Archives

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/2/AmericanFlag.jpg It's the high voltage cables running through these cars that worried them (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/topdown/detail?entry_id=42637)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/prius_crash_test.jpg Michael Taylor - SFGATE (http://www.sfgate.com) - June 30, 2009

As hybrids become more popular the questions still remain... --Ed.

Several years ago, I was at a field demonstration of hybrid cars. Reporters were given a chance to drive hybrids around a closed course, zipping silently around the orange cones. Fun.

Over on the sidelines were three or four firefighters from a local fire department. I asked them why they were here. One of them said they just wanted to have a look because of the problems they might have if they had to use the jaws of life at a car wreck involving a hybrid.

It's the high voltage cables running through these cars that worried them. Oh? Yes, indeed, hidden in the car are cables carrying up to 600 volts of electricity. You don't want to chomp into those with your giant wire cutters.

Now the problem is being discussed openly. And it also raises another problem -- hybrids are so quiet that blind people, used to hearing the engines of approaching cars, can't hear hybrids because their electric motors are silent. This, and the bolt-cutter safety issue, were both raised in a recent MSNBC piece.... http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/topdown/detail?entry_id=42637

More of this BS? We'll be electrocuted, we'll hit blind people, we won't be able to visit our gas station attendant as often. There are just so many issues with hybrid ownership! At least the article pointed to where to get the extrication info.

Hi Manuel:

___I think the loons were let out of the asylum the past few days... Insight's suck, Prius' headlights are garbage and now heaven forbid you will be electrocuted...

___All the while those that own them continue driving down the road at 60 + mpg and will continue to drive down the road :)

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Hi Wayne;

You are absolutely right. And to confirm, I had my own local set of sloppy loons on this side to contend with as well. So, yes something is up for sure.

Must be the feeling of anxiety that precedes a hike in gas prices and chronic refusal to acknowledge the more sensible transportation options.:rolleyes:


Cheers;


MSantos

What a crock!!!!!!

Blind people can't hear a Hybrid?

What about regular gasoline engined automobiles?

I have been around a whole lot of newer cars that were idling
at a light that were so quiet I couldn't even hear them
running after I FAS mine.

has anyone noticed the "molotov coctail" they are driving around on NOW?
if you get into an accident - there is a chance your car will catch on FIRE or EXPLODE - Long before any Firefighters can rescue you

with respect to the blind - they are probably more aware of there surroundings than the Sighted are. When was the last time you heard of a blind person getting hit by a Bicycle? they make no noise. and there are plenty of "Sight"abled people that get hit.

I thank god that we have the freedom to say what we think and feal - it helps to identify the "stupid" people easier

Now the problem is being discussed openly. And it also raises another problem -- hybrids are so quiet that blind people, used to hearing the engines of approaching cars, can't hear hybrids because their electric motors are silent. This, and the bolt-cutter safety issue, were both raised in a recent MSNBC piece.... http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/topdown/detail?entry_id=42637

Dr. Hogan and I had a conference call with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on my Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. There was an informal, general discussion, but the bottom line:

* NHTSA can't find the bodies either
* NHTSA statement 'there is insufficient data' is misleading

The NHTSA will close my FOIA by sending two pages, one listing their databases (likely to be identical to their web page) and a copy of one page from the NHTSA's Wagner presentation, June 23. But the general discussion was revealing.

The NHTSA decided not to look at the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) because the EV mode speeds are slow enough that a fatality is unlikely. But FARS directly addresses the words of HR 5734, "... such vehicles [are rjw] extremely dangerous ..." It is hard to find the bodies when you choose not to look for them. They are looking only for low-speed incidents and that data is sparse and flawed. For example, the General Estimate System (GES) is a 1 to 100 sampling and there was only one Prius pedestrian accident found.

The conference call confirmed what had been suspected, no one can 'find the bodies' but the ambiguity of the NHTSA claim is misleading. NHTSA has the same data we have but used the absence of a positive result, the absence of 'bodies' by ignoring FAR, to claim "There are not enough crashes." There are Prius pedestrian deaths, 11 of them, which makes the "extremely dangerous" claim in HR 5734 at best dubious.

STATE OF HR 5734

There is no Senate bill and this Congress ends in November. The window for further mischief is rapidly closing ... not closed but closing. But never underestimate the ability of Congress and the Executive to do the wrong thing given the announcement a week ago of plans to spend $750 B. without the taxes to pay for it.

