviously, but the car is started.

I don't get it. I put my Toyota hybrid in neutral while going through a car wash all the time.

I just googled this. I had no idea this was a thing some people worry about. I guess it's a problem if the hybrid battery runs out while the car is in neutral, but there's a meter right there to tell you how much charge it's got if you're really worried about it.

What surprised me in the video is that Alec was telling how his engine can charge his battery while in the car wash. I had a 2016 Auris which I had to put it in neutral in the car wash, and in neutral the engine couldn't charge the battery. That was never a problem, I never had an empty battery in the car wash or even came close to it, but it does seem different from Alec's experience (unless I misunderstood).

I checked my Toyota's manual and it does explicitly warn about neutral for long periods of time for this reason. However, when not in neutral, the car will not allow the traction battery to be below 40% or so, so it is difficult to enter a car wash with an empty battery.

However, the car may have a very small, old, or weak battery; there may be significant drain on the battery (air conditioning?) while in neutral; and you may be in a very long car wash.

The car wash in this video is a box with a solid floor and doors that close at the ends before the wash cycle starts. There's no reason for the car to be put in neutral for this car wash; it's not doing anything to move the car around. You park your car in this kind of car wash.

Aha, that's what I missed. That explains it all. Thanks.

I did that and an alarm went off after a while - apparently the battery was depleting to levels where it can cause damage to the battery. I only had it in neutral for like a minute too.

I just go to the car washes where the car stays still now.

I doubt there’s any permanent damage to the battery. It’s just that the car is bricked and you need a tow truck (and a trip to the dealership to get the battery recharged) if the battery is depleted completely, hence the warning.

2021 Corolla hatchback owner, I didn't know anything about the neutral thing until I was given a courtesy car by the dealership (CH-R: big car, tiny boot) and the lady told me twice never to put in neutral

Why do you need to put it in neutral in a car wash? Does it push the car forwards?

You can put the Toyotas in neutral, but you need to lift a special hatch and manually unlock the shifter. You need to do that if you're being towed. It's all in the manual, of course. I saw the hatch immediately. It's crazy to me that other geeks haven't checked every knob and hatch in their car or at least skimmed the manual.

Yeah, some car washes put the car on a track thing that moves it forwards.

I can put it in neutral, but the battery depletes and eventually an alarm sounds. I had AC on as I live in an extremely hot climate so I suppose it is a bigger problem here.

I recently bought a hybrid, and had been trying to wrap my brain around how it had an Atkinson engine in it. Was imagining a solenoid-driven crankshaft linkage or similar. Loved learning from this video that the secret is in valve timing and not fancy linkages.

But. The other points made felt muddled or even contradictory. I either didn't follow the TC guy's explanation closely enough, or the script could have used another pass.

I'm assuming that right now all valves as computer controlled so why we cannot have best of both worlds? cannot we dynamically switch between Otto and Atkinson cycles by just changing valve profiles?

computer could use Otto cycle in case more power is needed in rare situations

AFAIK all values are controlled by a camshaft. The computer doesn't get enough control. Solenoids seems like that are a possible replacement for CAMs, but they apparently have too many downsides.

Koenigsegg has an engine design that has a camless valve system based on their "Freevalve" technology. Its pretty cool.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koenigsegg_TFG

> cannot we dynamically switch between Otto and Atkinson cycles by just changing valve profiles?

Toyota introduced this exact behaviour with their "Variable Valve Timing-intelligent Electric" (VVT-iE) system:

https://toyota-club.net/files/faq/16-01-01_faq_vvt_ie_eng.ht...

It uses an electric motor to control intake valve timing.

Watching the graphs during the driving segment helped me more than his explanation, but maybe I'm visual about it? It's interesting to see when the battery is being used.

I've seen some modern hybrids just have a visualizer for this on the dash to encourage you to coast more and things, which seems about as helpful in understanding it too.

One of my absolute favorite thing about my Prius is how solid-state everything is. It really feels like the Toyota engineers went out of their way to throw the people working on their cars a bone.

The hybrid battery is super-easy to reach, and since Toyota stuck with NiMH for so long, it's extremely reliable across temperatures, and the cells are dirt cheap.

I have to help family members with car repairs every so often, and the Prius not having a power steering pump, an alternator, a starter motor, or even a normal transmission, means that it's actually feasible to stay on top of repairs as a non-mechanic.

In my brother's Ford fusion, it's a totally different experience, where it feels like Ford cut every single corner they could. I understand that their sedan line was dying, and I could really see why.

