The $2600 tax credit is federal. All states have it.

The 5 MPG advantage could be higher because of the Auto-stop feature, depending on how often and for how long you need to stop in your daily route.

A better battery package would also benefit more the people doing many stops and driving down/up hill roads.

Two sources of power and a computerized system to control them is a big advantage for hybrids. There will be hybrid tune-ups and performance improvements that will be distributed as new software releases. So far the technology advances have been mainly in mechanical and electrical systems, wait until more programmers get their hands on the software.

Best Tank = 54.2 mpg (Sep. 9'06)
Best Trip = 61.9 mpg

Um, guys, where do you think the electricity comes from? The capacity of the battery is almost totally irrelevant since you need to recharge exactly as much electricity as you use. Larger batteries do allow prolonged EV mode but you eventually have to recharge all that back.

Of course it's important for plug-in hybrids or pure electrics, but it's not that important for hybrids.

The capacity of the battery is extremely relevant for real life driving !
A lot of energy gets wasted because the battery is already fully charged, other times extra assist is needed but the battery is already discharged.

Obviously there has to be some balance, the IMA has to be able to charge and discharge the battery to some range. You don't want to never be able to completely charge or discharge the battery. There also has to be a weight vs. performance compromise. I've driven only a few miles in the HCH but I already notice that it could benefit with a higher-capacity battery, the software can also get some improvements... that's what makes this technology so exciting ...lots of potential.

Best Tank = 54.2 mpg (Sep. 9'06)
Best Trip = 61.9 mpg

The useful battery-capacity range is going to be entirely dependent on your driving terrain. Someoen living in a very flat idea probably doesn't even use the full battery capacity range, as the only potential time they'd need assist would be accelerating up to speed, adn the only time to recharge would be braking back down, or parasitic charging the engine. Increasing the electric portion would only increase the necessary charging "debt" to be paid by parasitic charging, which would probably be a push or net loss.

However, someone like me who lives in a very hilly area, who cycles his pack from full to 1/4 and back every day, sometimes more than once, would see tremendous increase in efficiency from doubling the battery capacity. Also, many of the stretches on my hills are so steep that full regenerative braking capacity is not enough to slow the car, and I still need to brake. If the motor capacity were larger, and the battery reserve larger, that would probably improve my total fuel economy by about 10 percent. The same mod might only act as expensive dead weight for a flatland driver.

When selling an OEM vehicle, they probably design the battery pack to to be sufficient for their average drivers, not exceptional cases with lots of mountains. Besides, another major goal of OEM hybrid manufacturers is to keep the differential cost between hybrids and standard vehicles as low as possible; adding tons of extra battery capacity is not cheap, and will offer diminishing returns as far as additional cost/fuel savings.

The one situation in which a much larger battery would be useful in every driving terrain would be in the case of a plug-in hybrid vehicle. I doubt we'll ever see an OEM plug-in though, as marketing would be a nightmare. Most poeple don't understand the benefit of plug-in, and would probably confuse a plug-in-hybrid with a full electric. Also, someone who never plugs in with a lead foot might spend 5 times as much per mile on fuel (lots of gasoline), as someone who plugs in regularly at night with a short, flat drive (almost no gasoline, lots of discounted grid kWh). With potential variances that huge, advertising what expected savings would be compared to a standard vehicle just wouldn't be possible.

I agree with DT.

A bigger pack would help those in hill country but flatlanders never really stress their packs.

One factor not usually taken into account in analyzing the TCH vs the 4c version ( XLE ) is how much is the V6 power & handling worth? $2000?

This vehicle is unique in that it can appeal to a V6-only buyer ( think Taurus/Intrepid/Malibu drivers ) or the upscale 4c buyer ( XLE 4c drivers ) or the frugal 4c buyer ( LE 4c drivers ).

It has an immediate 'payback' for the V6-only buyer.
It has a very near term 'payback' for the XLE 4c buyer.
It has a somewhat longer ( 5+ yrs ) 'payback' for the LE 4c buyer.

Or some people just like it and the idea of a 'payback period' is of no consequence for just the same reason that a Lexus buyer opts not to buy a Toyota in favor of a Lexus.

Lifetime fuel usage: 2.1 GPC ( 1.99 recent )