It's pretty interesting to see how the car companies are approaching the marketing of hybrids. On the one hand, I can understand the hybrids that are billed as muscle cars (the Accord, the Escape, the Highlander, and the RX400h), because they're really trying to reach the largest market segment available, which is not the eco-minded segment (right now).

I think it's a delicate balance. For example, I remember being criticized to no end when I bought my Prius (in 2002, before they were cool) about how I'd never be able to use the Interstates with only 98 horsepower. People get obsessed with those numbers, to the point of disregarding almost everything else. So, I can understand why car makers want to market hybrids as muscle cars.

On the other hand, I would like to see them maintain a commitment to a significant increase in gas mileage over standard powertrains. The Escape and Highlander hybrids, for example, only really demonstrate about a 30% increase in mpg, if that. While every little bit helps, I would love to see an SUV that gets 30 mpg consistantly.

I was wondering how long it would take Toyota to start marketing their popular cars with hybrid options like Honda has been doing. I think this is a great strategy for increasing the common acceptance and market penetration of hybrids. To some people the head-turning effect of the Prius is a selling point but lots of others just want a 'regular car' that happens to save them money on gas mileage. Smart move Toyota. Its about time.

"The Escape and Highlander hybrids, for example, only really demonstrate about a 30% increase in mpg, if that."

Well, the EPA ratings generally show improvements of about 50%, not 30%.

And as for gas savings, an Escape Hybrid is rated at 31 MPG versus 20 MPG for the non-hybrid. Over 15,000 miles, it will save 266 gallons.

That's the same amount of fuel one would save by going from a 28 MPG vehicle (eg, a Chevy Cavalier) to a Prius (rated at 55 MPG).

FYI, here's the fuel economy improvements and gas savings over 15,000 miles for hybrids that have a non-hybrid counterpart:

Accord - 32 v 24 (+50%) - 156 gallons
Civic - 47 v 33 (+42%) - 135 gallons
Escape/Mariner - 31 v 20 (+55%) - 266 gallons
Highlander - 31 v 21 (+48%) - 230 gallons
RX400h - 29 v 21 (+38%) - 197 gallons

Of course, you can dispute the EPA ratings, as many people report lower actual mileage than ratings, but others report mileage better than EPA ratings. It all comes down to how the vehicle is driven (no surprise there).

OK, so I'm a Brit, but I can't see why simply putting a 4-cylinder petrol engine in a hybrid, or "an SUV that gets 30 mpg consistantly" is considered treehugger?
Our Renault Scenic (5 large seats) has a 1.6 litre petrol engine, and I get over 45mpg on the motorway, cruising at 70mph. If I wanted to floor it, it's got enough 'muscle' for me to loose my licence, or to burn rubber when the lights turn green. Why do people in the US need such powerful engines? Are you all carrying gold bullion under your seats?

Dan, I think you are absolutely right about the obesity in cars (not just people) in North-America, and that is likely a result of (among a few other factors) low gas prices. We can expect that to change if things keep going in the same direction...

As for the 4-cylinders article, what's worth noting is not the 4-cylinders itself but the fact that Toyota probably opted to use the hybrid tech to save fuel instead of using it as some kind of glorified-turbocharger with minimal fuel economy and emissions benefits. I think it's good news and if hundred of thousands of Camrys that get 45-50 mpg are sold, maybe it will make other automakers take notice (even more) and change the US automotive landscape to some degree.

Incremental improvements in fuel economy, like those offered by hybrids, are largely irrelevant given the increasing number of miles travelled by car each year even in developed economies -- to say nothing of what will happen in China in the next few decades.

The key task is radically reducing the number of miles travelled. That means living somewhere you can get to work (and your kids can get to school) by cycling, walking or public transport. Large numbers of New Yorkers and Londoners already do this, even if the latter often own a car as well.

Consider also othe total life-cycle cost and impact of a new car as well, as well as its embodied energy (what did it cost/require to build it?). That new Prius you just ordered may well be built with an eye to recyclability, but that 10-year-old Civic DX is already built. I would wager that 1,000 miles a year in that Civic is better step towards environmental rectitude than 15,000 in a brand new Prius.

(For that matter, a scooter or motorcycle that gets better mileage than the Prius is about 1/10th of the weight is an even better idea for those trips where walking or cycling isn't practical. One of my bikes used to regularly do Edinburgh-Glasgow on one imperial gallon - roughly 55-60 mpg - at 80 mph.)

Dan, the figure you posted is imperial gallons, in US gallons(45/1.2), it would be 37.5mpg.... which is still good.

Toyota is learning from Honda's mistake. Not many people buy accords for performance, and the high market positioning just makes it less reachable. A 4cyl camry hybrid would be good and I guess its going to be the 2.4L unit. What bothers me is whether the hybrid stuff is not too overrated. Wouldn't a turbo version of the 1.5L engine with stop/start provide similar economy to the hybrid at much lower costs?

AN example is the accord hybrid tested by edmunds with 30.2mpg and 0-60mph in 7.48s, and passat 2.0TFSi DSG tested by a autocar magazine with 28mpg and 0-60mph in 7.4s. Now add a starter/alternator which results in 7% improvement and the passat would be at 30mpg.

Just a thought.

Ian,

I totally, 100% agree with what you say. But I'd rather that if they bought a new car, that it was a high-mileage hybrid. People need to build bikeable and walkable community, drive less miles per year and all that, but it's not mutually exclusive with building new hybrids.