Come January, there will be a new round of political appointments and a new head of the NHTSA. Soon the current political appointees are starting to think about their next job. The senior civil staff are planning their orientation presentations for the new bosses.

CONCLUSION

Efforts todate:

1. Every co-sponsor of HR 5734 and the committee members have a copy of the Hogan report and recommended language changes.
2. Every Congressman whose constituents signed the petition has a full data package.
3. Every major news paper of the co-sponsor's states has a data package on HR 5734.
4. Engineering the perfect solution continues.
Edit/Delete Message

dude.. seriously. If you're going to just cut and paste any old crap into various threads, I'm going to start marking you're posts as thread abuse. Discourse is one thing, but this borders on stupidity for the sake of being anal sore loser.

More of this BS? We'll be electrocuted, we'll hit blind people, we won't be able to visit our gas station attendant as often. There are just so many issues with hybrid ownership! At least the article pointed to where to get the extrication info.

How is this BS?

Will it still be BS the first time there's news of a fatality? It's entirely possible (most likely inevitable) that a firefighter will use the jaws of life to extract passengers from a hybrid, hit a high voltage line, causing cardiac arrest in the firefighter and possibly also the passengers.

I expected the comments on this story to be discussing possible solutions to the problem. Develop electrically insulated jaws of life so that the operator isn't at risk, re-train rescue crews to be aware of the dangers, add extra electrical safeties, sensors with audible warning if there is stray voltage anywhere, etc...

Why is everyone so quick to write off this story as "anti-hybrid", "loony", BS"?

Hi Osme;

Because it has been discussed "ad nauseum" before. A quick search on this forum will reveal the details that these authors and skeptics often miss or ignore. ;)

Just to answer your point directly: There is no danger of electrocution in the event of an accident as the power is automatically cut off by relays.

Cheers;

Why is everyone so quick to write off this story as "anti-hybrid", "loony", BS"?Because there have been so many stories over the past decade and the reliability of over a million hybrids do not support these chicken little stories.

Search CleanMPG for Dust to Dust and Sudbury....those stories are just dishonest.

Hi Osme:

___Those relays Manuel mentioned are at the pack and the only way to get electrocuted would be to bury the jaws of life into the actual packs terminals. A NiMH pack is far safer due to the relays opening up than the 12V bomb sitting in the font of most cars let alone the ability to trigger an airbag into somebody which is the exact reason Emergency response personnel go after those 12V cables first before anything else.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Let me take articles like this to the absurd - if you saw every week the past decade a story denying the Holocaust would you believe it? Of course it would be called out before it went that long because too many know better and were a witness to it.

It concerns me that people are intentionally spreading lies because they somehow find hybrids threatening.

How mnay times have any of you walked through a salvage yard or been to salvage auctions?

Ever seen a car ripped in half with most of the powertrain in a pile on the ground.

The consequences on a 120 MPH combined head on impact.

The smell of shredded flesh from 50 feet away.

Now we will have two batteries, and a fuel tank, or one battery with enough power to propel a vehicle for over 100 miles.

A recent study found that over 100,000 lives could be saved by comparing the operational strategies of hospitals nationwide, and looking at the differences in procedures from hospital to hospital.

You can bet the insurance companies and manufacturers, who will ultimately bear the burden of a lawsuit happy nation are considering the potential consequences.

Of course those lawsuits will eventually be paid by each of us, through higher charges.

Personally I want to know the facts, and potential risks. Emergency personel shoud be aware of any potential increase in risk in doing their jobs. Should they just blindly attempt to do their job when there is a fire? What does fire do to one of these battery packs? Is the risk reward ratio great enough for them to not attempt a rescue becasue of the circumstances?

To assume any electrical protection design is suffecient for any circumstance might be fine for us sitting here at our CPU, but we are not making life and death choices in terrible situations.

regards
gary

I'm for safety - it's just the motivation of such articles is misguided and ill-researched at best and at worst an attempt to discredit hybrids.

Why are safety concerns not across the board? ;)

For years pickups and SUVs have had lesser safety standards - why not outcry to improve them? More are killed from this. And that's before factoring in braking distance and increased risk of rollovers.

Now we will have two batteries, and a fuel tank, or one battery with enough power to propel a vehicle for over 100 miles.



The battery pack in my Prius, when fully charged (solid green battery icon on the MFD) can propel my Prius for perhaps 5 miles on flat ground, so I have to call you out on that 100 mile figure.

Like Wayne stated, the NiMH battery pack in the Prius is far better protected in a crash then the dumb old lead-acid battery in your car.

The sad reality is that virtually no one survives a head-on collision at a combined closing speed of 120 mph. Defensive driving says you are better off doing just about anything you can think of to avoid a collision like that. It really won't matter what you are driving at the instant of a 120 mph combined head-on crash, you're dead. At a minimum, your aorta will rupture from the G forces, and you'll have zero chance of surviving that.

Harry

The Mercedes that Princess Diana died in was going at least 60mph. Her heart was completely dislocated. :eek: To date, NOBODY has survived after their heart was dislocated.

The battery pack in my Prius, when fully charged (solid green battery icon on the MFD) can propel my Prius for perhaps 5 miles on flat ground, so I have to call you out on that 100 mile figure.

Like Wayne stated, the NiMH battery pack in the Prius is far better protected in a crash then the dumb old lead-acid battery in your car.

The sad reality is that virtually no one survives a head-on collision at a combined closing speed of 120 mph. Defensive driving says you are better off doing just about anything you can think of to avoid a collision like that. It really won't matter what you are driving at the instant of a 120 mph combined head-on crash, you're dead. At a minimum, your aorta will rupture from the G forces, and you'll have zero chance of surviving that.

Harry

You are calling me out on a BEV. LOL!

And you are behind the car that was in the head on and you get nailed with the battery.
In the 60s minor collisions resulted in broken motor mounts. The throttle stuck wide open and the car ran across the road into oncoming traffic.

Result is motor mounts that are trapped in rubber to keep a simple fender bender from killing an innocent bystander.

I guess no one has actually looked at the results of highway carnage.

I have seen tens of thousands, and to rationalize that any single impact is automatic death is something you should be callled out on. I have a friend that you wrote off who walked away from a head on at 100 MPH between a Pontiac Catalina and an old VW.

You can never predict the consequences of accidents, but you CAN statistically analyze to overall risk increases or decreases of thousands of accident statistics. Those facing the financial consequences should have the information.

Pick your source, maybe the Insurance Institute, or another "unbiased" source, if you think there is one left.

Now who has an agenda?

regards
gary

Anyone find it strange that there was not this kind of alarmist screams on airbags? Now we have at least two per vehicle - each one could kill.

It's a bit hard to take articles like this one seriously when plenty of attorneys would jump on something like this....don't you think that would happen by now? ;)

I also find it strange that someone who owns and drives a hybrid would take this angle - Gary.

Wrong

Uh, there were screams and lawsuits when airbags first came out. The result of the screams and lawsuits were the airbags were redesigned to deploy at higher impact speeds after a couple of children were decapitated, when a woman accidentally drove into a ditch at 5 MPH in a mall parking lot. Also the sensors were repositioned to areas of the car where minor impacts would not result in a unnecessary deployment, as they did when the sensors were originally mounted just behind the front bumper. They were also redesigned to not deploy in side impacts as well as rear impacts.

Also sensors were placed in the passengers seat to disable the passenger airbag when there was insuffecient weight on the passengers seat.

Pale, it is not an "angle" of any sort. I want to know if there is statistical data that shows what I am driving is more or less dangerous than a conventional vehicle.

I want to know that I would be taling a greater risk in an emergency manoeuver in a Saturn Vue because the rear suspension could fail, causing loss of control.

I want to know if someone runs me off the road into standing salt water, if my car could kill me.

In fact I want to know if the insurance premiums on any car I own are higher, I want to know the reasoning of the insurance company as to why they consider that particular car to be a source of greater risk.

Remember the issue with power windows and submerged vehicles. Do you carry one of those spring loaded metal punches to break your window out if you end up submerged in a vehicle, with your power windows shorted out, as well as your power door locks.

I want to know when I look under the hood of a 77 Porsche 924 that if I disconnect a spark plug wire the shock could kill me, and there was a warning on the radiator support that made it clear that Porsche felt it was important to warn the old mechanics that had disconnected a lot of plug wires, that it was no longer a realistic option.

Seen any of these warnings lately?

Yes I drive a hybrid, but that does not make me not want to know if there are additional risk involved with the operation of that hybrid.

Maybe it's the same desire for self preservation that leaves me with all my body parts after 58 years.

