Andy and the Rev. are way in front on that one :D
Printable View
Not being argumentative, for once, but I don't really consider hybrid "electric vehicles". Range is not really an issue and if you have to you can run on the gas engine. They are wonderful for urban driving and not bad for highway. I was, and still am a "gear head" and love high performance in "real world" terms. Having a supercar that does 200mph is really kind of useless in my locale. However, having a vehicle that has the torque to pull out tree stumps or run from 0 - 60 in no time is a fun and useful vehicle. The hybrids do a great job of blending the real world the the electric car advantages.
As those that have driven cars with electric motors they really do have impressive performance. Especially like yours CB that looks normal and has a lot of room along with good drivability. Seems like many of the hybrids have be made so ugly style wise that it's almost a badge of honor. Many of them look like something that came out of my dogs behind after a big meal. Not sure why they can't make them more conventional in looks.
I don't think the more extreme environmentalists or governments want hybrids. It's "all or nothing" to them and they want the control that goes along with a limited range vehicle. Hybrids are a good gap until something much better comes along.
PS- MT you look much better on the bike than the car. Those micro cars are not as maneuverable as a bike is and if your drivers are anything a bad as they are stateside you better be defensive in your riding. 40+ years of riding and never seen anything like the last 3 years. I think the gadgets in the cars and phones have made the roads so much more dangerous.
I keep looking at how electric/hybrid vehicles are developing out of the corner of my eye, but I'm not sure there are many places to realistically use them in this part of the US.
As of now, I have a two door Jeep Wrangler Rubicon (which, like Spaldy, I use to do grunt stuff like tug tree stumps out of the ground and get to things and places "regular" vehicles - like my ridiculously reliable Honda CR-V - can't or shouldn't).
I think the one thing we should be doing is not replacing our vehicles anywhere near as often as we seem to. I don't know the numbers, but surely a new vehicle causes much more in the way of environmental damage than running a slightly ratty older one for a few extra years?
Both of mine were bought in 2013 and I have no intention of replacing either unless they start failing on me.
My previous Honda CR-V (bought in 1998) was only replaced because the extreme elements had trashed the bodywork to the extent that the doors liked falling off.
I've since built a garage for my cars to escape the snow and sun, so I'm hoping they might last to 2030, assuming we're still allowed to run on petrol then....
If you're not using a manual transmission, you're not really driving.
Really hard to get a manual transmission car these days. I think it's less than 3% of the cars sold here in the states.
However, Motorcycles still have them! that's the joy of them!
My Jeep is manual, but the latest CR-V isn't (more's the pity).
Perhaps I'm being too "old school", but I don't think automatic transmissions encourage attentive driving although I do enjoy seeing how high I can get my mpg up to on the CR-V by watching the fuel consumption meter thingummy in real time.
Not sure what vehicle I'm likely to get next. Neither of mine are ideal for both of the dogs (border collies - one mellow, one a chip off of the Shep block, for those of you old enough to remember Blue Peter!).