I understood after I watched the brilliant Weber Auto video on it, published 5 years ago[0]. I liked it so much I "gently" encouraged my partner to get a Yaris hybrid, which gets about 69mpg average. It's not unusual to see 80+ on individual trips. She was a little sceptical about having an auto at first, because us Europeans still think it's 1980 and that manuals are superior, but she came around after a few minutes of driving.

To be fair, though, classic "slushbox" autos actually were/are garbage, as are chain actuated CVTs. The hybrid system gets you immediate acceleration like an electric, none of this awful lag you get with a slushbox.

It's hilarious to me that 34mpg is considered remarkably good, though. I know it's a "minivan" but my Golf GTI gets 42mpg and is actually fun and arguably cool. I can also fit 5 people, furniture, and 2.4m lengths of timber in it comfortably.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O61WihMRdjM

The Sienna is considerably larger than a Golf. It seats 7 or 8 depending on configuration.

Also remember we use different 20% smaller gallons than you do in Europe. 34 miles per US gallon is about 41 miles per imperial gallon.

https://www.carsized.com/en-us/cars/compare/volkswagen-golf-...

In the same US tests with US spec vehicles, the Sienna actually achieves considerably better fuel economy. Quite impressive given the size difference:

https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=49303&id=5...

> Also remember we use different 20% smaller gallons than you do in Europe. 34 miles per US gallon is about 41 miles per imperial gallon.

Ohhhh... That would be it then. Yeah, that's very impressive. I definitely feel like these super-efficient petrols are the sweet spot right now.

> It's hilarious to me that 34mpg is considered remarkably good, though

I was curious too, I have a manual, petrol engine, Citroën C4 Picasso (called a minivan in English I think? but then I didn't think a Golf GTI was called a minivan so I'm not sure) from 2011 that's not hybrid at all and that's about what I get (7 L/100 km). It's comfortable to be in but not interesting to drive at all though.

I get a very consistent 4,3 L/100 km (54 mpg) on my diesel C4 (basically the same size as a Golf GTI) from 2013 and I like driving this one.

edit now that I've read the sibling comment, Google uses US gallons for its conversions and that's what I've used here.

I didn't get the "green stairs" reference; can anyone tell me what it's about? https://youtu.be/KnUFH5GX_fI?t=546

There's a reason so many cab companies have fleets of Priuses.

I now have a hybrid Toyota truck (Tacoma i-Force MAX), so it's not like the classical EV/BEV powertrain, from my understanding. Instead, the motor is between the engine and the transmission, so it gives an initial kick of torque before the engine starts or provides sufficient power.

It's interesting that Toyota has two hybrid models: one for efficiency and one for low-end torque performance.

https://www.tacoma4g.com/forum/threads/toyota-i-force-max-hy...

Also have an iforce max, it’s a weird one since our systems are 288V systems capable of running the drivetrain for a bit and not the 40V “mild hybrid” systems that only run auxiliary systems.

Yeah, it's certainly a departure from the Prius-style hybrid powertrain. I'll watch that video as I haven't come across it yet!

Also, I love how my 4th gen Tacoma drives! So glad I got a long-bed Trailhunter last year.

Oh, it's a hybrid Sienna minivian! Now I'm bitter, because I was looking at those for the family a couple years back, but stock was low and they were priced $15k higher than a 3-row gas-guzzling SUV.

Actually, another thing was that the visibility out of the Sienna seemed quite bad.

We bought one, after being on a waiting list for 9 months.

Visibility is fine, comparable to other minivans and much better than a few older models. It no longer has rear vent windows, which is a pity.

The software for the infotainment system is horrifying. Everything else is quite good.

The only benefit I've really made sense of with hybrids is their engine emissions aren't localised to the neighborhood where they're charged overnight. Apart from that, I can't think of anything else.

Before seeing the sibling comment here this is muddled or contradictory -- I'd shared the link on (having watched it in full) noting this may be the best explainer of this nature for its target persona that I've seen.

What I didn't get from the video is that there's a differential, but it is not connected to the wheels. Is there a second differential that connects MG1 to the wheels?

The planetary gear works as a differential with the Sun gear, Planet carrier, and Ring gear each connected to something. You can see how this works here:

https://eahart.com/prius/psd/

That animation of the Power Split Device really helped me understand how the thing actually worked, even more than some of the physical models people show do.

