2010 Honda Insight EX: Freeway Flyer

Wow, your "friend" averaged 94mph. Subtract the two fuel stops (assume 7 minutes each stop) ~= 101mph average.

I averaged 93mph in a 1992 Toyota Camry V6 on a similar trip.

the Jetta TDI gets 47 and the Golf TDI gets 49 mpg hwy

+1 mikeolan

I hate how there is this myth that acceleration equals saftey. You don't need to gas it to get into spot X, instead slow down and wait for the next spot X to open up. What do you need for spot X? A Ferrari.

I drive a Civic and used to have a V8 Mustang and have never had a problem getting into spot X. If anything the Mustang was more of a danger.

@Dbostondriver : That's a load of bull. You can't just stop in your lane and wait- that's a great way to get rear ended. Where I live I have to cut across 3 lanes in 1 mile during rush hour to get from the onramp to my exit. All it takes is a convoy of semis in the middle lane to miss the exit, and with the traffic flow all moves have to be carefully calculated to merge safely.

That was my biggest complaint driving the Subaru was its 4AT often lagged 1-2 seconds before downshifting. You don't realize how important those 2 seconds are going from 35mph to 70 until it's not there.

Once you get into the small car mileage range talking about mpg is largely making distinctions without difference.

Taking a Civic instead would have used under one gallon additional.

(But taking the Ram would have used another 9.)

@mikeolan, so what you're saying is that power doesn't matter as much as having the control when you need it (e.g. ability to manually choose gears)...

So, you're starting at 0, accelerate to ~50mph (8-9 seconds) and look for an opening from the onramp to the main freeway, accelerate to 60-65 to merge (3rd gear). Release the accelerator to slow down to traffic around you, look for next opening, accelerate, merge, repeat until you're at the correct lane and upshift to top gear.

The Insight has shift paddles, it can be done.

@yellobal : Oh absolutely, you need control- this is why on autos the 'manumatic' feature is great, as modern autos especially try to gear high to keep a good EPA rating.

Your average 4 cylinder compact/mid-size can accomplish this without much drama, but this is also because most of them perform similarly to a v6 sedan from not too long ago. But when you're talking about something as wheezy as the Insight, it's a stretch doing it solo, and with passengers (as I unfortunately experienced during my test drive) it's miserable.

Typical drivers won't have issues with the Insight's small motor and IMA on the freeway. You adjust your driving to match your vehicle's capabilities, much like you would with any other vehicle.

For some who manage to put themselves into situations where only a large blast of acceleration will "rescue" them, driving any hybrid (or most small commuter cars) will be a hair-raising experience. Not only are these drivers inattentive, they are also getting poor fuel economy, wearing out their vehicles faster, and likely the cause of the inexplicable stops/starts on an otherwise clear freeway.

The Insight is a small, 2+2 commuter, that can do occasional highway work. The Insight is far from the best car to take on demanding road trips; But a longer highway jaunt isn't unbearable or unsafe. Despite the small motor and IMA, it can get up to speed quick enough to get on the I-5 anywhere in California, without drama. That works for most of us.

I agree with dbostondriver. Boston is one of the worst places for traffic congestion and small little on ramps etc. (poor design as its an old city)

It should never be a problem as long as you are a competent driver and make competent decisions. It's all in your head if you think you NEED anymore.

Sorry to burst your bubble

I'm sorry, I've always driven cars with small 4 cylinder motors and have yet to have a problem with the "getting into space X" problem. I've been driving a 4 cylinder 92 camry for a few years now, and never have i had an issue getting into the space I wanted. It is all about driving smartly, not driving with an insane amount of power that you don't need anyways.

44.4 MPG on the highway = lightweight, aerodynamic car with a fuel efficient engine. You could match that or beat it for less money if you ditched the electric motor and batteries (of course, then the city mileage would drop off).

I always thought it was utterly retarded that the state of california encouraged hybrid ownership among highway commuters with the HOV access stickers...it was based on the combined mileage, not the highway mileage, but the HOV access stickers are only valid on highways so it makes no sense for them to have based it on combined mileage instead of highway mileage...and if they had based it on highway mileage, then there could've/would've/should've been non-hybrid vehicles on the market that could meet the MPG cap, or at least come damned close.

Sorry mikeolan, but you're just spoiled. My first car had 62 hp (when new, probably less when I started driving it). My second car had 70 hp. Both had 4-spd manual transmissions and weighed a 2200 lbs or so. Both cars would be hard pressed to get to 60 mph in much less than 12 seconds. I never had problems dealing with merging or making my way through traffic, even though I was surrounded by cars with 2-4 times as much hp (even a new Honda Accord at that time was making 130-140 hp and weighed about 50% more).

Furthermore, I've driven a wide variety of vehicles in LA traffic, many of them very slow. 16 ft cab over box trucks with a big 4 cyl diesel (4 liters, well under 200 hp and a loaded weight of 15k lbs), 24 ft stakebeds, first gen Honda Civic hybrids. I've never had an issue getting where I wanted to go in a safe and effective manner. All it takes is a little foresight and planning. Conserve momentum, know your location and take the openings when they arrive. I won't give up my 400+ hp cars these days, but I definitely was a more efficient driver when I was driving slower cars - I had to be.

p.s. - I hate hybrids

@church123 No offense but it's not 1979 anymore, the national speed limit isn't 55mph, and drivers pay far less attention. If it's an open on-ramp I could merge with ease with a Geo Metro. But more realistically I'm stuck behind someone who takes the entrance ramp insanely slow then guns it at the last minute- or worse, keeps on going 45mph when I need to cut over to the next lane where people are going twice that speed.