"A 4cyl camry hybrid would be good and I guess its going to be the 2.4L unit. What bothers me is whether the hybrid stuff is not too overrated. Wouldn't a turbo version of the 1.5L engine with stop/start provide similar economy to the hybrid at much lower costs?"

Yes and no. turbos and superchargers are indeed one of the possibilities that can be used for downsizing engine, but we must remember that a full hybrid system like Toyota's or Ford has other benefits.

The electrical-only mode is very quiet, but the biggest advantage is the AT-PZEV and SULEV emissions ratings that are in part due to it (the other part is mostly running the engine on an atkinson (sp?) cycle to have more complete combustion (this reduces engine power, but is compensated by the electrical motors).

A Prius (f.ex) not only helps with fuel comsumption and CO2 emissions, but also with all the other smog-causing emissions and that's important in urban areas (which is where the electric-only mode is the most useful too, and the urban mpg figures are the most impressive).

The motivation for US citizens to constantly want a pimped up engine has eluded for years. THe more crowded the roads become, and the lower the average journey speed goes due to gridlock, the greater became the lust for power. At first I thought it was all about personal power, fantasy and delusion..."I can get there faster with more horsepower". THen I realized that there is a practical motivator: jumping out into traffic is enabled with high torque. Maybe the ability to customize performance on the fly will help us wean ourselves slowly from the speed addiction.

Why not simply develop cleaner diesel systems?

"Why not simply develop cleaner diesel systems?"

That's in the works too. They are working on more than one thing at a time.

When is the release date for this Toyota Camry Hybrid? (at least ballpark it w/n one or two weeks.)

By the way, you can't sell a car that lacks horse power b/c thats exact reason why they have a bad reputation that these hybrid have already. Of course you can't sell it as a hybrid unless it gets at least 30 mpg. Thus, going with a Turbo engine makes sense since it can help one achieve both compare to the alternatives.

One negative characteristic of a Turbo or Supercharged engine is the additional maintenance. A normally aspirated engine (meaning no turbos or supercharges) will last longer. Turbos in particular, also have lag which isn't good, however, most Turbo Diesels have great gas mileage.

Let's combine Turbo Diesel and Electric. Except laws in certain states including California will not permit that.

Hey Toyota, how about a hybrid four cylinder Highlander. That reminds me, where are all the other car manufacturers? I think Toyota and Honda are going to run away with this new market. Toyota should just start selling after market hybrid technology that we can install on a Mercedes or Audi. Recently I saw a show where a man had added extra batteries in the trunk of his Prius to create even greater mileage in City driving conditions.

The rumor is that there is more pollution created by building a new car, than that car will produce in its lifetime.

Either way, I would rather buy a hybrid.

"The rumor is that there is more pollution created by building a new car, than that car will produce in its lifetime."

It is just a rumor. The numbers I've seen are more like 1/4 of the pollution from a car comes from making it if you keep it 5-6 years, or something like that (memory is fuzzy at the moment). I'm half alseep so I don't feel like digging up the source, but I'm sure you could find it through google.

I thought that this would provide you with some supportive facts to buy your hybrid.

MGR, this is the study that's caused a lot of talking about the "dust to dust" reality of energy consumption in automobiles. I hear this study cited alot:

http://cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/

Hey i think the camry's are so cute i would love to have one for my 18th birthday in febuary or for christmas. It seems like the cars are getting better and better every year.

can we take all of this energy, research and money and put it into vehicles that don't have batteries that will end up in landfills? what about biodiesel? i feel like we're all being snowed by this hybrid campaign. i feel a little better when i see one on the road, but always think that if the person driving it did more research about what would really help the environment and have societal impact, they might be burning biofuel.

--
editor note: Batteries from hybrid car are recycled.

A typical car in America burns ITS OWN WEIGHT in fuel every year. 12,000 miles divided by 22mpg is 545 gallons for a 3,000 pound vehicle. 545 gallons at six pound per gallon (conservative) is 3,270 pound of fuel burnt every year!

If a 3,000 pound vehicle could be a hybrid that gets 40mpg, the amount of fuel burnt falls from 3,270 to 1,800 pounds which is a savings of 1,470 pounds per year. For a vehicle that is typically driven at least ten years, that is a savings of probably well over 15,000 pounds of fuel.

So, what's worse? Is it worse to have a couple hundred pounds of batteries (that are recycled) OR is it worse to have: thousands of pounds of oil pumped, delivered from the middle east, refined, delivered to the station, and then >15,000 pounds burned in your car?

I don't know of any vehicles that don't last at least 120,000 miles, so stop doing fuel savings math based on five years! Even if batteries must be replaced at 60,000 miles, the savings for a hybrid are significant both economically and environmentally by a huge margin.

Oh, does anyone bother to show that the hybrid will save $7,500 over ten years in fuel savings? You can buy a lot of batteries for $7,500! I calculated the cost of replacing the batteries in a Honda Civic hybrid as $800 if you DIY. That price will fall as good batteries become more mainstream.

Remember the "Muscle" cars of the 60's? Even their big V8s often got less than 200hp, so why does grandma's sedan need 300hp on streets that are half as fast as they were in 1970? Put a 120HP engine and 40HP of electric in a sedan and it will be plenty fast and get great mileage. The Toyota Camry Hybrid is the closest thing to sporty specifications that also will get good mileage.

I predict that Honda will take the diesel they are designing and put it in a hybrid and then we will finally get the car the world needs. Imagine a 120HP turbodiesel backed by 100KW of electric and you have a quick little car that should get 60mpg combined in normal use.