While waiting for my dinner to cook tonight, I opened up a brochure on the 2007 Toyota line-up and on the very last page, I noticed in small print that the expected battery life for the battery pack is 150,000 miles based on laboratory bench testing.

I had always thought that Toyota had refrained from making any specific statements regarding hybrid battery life, other than, the battery should last the life of the vehicle. While the Hybrid battery is warrantied for ten years or 150,000 miles in my state, it's still rather unwelcoming information to me if the battery pack is truly designed to only last 150,000 miles.

Now, I did a Google search and found the following info from the official Toyota website:

From: http://www.toyota.com/html/hybridsyn...l/battery.html

So, why does that information contradict what I read tonight, from the Toyota brochure?



Comments?

Thanks.

Cool!

In about 4-5 years, I should be able to pickup a used Camry hybrid for a great price. Until then, the Toyota warranty applies:
http://www.toyota.com/html/hybridsyn...voritecar.html

This will be a terrific bargaining point. Of course, Toyota is selling every Prius they make with just the 8 year / 100,000 mile warranty. I've got one and just crossed 90,000 miles. Soon as the last warranty is done I'll be free to expand my current experiments to new areas.

No doubt there are folks who put a lot of stock in warranties. But since we've always driven our cars 'until the wheels fall off,' warranty duration is the least of my worries. Heck, it fills the used car lots with great values.

You see, there is a vast difference between "warranty" and "life time" for any product. You've confused the two but that is OK . . . some of us know the difference and are quite happy to take advantage of it. <GRINS>

Thanks,
Bob Wilson

Operation Iraqi Oil Freedom:

Automatic, stock, project car.

My other 1500 cc car:

Automatic, stock, backup car.
Free speech, dialog and knowledge thrives without the poison of SPAM.

Question is, is the battery's intended service life truly 150,000 miles ???

"Warranty" is not "intended service life." But feel free to be confused since we always enjoy the bargains of vehicles beyond their warranty.

My 2003, NHW11 Prius, has 90,000 miles, about 54,000 miles beyond the engine warranty. The engine still runs and other than ordinary dings and scratches, the car is working quite nicely. It didn't fall apart at 3 years or 36,000 miles.

bob Wilson

Operation Iraqi Oil Freedom:

Automatic, stock, project car.

My other 1500 cc car:

Automatic, stock, backup car.
Free speech, dialog and knowledge thrives without the poison of SPAM.

Bob - the wording suggest that the average life is 150,000 miles based on lab testing. I am sure the same tests would suggest that the ICE is good for about 250,000 miles. This has nothing to do with confusing warranty and intended life.

If I remember correctly, the Camry Hybrid went on sale last year, around May 2006. My understanding is some of them have shown up in New York taxi service in May of this year:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/html/news/ind06_09.shtml

Taxi service will put a lot of miles on the vehicles and we'll soon enough see. Also, the Dept. of Energy is doing fleet testing of the Camry Hybrid with two vehicles:

http://avt.inel.gov/hev.html

Maintenance records are available and Camry hybrid vehicle 6330 has 50,000 miles after 7 months. At this rate, it will reach 150,000 miles in 21 months, around December of 2009. If this lab follows their standard protocol, they will run the car to 160,000 miles. I'm patient and look forward to seeing what happens.

The "lab" generated one result but I would be very interested in reading the full lab report. A synopsis on a brochure is a bit thin. I'll see if I can get the same document and send a letter to Toyota America asking for more details. This is a fair question.

The "warranty" suggests 10 years/150,000 miles is a minimum. Prius and other hybrid experience suggests 150,000 miles is not a problem on the earlier cars. However, Toyota may have designed the margins in the Camry a little closer.

There is no form of semantics or written claims that can replace actual experience. So absent the original, referenced lab report, I'm content to wait 21-22 months for the Dept. of Energy report. Of course, I don't own a Camry hybrid, yet.

Bob Wilson

Operation Iraqi Oil Freedom:

Automatic, stock, project car.

My other 1500 cc car:

Automatic, stock, backup car.
Free speech, dialog and knowledge thrives without the poison of SPAM.

It is well worth noting that SodaGuy's scanned document appears to be 'lowering expectations' by Toyota. Their previous assessments have used expressions like 'for the life of the vehicle' and 'no significant degradation in 180k miles'.

Yet this does not convince me that the current fleets' batteries are doomed. Instead I guess that Toyota is not so confident that using NiMh for high-powered and PHEV over the next few years will work perfectly. Time to start lowering expectations?

Those who have followed Toyota hybrids closely since 2001 already know that most of the fleet is still OK. Some batteries have been replaced on Toyota's dime, and a very few owners have paid for the whole thing. This history does not support a 150k mile median life. Something longer instead, but we don't know what that is yet.

I look at hybrid vehicles differently though. They use fuel sparingly, depreciate slowly, and have low maintenance costs. Together this means the total ownership costs (TCO), cents per mile (c/mi), is low. This may be 15 to 35 c/mi depending on whose numbers you like, but should be compared to 50 c/mi for the 'average' car purchased new. This provides a framework to understand potential HV battery replacement costs. $2000 every 200,000 miles adds 1 c/mi to the above. Use different numbers if you find them more suitable, of course.

The heck of it is that there is little or nothing we might do to extend the hybrid HV battery life. For the transmission (that other 1 c/mi risk!), at least we can keep the fluid clean.

For the new-car buyer, the main alternative is a conventional vehicle with a conventional automatic transmission. That device is all-but-guaranteed to add 2 c/mi (maybe more) to your TCO. Not to mention the extra fuel you would be buying.

Ah, but back to the topic, will Toyota be asking more of the Venerable NiMh Batteries, before they can migrate to lithium? They well might. We'll probably have all this figured out in 10 years. Meanwhile, just take your best shot, and I hope it works out very well!

DAS

Bob, I think you are getting confused with his question. he was not asking about the warranty life or even quoting the warranty specs in his question, but a brochure that actually states the expected battery "life" not expected battery warranty terms.

This is a bit disturbing as I have never seen such a statement in any of Toyota's official documentation.

I would like to see a full copy of that brochure the see when it was released, and who released it.

I do feel that even with a battery replacement at 150,000 my car will be as efficient as the 4 cylinder and might be a bit more efficient. That is taking into account the cost of the battery factored into the miles on the car. I even went into the purchase thinking I might have to get a new battery around that mileage. For me that is about 4 years of driving. I also know the transmission will last much longer than a conventional one. Nobody complains about the fact that an normal automatic transmission costs more to rebuild than a replacement battery pack, and they usually have to be rebuilt around the same time frame more often than not. I view it as trading one issue with a new issue. i think the battery issue is much less of a problem than a transmission failure.

Those with basic reading comprehension skills can see that Toyota does not refer to a 150,000 mile warranty. It clearly states that the expected life is 150,000 miles. Maybe this is wrong, but that is clearly what is said in this particular brochure. As a result, I can totally understand why somebody would ask questions about this.

Anyway, as I have witnessed time and time again with you, you have great difficulty with reading comprehension. I mean, we all have our strengths and weaknesses, but this is ridiculous. You misread something and then insult somebody multiple times for reading it correctly. You are a joke!

It was a brochure on the 2007 Toyota line-up. You could probably pick one up at your local dealer. Here's a snapshot of it: