Well, the current Camry V6 is rated at 190hp for the non-SE model, so I guess the marketing angle is "V6 power with 4-cylinder fuel economy", much like the Accord Hybrid's marketing pitch goes. Well, except that the HAH uses the V6 engine and has the highest power of the Accord lineup. At least for the Camry, there's still the 210hp SE.

At any rate, I think he Camry is due for a redesign anyway. Who knows where this fits into their lineup once the new bodystyle and engines are released.

I'm not fond of the looks of the Camry. One of the reasons why I didn't wait for them to produce a hybrid and just bought the HAH. But, if with their redesign it looks better... then maybe it'll be time to trade in the wife's Escape.

<Best Tank Economy!><Best Tank Endurance!>

I feel your pain, Wayne. At least you can chart progress (?!?) being that the Camry I4 is a step in the right direction, unlike the HAH. (Disclaimer: I LOVE my HAH. But like people I love, it too has shortcomings.)

Here's a thought, market forces aside- they (Honda & Toyota, independently) might have simply found it easier to mate the HSD/IMA to an existing powerplant that's fully integrated to the vehicle than go with new. Yeah, both companies of course have smaller engines 'on the shelf' that could mate to the Accord/Camry, using IMA/HSD to make up the difference (a la what they did to the HCH- smaller engine w/ IMA to ~match existing performance), but we don't know what complexities arose when that was looked at. Apparently at least for the HCH it was doable, but when did the HCH begin development? Its a different environment now- hybridization is a race at this point- he with the most offerings wins the (initial) PR battle. Good long-term view? No. Will it equilibrate out? Yes. Keep the faith.

I HOPE that Honda's and Toyota's initial forays into the family sedan hybrid market expand rapidly- they picked sub-optimal entry points, and need to move beyond that. We can't fix what's been decided, only hope that they are successful enough to exapnd the offerings rapidly.

The concept of "performance hybrid" is very confusing to John Q. Public and it dismays me that the market researchers for these guys haven't figured that out yet. If this path is to be followed, at least battle that confusion with a "have your cake and eat it too" campaign to try to clear the confusion. I'm getting tired of explaining that to confuseled folks at the gas station. Maybe I should trade-in for an HCH- less talking required. But I want something a little larger than that...an Accord.

What I really want is to walk into the dealer for my next Accord/Camry/Avalon/Fusion/Malibu/Stratus and he asks "Yes, sir- of course. And would you like that in 4 cylinder 2.0, 2.4, or 6 cylinder? And with or without hybrid-electric?

...in keeping with the tradition of being able to pick-and-choose what I want, hybrid is simply another powertrain option mated with the prime mover of my choice. We're getting there.

Or why not cars with switchable modes? Why not an I6 that has the ability to shut down 2 cyls all together for economy - run 6 if they want performance. Would be an interesting concept to have a car with say 3 or 4 settings where you can control your own economy / performance level. Seems like it would appeal to a wider demographic.

*** Retired after 65,000 outstanding miles ***

The Honda Accord Hybrid already does that. It can run on both 6 or 3 cylinders depending on load. It's still not as efficient as a small 4-cylinder engine, but indeed it's a big part of the HAH's efficiency gains over the standard V6 model.

you can get anything you want faster, better, or cheaper. Pick any 2.

Added complexity...cost...more stuff to go wrong...slipping rollout dates...too hard to explain the system to J.Q. Public (look @ the HAH sales)... I can see the executives' eyes rolling back in their heads at the meeting that presented all these "what if" possibilities.

Ideally we would get a "cafeteria hybrid" that we could tailor on the fly. But anything that tries to be everything to everyone winds up doing nothing for anyone, and probably breaks along the way. So we get compromises instead that at least do something for many.

The ideal can be achieved in limited circumstances, but at what cost in capital, talent, and time; given limited reservoirs of each.

...to the point where I am pretty convinced that I would get almost identical FE without the IMA at all (well, other than for starting after autostop). I rarely see assist; when it does come on while in eco mode its not for long at all- the gas savings there can be measured in the milliliters.

If I had a 3-cyl creep/parking lot mode I know I could give a lot of HCH-I folks a run for their money.

Well,Toyota did want to decrease the Hybrid price premium;I guess the Camry Hybrid is the 1st step.We will get a bigger motor than we need, and no fancy 5 cycle 13/1 expansion from a 10/1 compression,but we won't get the high cost-I hope.The Prius is about $22000 base-it is roughly equivalent to a LE Corolla-$17000.If they cut the premium then the Camry hybrid should cost Camry LE+$3000,not Camry LE+$5000.
Now we all know that the 1st Camry Hybrids will be loaded, and Toyota dealers will run true to form and want $30000+ for them-which pretty much makes payback from gas savings impossible(200,000 miles plus).Yeah,folks don't buy hybrids just to save money on gas,but that is a big part of it(having your cake and eating it to-like the HH,if it were cheaper)Charlie

--

XCEL,so this Camry won't narrow the hybrid premium,since it won't really have a simpler-cheaper motor than a Prius.Since the Hybrid components are in short supply-according to Ford-there is no reason that the price of batteries or electric components will drop just because there is more demand volume-at least not soon.
Yikes-I sure hope that the bigger motor is just a 1-2 mpg compromise-not a 5-8 mpg compromise.I hope the 500 lb weight advantage of the Corolla vs Camry accounts for at least 1/2 of the mpg difference(auto Camry vs auto Corolla 24 vs 30mpg)??The manual trans are a better comparison,but I'm more familiar with the auto EPA mpg ,so I used that.
They probably factored the 300 lbs weight increase into the equation with the idea to make the 0-60 at least as good as the 4cyl non hybrid Camry.It might take 15 more of the extra 30 hp just to break even in the accel dept.
Thanks.Charlie
PS-Big aside to XCEL-I finally put the scanguage on the Pilot-pleasantly surprised.It was getting ~25-27 mpg at 73 miles per hour(about 2000 RPMs ) with the AC on at sealevel. One peculiar thing was that it was about the same at 62-64 miles per hour-maybe one mpg better.I'm not sure why-same direction-road surface about the same.Maybe I was in a more open area with less protection from the wind;I'm just not sure why I didn't see about 30 mpg at 62?I need to do more observing.I'm fairly sure the transmission was locked up at both speeds,but maybe not..
I rarely drive the Pilot-my wife and son use it.They don't drive fast,but they are strictly gas or brake drivers.Their right foot is never on the floor.