Frankly I find some of the responses to this thread astounding. There are encyclopedias of
evidence of poor design and poor pre disaster failure analysis of auto designs in the past.

Windshields that decapitate you.

Impalement on the stupidist knobs and other poorly designed protrusions.

You darn right I have an agenda-survival.

regards
gary

In fact on this very forum another member posted about a recall on my recent Echo purchase, about a defective crank angle sensor that could cause my car to cut off at any time.

Due Diligence, ladies and gentlemen.

I went to the dealer and had them confirm that the recall had been done after my purchase.

Beats dying every day.

regards
gary

You are calling me out on a BEV. LOL!



What BEV would that be? You said nothing about a BEV in your post.

While it might be possible that some people have survived head-on crashes at closing speeds of 120 mph, I sure wouldn't want to be in one of those vehicles to check that. Defensive driving means avoiding a crash like that at all costs because your chance of survival is slim to none. Many people don't seem to understand that, and allow themselves to be in head-on crashes when they could have swerved off the road to avoid one.

You seem to be focused on the vehicle. My Prius has good crash ratings. I would suggest focusing on the driver, instead.

You really worry about things like power windows not working under water? You worry too much. Life is not forever, and there's no use in being fearful of every possible bad thing that could happen to you.

Harry

While there might have been more outcries on the airbags, the fact still is hybrids have been selling in America for ten years. During that time, hybrids have not had anything surface that is a clear safety hazard like the first-generation airbags deploying too fast.

40,000 Americans die on the roads annually so there is definitely room for improvement, even if you deduct 20-30K from drunks and obviously reckless drivers.

I'd like to politely ask Gary as hard as he is coming down on this thread why he has not traded his Honda Insight for another vehicle like a Volvo?

As much as he is stressing safety one would think he would get rid of the Insight.

It's all a matter of relative risks. You choose to take certain risks every day - driving for one. Walking across a parking lot is dangerous, too. The parts that make a hybrid unique to other cars - namely the battery - are minor risks in the larger picture.

The hybrid battery packs, with a very stable NiMH chemisty and an internal g-force-activated shutoff switch, are fairly low on the risk scale.

A lead-acid battery is more hazardous in a collision. Not to mention, it's near the front of the vehicle, so more likely to be damaged.

What about the tank of gasoline? What about the airbags mentioned above?

What BEV would that be? You said nothing about a BEV in your post.

While it might be possible that some people have survived head-on crashes at closing speeds of 120 mph, I sure wouldn't want to be in one of those vehicles to check that. Defensive driving means avoiding a crash like that at all costs because your chance of survival is slim to none. Many people don't seem to understand that, and allow themselves to be in head-on crashes when they could have swerved off the road to avoid one.

You seem to be focused on the vehicle. My Prius has good crash ratings. I would suggest focusing on the driver, instead.

You really worry about things like power windows not working under water? You worry too much. Life is not forever, and there's no use in being fearful of every possible bad thing that could happen to you.

Harry


100 mile range has to be a BEV. Recall on the Tesla for a steering defect. Not related to the battery powertrain but who cares when you have no steering.

regards
gary

When did BEV come into the discussion? I believe the title at the top of this page is about hybrids. Besides, a problem with the steering on a Tesla has nothing to do with its electric-ness, as you yourself pointed out. It could just as easily be a chevy with that fault.

Aside from the usual hybrid cheap shots like Dust to Dust, the Sudbury nonsense about NiMH batteries, EMF, etc, how many people in the public really care about safety?

If anything, I see quite a few drivers daily that either think they are indestructible or suicidal - take your pick...it's why I'm skeptical about such articles.

Note the poll

While there might have been more outcries on the airbags, the fact still is hybrids have been selling in America for ten years. During that time, hybrids have not had anything surface that is a clear safety hazard like the first-generation airbags deploying too fast.

40,000 Americans die on the roads annually so there is definitely room for improvement, even if you deduct 20-30K from drunks and obviously reckless drivers.

I'd like to politely ask Gary as hard as he is coming down on this thread why he has not traded his Honda Insight for another vehicle like a Volvo?

As much as he is stressing safety one would think he would get rid of the Insight.

No safety related recalls on the Insight. There is one on the Prius for loss of steering similar to the Tesla as mentioned above.

Not coming down hard at all. The bottom line is you have the ability to protect yourself or ignore a warning. Your choice, your life, your right. On the other hand when your poor choices lead to my injury I have the right to recourse. Most accidents are one persons fault, but in many cases many innocent people are seriously injured or die.

