Honda Hybrid Spied in the U.S. Desert

Heh, same thoughts ;D

yeahh i thought nextgen prius...

this is not a honda this is a toyota, guys look at the front logo do you anything looked like the honda logo, this is a prius facelift not a hybrid honda

thanx man!! :P

Snark's right on target. Certain shapes work and it's hard to depart from them if the car's to have some semblance of usability. Like Snark, I'd hope its dynamic performance is better than the Prius which is so devoid of feel as to be anaesthetized.

uhm, the worlds most aerodynamic production vehicle is the 2000ish ford taurus. It is a 4 door with tons of cargo room and doesn't look a thing like this.

F**k off. If it looks like a Prius, it does. It has nothing to do with aerodynamics. We were talking about they way this vehicle looks like. Ok?

That was for Snark.

Snark's dead right! Certain shapes work. To say that something's a "copy" out of hand is ignorant. Oh, and Monty--there's a good chance that the badge shape is also part of the camouflage too, so that people would think it's a Toyota. I've been in this business for a while and we do that as a matter of course.

"We were talking about they way this vehicle looks like." So was I. "It has nothing to do with aerodynamics." So why else would they make the vehicle, which is intended to be high-mpg, in a shape that just so happens to have the best aerodynamic properties possible?

but it isn't the best aerodynamic shape possible! don't you listen? Its a feakin box with a wedge shaped front.

100% in agreement with Snark ... good to hear from someone with knowledge and understanding instead of a "no brainer" comment ... this is the most efficient shape by far ... clearly this is a much much larger platform than the Prius and looks a lot like a Honda FCX with a disguised rear end ... it would also make economic sense to build volume by creating a hybrid on the same platform as the FCX will be a low volume expensive vehicle.

"but it isn't the best aerodynamic shape possible! don't you listen? Its a feakin box with a wedge shaped front." Yes. It also has a kammback, the truncated teardrop shape calculated to have the best aerodynamic properties for a space-efficient car. It's quite plainly not a box, as the rear glass slopes down to about 50% of the maximum height of the car - one wonders if we're even looking at the same car, or if you bothered to look at the pictures at all. That wedge-shaped front end that you somehow managed to notice is also designed for maximum I love how you're lecturing an engineer about aerodynamics. Please continue. I always enjoy dumb opinions expressed with great force. It lets me know who should be ignored.

"uhm, the worlds most aerodynamic production vehicle is the 2000ish ford taurus. It is a 4 door with tons of cargo room and doesn't look a thing like this." Actually, it had a rather decent .30 Cd, which is comparable to most production cars, and much worse than the Insight, Prius, and FCX Clarity, all of which are in the mid-to-low .20's. However, it had a larger frontal area than most modern hybrids, which led to an overall mediocre CdA (Coefficient of drag with frontal area figured in.) This is where the Prius, A2, Insight, and other Kammback cars also rule, as they tend to minimize frontal area and are therefore far more aerodynamically efficient than a larger car with a low coefficient of drag - the measure of which is only part of the aerodynamic efficiency of a car. The Ford Flex has a Cd around 0.3 too, but its high frontal area means it's not as good as a car with a smaller frontal area and the same Cd. Also, note the effective debate strategy of actually including real facts, instead of random crap you pull out of your ass, in a debate. Consider it sometime.

haha don't get me started on your facts. The only real fact that I was able to find was about the 1985/86 taurus having a coefficient of friction of about 0.29 and that was publically released by ford. All the other numbers you might find on the web were originated by a website that felt the need to fill in the number on there specs sheet. other sites copied and now we have several sites displaying the same wrong data. I am sorry, but how after 15 years of improving aerodynamics on a car does it get 0.01 worse then the year it started out? Please, if you want to use numbers cite your sources and make sure they are credible (aka from ford or sae or any other similar body)

It certainly shows the choice of fuel is more important, yes. Do not doubt how important aerodynamics are to fuel consumption.

"Therefore why doesn't Honda design a car that doesn't look like a carbon copy of the Prius?" Honda designed a car that looks like Insight (which looked like CRX). The difference is, Insight wasn't as big and had only two doors. Prius follows the same design basics as CRX, Insight (and many other cars), hence the similarities.

Speaking of which, isn't the Prius due for a new generation next year?