http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...TGGNJVN1R1.DTL

" Toyota builds a Camry Hybrid for the masses
It looks like the standard model, but this 'green' version gives you much more for your gas money - G. Chambers Williams III, San Antonio Express-News
Sunday, July 16, 2006
. . ."
The article starts by saying the Camry doesn't look weird like the Prius (or Insight). But at least they compared simularly equiped Camrys and pointed out that with the tax credit:

"And it's possible you could qualify for a $2,600 federal tax credit with a hybrid purchase, which would make it less than the cost of a comparable gas-only Camry."

It goes on to report:
"So while the Camry Hybrid offers much better fuel economy for a lower purchase price than the Accord Hybrid, it has less power. The good news is that during our week in the Camry Hybrid, we found it has more than adequate power for everyday driving, including freeway on-ramps and passing on the highway."

Then there was one screw-up describing the HSD:


"The hybrid system uses a continuously variable automatic transmission, which has a system of belts and pulleys rather than gears."

Oh well, I've read worse.

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.

To be honest, it the Camry Hybrid had been out in 2002, I would have nabbed it up! It does seem like the perfect balance of power and fuel economy. Basically, it fills a much-need gap between the Prius (very efficient, but not that powerful) and the Accord (powerful, but not that efficient). And for just $3,000 more than the Prius or HCH, it's *reasonably* affordable. I think Toyota hit the Bullseye on this one!

Oh, it's really refreshing to read a hybrid review that point out that the "premium" is largely negated by the tax credits.

I hope the Camry Hybrid does well... The only negative thing I've heard about is is that about half it's original trunk space (i.e. compared to the non-hybrid version) is taken up by the batteries... Wondering if someone could confirm/refute that...

Check Toyota's specs?

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.

According to "Car & Driver", it's a lot less than half. But if you were to look at the LE and the Hybrid side-by-side, you'd certainly see the difference. I doubt this will be a deal-killer for too many people. After al, if they needed to haul still, they'd get a FEH or a HiHy.

Gas mileage on the car is still crap. Car is simply too big. Pure technology can't solve the problem of moving too much metal. You can get a 10 year old Geo Metro and out perform the FE of this brand new hybrid. A disappointment if you ask me.

I guess if someone can't settle for anything less than a larger car it's good. Surprised car and driver didn't pan it since it didn't have a V12 engine and go 0-60 so fast that the tires would melt.

The trunk space is noticeably smaller than the trunk space on the non-hybrid Camry, but I really don't think it's HALF the size. It really isn't that much smaller (1/2 cubic foot?) than my 1999 Corolla's trunk space.

At 40/38 I don't think the fuel economy is crap at all. It is significantly better than the FE on a non-hybrid Camry, and better than the FE on a Hybrid Honda Accord. In the interest of comparing apples to apples, though, the Accord has a 6 cyl ICE where the Camry has a 4. Of course, if we are to stick to comparing apples to apples we shouldn't compare the TCH to a Geo Metro or a Honda Insight either. Neither of those vehicles is a family sedan.

If what someone is looking for is a family sedan with roomy back seat space (so your toddler isn't resting his foot on your shoulder while you are driving as is the case for me in my Corolla), with very good fuel economy (40/38 IS good FE), with at least a reasonably affordable "hybrid premium" (comparable price to a similarly equipped non-hy Camry when all is said and done), then the Camry Hybrid is, as the article says, "much more for your gas money."

I agree with Nagorak on one point: when you get much larger than the Camry/Accord, you quickly reach the point of diminishing returns with the current generation hybrid technology. GM says that their 2-mode system will solve the up-scaling problem, but we'l have to wait and see.

It seems to me that the Prius/Civic size is the best for the IMA/HSD systems. HSD can probable scale up a *little* more than IMA, which I suppose is why Honda hasn't said anything about planning an IMA Element or IMA Ridgeline.

is this one better than the honda hybrid 2006? I got the honda and was very happy with it, so far.

I have a 2007 Camry hybrid. According to Toyota's specs the trunk is about 2/3 the size of a non-hybrid. To me it seems smaller. After six weeks with this car the trunk size is the only real complaint I have. If you plan on using it to take a family of four or more on vacation with all you luggage, you should take a good look at it.