Pale I perfectly understand that every act in life involves some degree of risk. I also understand that in almost every minute of life you try your best to minimize that risk. You don't choose to ignore any risk regardless of the source, since the sorce is irrelevant to your potential injury.

Ever had a tree fall right in front of you and you had to slam on the brakes to keep it from crushing you in your VW. It missed a school bus in front of me by a few feet.

Ever pulled off the road to keep another driver from slamming into your rear end, in a car notorious for going up in flames when hit in the rear, like a 1959 Corvette.

People, don't loose the message in your dosagreement with the messenger. If this thread results in anyone avoiding an unnecessary injury, then we all win.

regards
gary

Aside from the usual hybrid cheap shots like Dust to Dust, the Sudbury nonsense about NiMH batteries, EMF, etc, how many people in the public really care about safety?

If anything, I see quite a few drivers daily that either think they are indestructible or suicidal - take your pick...it's why I'm skeptical about such articles.

Cars have gotten much safer, so the typical driver seems to dumb down his driving to counter that. Honestly, the route to safety now is through tough driver training; the vehicles are no longer the problem. I'd go so far as to say the vehicles were never the problem, it's the drivers.

Harry

Gary,

Concerning the Prius loss of steering (actually tried to find the article from a couple of months ago on that), it's not clear-cut like the Pinto gas tank.

This problem occurred on a wet road....i.e. the plaintiff may be attempting to get money for their bad driving. It's been difficult to duplicate the condition, so this case is iffy. Why is it so hard to catch with a million Prius built?

Cars have gotten much safer, so the typical driver seems to dumb down his driving to counter that. Honestly, the route to safety now is through tough driver training; the vehicles are no longer the problem. I'd go so far as to say the vehicles were never the problem, it's the drivers. ...

Quality control systems that depend solely on human training have repeatedly been found to be expensive and comparatively ineffective, in all kinds of industries and processes. Humans are still error prone, no matter how well they are trained.

Put another way, changing all the vehicles and roads is cheaper, easier, and more effective than changing all the drivers.

Let me start by saying I believe Honda makes some of the most reliable, well built cars in the world. If I didn't believe this, I would never have purchased such an advanced car like my Honda Insight. There are Honda Insight owners who have achieved great mileage and experienced thousands of miles incident free, and then there are others who have had similar, if not worse experiences then mine.

This is my Honda Insight so far:


Honda Insight hybrid MSRP: $26,000. The total cost of; warranty, repair, recalls, and diagnosis as of Nov. 7, 2005 is approx. $14,119.94,which is 54.3% of the MSRP.....
Random complete loss of the Integrated Motor Assist engine (Battery power) which I believe has put my life at risk.
Honda's consistent inability to properly diagnose my Honda hybrid's problems without a "Check Engine Light", this has lead to even MORE damage.
Three catalytic converters within 155,000km. Because of the complexity of this Honda hybrid there isn't any other options then to purchase the parts through Honda, at approximately $2000 how can Honda allow the need for replacement every 60,000km?
Long waiting periods for almost every part I have ever needed for my Honda hybrid, which in turn has caused weeks, if not months of vehicle downtime and approx. 367 days of open work orders/un-resolved problems.
At 150,000km I have a lifetime MPG of only 42.3 MPG, a large contrast from Honda's initially advertised 68 MPG.
Strange, electric noises randomly coming from the IMA Battery Compartment
Water damaged $300+ speakers, carpet rot and interior rust probably due to a chronic drivers side window leak that they cant seem to permanently fix
Transmission failure
ABS Brake system failure
A/C failure

Cars have gotten much safer, so the typical driver seems to dumb down his driving to counter that. Honestly, the route to safety now is through tough driver training; the vehicles are no longer the problem. I'd go so far as to say the vehicles were never the problem, it's the drivers.

Harry


Some researchers think that people have a built-in individual target levels for perceived risk, so that at some point as equipment becomes safer driver behavior becomes riskier and relatively constant risk levels are obtained (i.e. risk homeostasis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_homeostasis).) Unfortunately all the vehicle safety equipment in the world isn't going to help a pedestrian that gets run over by a texting driver.

I would suggest that increasing penalties/enforcement for injuring others or damaging their property in a crash would increase the perceived risks of of dangerous driving behavior and result in safer roads for all.