It's about 2-4 times a week I need to floor it to get up to speed, and significantly more often I have to hit my brakes because somebody didn't time their merge right and their car can't get up to speed fast enough.

"A friend of mine recently drove the 330 miles from Los Angeles to Laguna Seca on an early Sunday morning in a Chevrolet Corvette Z06 and made it in three and a half hours."

Your friend is an idiot.

All of the posters above that state you dont need a powerful car are spot on. A smart, careful and experienced driver can manage with just about anything. It is nice to have a bit extra when you need it, but far from needed. I drove my 95 Escort Wagon 5 speed as my commuter car for 8 years...it was not a powerhouse but it did the job just fine and it got around 41 MPG at a steady 65 with a best ever 44. It was a great car and I am sorry I sold it. Reliable, comfortable and cheap to own. It just was not a relaxed highway cruiser and my job at the time meant a lot of windshield time so I got my Mustang. Now my commute is a lot less and I wish I still had it. A family car just does not need 200+ horsepower. My 165 horse Stratus V6 never, ever feels underpowered.

I didn't start driving till well after 1979. I didn't get up to 70 hp until 1991. There have always been people who suck at driving and always will be, barring some change in US licensing requirements. And even with a car that will do a 12.0 sec 1/4 mile, dealing with a slowpoke in front of you who can't merge properly entails plenty of problems - the issue isn't the car, its the moron impeding you.

Point being, there are still plenty of vehicles that take 10+ seconds to get to 60 mph and driven properly it just isn't a problem, even in places like LA where there is dense traffic, very high speeds when possible, and aggressive drivers.

Freeways and interstates aren't really the problem for underpowered vehicles. The problem is two lane roads with limited oportunities to pass. I used to drive a ford ranger with the 3.slow 6cyl. That truck did 0-60 in like 13-14 seconds. Passing someone on a two lane road was always dangerous unless you had a straight away a few hundred yards long.

My miata is powerful enough that I can quickly execute a pass when needed. I can also match speed and merge into really dense traffic with such a small car. On top of all this, it gets 31mpg highway to boot. I love it.

Most people don't even use all of their cars' power when accelerating, so the idea of it being dangerous to have a car like the Insight which is faster than most 80s' or early 90s' cars is wrong. You just don't have to drive so aggressively, and you'll do fine, that's what a lot of people do, some with older cars, some with new cars who just don't use the power of their cars. I have a 5-speed manual compact with a 175-hp engine, and I always merge in 4th gear, sometimes even in 5th, and I've never had a problem.

As to bringing up the VW TDI cars like the Jetta, seriously get over it. It gets as good on the highway as hybrids or 2 or 3% better, but in the city, the hybrids can get 60% better fuel economy. Those numbers are not invented, they're from a direct comparison test made by Edmunds.

I don't know why some people hate hybrids that way, trying to deny that they can actually work and be good commuting cars. Seriously, what's wrong with you people? Don't like them, fine, don't drive or buy them, but why the constant denial that they can do anything well? You can't even claim that they affect you indirectly negatively, as they take less gas, they exert a slight downward pressure on gas prices by reducing demand, they don't increase pollution in your cities, they aren't dangerous for others on the road as they're not too big and do not facilitate careless driving styles (they're no fun to drive for the aggressive drivers).

The writing itself is a pleasure. Thank you.

@KChoz A 5 speed manual compact with a 175hp engine is going to pull pretty strong and is in a totally different performance league than a wheesy 101hp Hybrid

But you're totally wrong about the Diesel. I've got a Jetta TDI and easily make 40MPG through my daily commute. If I'm sitting in gridlock that number will go down of course, and I've been able to pull off 52MPG in a Prius. Is that extra 10MPG worth it? No.

But the difference is the Prius is not really fun to drive at all. It's fascinating but not fun to drive, especially in the hills. The Insight has some steering feel but it is truly one of the worst piles of garbage sold in a showroom today. But the real difference is that if gas was to go back to being 80 cents a gallon, the Insight would be a truly regrettable purchase, the Prius wouldn't be that desirable, but the TDI would still be a great all around car by any standard.

@Mortal1 True that as well.

Do we really think that gas is going back to 80 cents a gallon?!?

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that is seriously doubtful. Simple law of supply and demand

I recently got stuck in a kia spectra rental equipped with the 4 speed slushbox and am thoroughly surprised out how competent it is on even the highway. In reality, I don't see NEEDING much more than that.

@mikeolan
A lot of people buy hybrids to reduce greenhouse gasses and to do their part to improve our environment. It's not always about saving money on gas, even though we ALL know gas will never be 80 cents a gallon again.

@tehnighthawk : The excess greenhouse gasses wasted building the Insight more than offset any savings. And quite frankly, passing up a vastly superior vehicle (including one that has enough room to carpool in) over fake pollution is as ridiculous as buying an SUV so friends think you've got an "active lifestyle."

Also realistically speaking, there's no reason for gas not to fall outside of the current speculation bubble, which has been the trend of the past 5 years. (E.G. Land is a finite resources -> Property values will always rise as we run out of land to develop!)