The EVs I'd really like to see some day in the US are the dirt cheap 100 mile range $5k Chinese EVs.

One can dream I guess.

Likely to remain a dream as the people buying a $5k car are likely to prefer a reliable 12 year old luxuery car instead.

I dunno. While most people likely only need one of those, it just feeds into the narrative that you can't take EVs on road trips.

They don't need US crash or safety standards. Just get an e-bike instead.

try living in rural mexico with an EV ... we have a hybrid because it is the only sensible choice ...

My main takeaway from the video is just how terrible Toyota was at marketing this.

I mean, does it really matter?

The Prius (and all subsequent Synergy Drive cars) were widely known - from the very beginning - to be extremely fuel efficient ICE cars. As time went on, they universally became known to be both fuel efficient and also absolutely bomb proof.

Both of those things surprised basically no-one, since the direct successors (Camry, Corolla, 4Runner, Tacoma, Hilux) were also already known for being fuel efficient and reliable cars.

The only people who really care about why and how exactly they got so fuel efficient and reliable are engineering nerds - and many of those already knew, the planetary gear set + atkinson cycle engine are a pretty legendary design. They hit it out of the park on the first try, after all.

And as this video shows, explaining the why and how to non-engineering nerds takes a good part of an hour anyway. How do you do marketing with that?

It does to me. I was operating under the misconception that hybrids combined the meant more parts and more maintenance. I said this out loud as a complaint many times in discussions about them and everyone let it drop or conceded the point. Reading this thread it appears I was ignorant that it was more hybrid than I imagined.

Ditto. I also actively avoided hybrids as being worst of both worlds.

I used to think the same before I bought a hybrid (Honda CRV). It is different from Toyota but also a very simple setup (generator + ev at low to medium speeds and direct drive at high speeds). It technically doesn't even have a gear box and no alternator. It has less maintenance items than its ICE equivalent. (Not taking into account the battery replacement in long term)

I recently got a BYD Sealion 5 PHEV and still driving in the engine so haven't been plugging it in yet.

After 430km my fuel usage is exactly as per the start of this video at 6.9L/100km.

Being in South Africa, the affordability of this vehicle compared to an EV makes this the most sensible purchase for me at this point of time. Also, it seems that BYD's price might be especially good right now due it trying to gain market share.

My experience with hybrids have been.... mostly positive, good mileage, Toyota's drive very well, but.. I would not buy one for one pedantic, silly reason: I hate the government mandated banshee howling sound. Many ICE vehicles are just as quiet as an EV without the fake noise, and while I am not discounting that quiet vehicles can pose a hazard to pedestrians, the howling is just.. utterly obnoxious.

I had a good experience with my prius for quite a while.

I wouldn't buy one with the noise either. I was annoyed daily that there was a loud beep during backup, which is the first thing I had to do every time I got in the car -- that beeping was inside the cabin.

Mine was apparently before that. I bought it strictly for the commute as I was really tired of shifting in stop and go traffic. People talk about having having power from low rpm's like we're drag racing, but the real win is in stop and go. Mileage also great in that situation.

But once the car hit 100k miles, it just became a nightmare with maintenance. Everything was special and somehow tied together.

More of a Toyota issue, but they wouldn't recall the headlights ceasing to work -- each one had to be replaced with their computer control something for $700. Who needs headlights? Also the rubber pad to open the trunk melted -- this happened to quite a few Prius owners in a certain time frame -- toyota insisted we all spilled something that melts rubber on a pad that faces downward.

I would be open to a hybrid, but I just bought a Honda Civic instead.

I read a comment once that referred to this as the "sad spaceship" sound and I can't stop thinking about it. So on point. I hate it.

A few drops of superglue into the speaker should work wonders. Probably very easy to DIY on your driveway in a few minutes.

That's a really good idea. I only worry about invalidating a warranty. As soon as the dealer finds out..

You'd only invalidate the warranty of the speaker itself. Good riddance.

this was a great video

Doug T H I S doesn't get old

If nobody understands them, why would I watch this video - Either he also doesn't understand them, therefore why would I watch? Or he does understand them, in which case the title is incorrect, therefore why would I watch?

  This one commercial said, “Forget everything you know about slipcovers.” So I did, and it was a load off of my mind. Then the commercial tried to sell slipcovers, but I didn’t know what they were!
  
  - Mitch Hedburg

https://youtu.be/KnUFH5GX_fI?t=981&si=VNWJu0XaNdu-gj9Y

Thanks for this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com