Which fuel-efficient technology is best depends on the customer
With gas prices hovering in the upper echelons of their traditional price range, and enough volatility in the market to make consumers nervous about future price spikes, fuel-efficiency is top-of-mind for many new-vehicle shoppers.
Fortunately, almost every brand on the market can now offer those buyers some form of fuel-efficient technology — some brands several different alternatives.
The question becomes, which is best suited for which customers? The answer is, “there are horses for courses,” so to speak. And the winner may be different depending on what “course” best fits the customer’s profile. Which technology is best suited for which customers depends very much on their family needs, lifestyle, and driving patterns. There is no one-size-fits-all, best solution.
Eco-Run revealing
That fact was highlighted recently by the Automobile Journalists Association of Canada (AJAC) ‘Brighton-to-London Eco-Run’ — a three-day trek across southern Ontario with 23 vehicles that showcased a broad spectrum of current and near-future fuel-efficient and fuel-alternative technologies.
A number of useful conclusions can be drawn from both the experience and the data generated by that exercise. Some of mine are:
1. What’s optimum for primarily stop-and-go city driving — Electric Vehicles (EVs) or hybrids, for example — may not be the best choice for those who spend more time on the highway.
2. There’s a lot of life in the gasoline engine yet. While it is being challenged by alternatives, recent approaches such as down-sized engines combined with turbocharging and direct fuel-injection, are capable of previously unheard-of levels of fuel efficiency, over a broad-range of driving conditions.
Taking a different approach, some companies, including Mazda and Honda, are going back to square one with their engine designs and optimizing every detail with fuel-efficiency in mind. With spectacular results.
3. Europe’s long-standing preference for diesel passenger cars is well-founded. Not only can they provide fuel economy the equal of some hybrids, their inherent low-end torque production makes them an absolute pleasure to drive.
4. Perhaps the biggest bang for the buck, particularly if the customer does much stop-and-go driving, comes from automatic stop-start technology — particularly when it’s combined with an advanced-technology gasoline or diesel engine.
When your engine is running and you’re not moving, you’re getting zero miles-per-gallon (or km-per-litre). Shutting off the engine when the car is stopped eliminates that waste of fuel. A few vehicles currently offer this technology but it promises to become much more widespread in the near future.
5. Hybrids, which inherently incorporate automatic stop-start technology, are particularly efficient in city driving conditions, where low speeds, frequent stops, and the recharging effect of regenerative braking highlight their advantages. But some current hybrids can also achieve very low consumption in highway driving.
6. Range-extended plug-in hybrids, like the Chevrolet Volt and the forthcoming Toyota Prius Plug-in add some additional electric-only operation to the attributes of a conventional hybrid.
The big plus for these plug-ins is that when the energy stored in batteries is depleted, the customer isn’t stranded as would be the case with a pure EV. He or she can keep on driving until it’s time to refill the gas tank.
7. Today’s electric vehicles are real cars that perform as well or better than their conventional counterparts in most respects. There is definitely a place for them — it’s just not every place.
They are in their element in stop-and-go city driving. That’s the kind of service they were designed for. They perform well enough on the highway, but limited range between recharges, long recharge times, and an absolute dearth of public recharging infrastructure still effectively limits their usage to relatively short-trip service.
8. The customer’s driving style can have as great or greater an effect on fuel consumption as most technologies can, as an experiment conducted within the Eco-Run by event partner, Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) demonstrated.
NRcan entered two identical vehicles that were driven differently. One was driven “to keep up with traffic,” the other with fuel-efficiency in mind. And the difference in fuel-consumption was dramatic. The car driven “normally” consumed about 25 per cent more fuel on average, and as much as 75 per cent more on some driving stages.
The Eco-Run wasn’t a competition. There were no winners or losers. In fact, it could be argued that every vehicle that took part was a winner in its own way. And consequently, so are consumers, for they have many choices.
But among those choices, there are definitely “horses for courses.” You need to determine the nature of your customer’s “course” to determine which technology best suits his or her individual driving needs.
