http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=121389

Good deal!

Now this is GM's first generation, serious hybrid. Everything before was practice. In engineering, the first generation is generally pretty good but with problems. The second generation fixes those problems but often is not optimized. It is the third generation that really shines. But first generation isn't bad as along as the pioneers make appropriate plans to deal with the problem.

Ordinarily I don't recommend an extended warranty. IMHO, it makes sense with the first generation of this vehicle not because of any concerns about GM engineering . . . just the 'real world' often teaches us lessons that can not be learned by any other means.

Bob Wilson

 

I agree Bob. It's good to see that other manufacturers are (finally) stepping up to the plate with a product we can all buy! I hope it's not SO late that they can't compete (i.e., GM and Dodge in first generation, while Toyota is in 3rd or 4th generation).

 

I think GM and now Dodge have put themselves alone in this segment of heavy large SUV's. This is good for those looking to get one of these soon. Thus far Toyota has show no interest in competing in this large vehicle market.

A 40% increase in fuel economy is fantastic for all of us.

 

And we know for sure that Honda isn't competing in the large vehicle market. They are stopping the accord hybrid because IMA "works better on smaller vehicles" or whatever the quote is. The accord isn't even that large of a vehicle (compared to a truck or SUV.)

 

I think you are forgetting the Honda Pilot and Ridgeline.

Consumer report got a 17 mpg overall and 12 City for the Pilot, and 15 overall and 10 city for the Ridgeline. Granted CR manages to get less than most everyone but Honda has large vehicle products it wants to sell.

CR got 12 overall and 8 city for the Durango, but that was with the 5.7L, there are 3.7L and 4.7L that may compare more favorably with the Pilot.

Toyota rules the mid-sized truck market (CR 17 overall 13 city) and is looking to expand it's full size market with the Tundra. CR tested the 4runner and got 16 overall 11 city, and the Sequoia 15 overall 11 city.

Those are all large vehicles.

 

So 2-Mode could turn a 15/19 truck into a 21/20 vehicle. Considering how many big trucks are on the roads, this could save a lot of fuel if the 2-mode standard ever became widely adopted.

 

I was assuming that the OP was talking about the large vehicle market in respect to hybrids? We all know the vehicle offerings of the different major manufacturers.

 

These numbers are definitely interesting from a comparison point of view.

I just can't resist a dig, though, in terms of absolute values: This is the same CR, right, that rates "rollover resistance" by taking a truck up to 60 mphand then dialing in full steering lock, and again in the opposite direction if it doesn't roll the first time, and again until it does roll, and then if it's only tipped up on two wheels, they still rate it "unnacceptable" or "menace to society" or "requires driver IQ of over 150" or whatever. . . .

Anyway, then, not surprised these geniuses only got 15 overall out of a Ridgeline. Surprised they didn't blow the engine, since they must've left the gas pedal duct-taped to the floor the entire time the key was turned on.

Would *love* to see what CR would get with my 05 (Jeep) Liberty: probably 9/4. (Though if they thought it was Japanese, it would probably magically gain 5 mpg. The power of CR's mind never ceases to amaze.)

--doug

 

Everyone with an interest dislikes CR's fuel economy ratings because they describe them as 'real world'. Actually in a discussion with a CR representative on an Edmunds forum I saw what it was that they tested.

They do an extended highway test at a 'normal speed' of about 60-65 mph. On the Prius for example they got 48 mpg during this test. Dead on accurate according to my own driving.

However they view 'real world' driving in the absolute worst scenarios.
A) Cold start
B) Short trip with passengers
C) Multiple stop and go's such as in a small town from light to light to stop sign to stop sign
D) Turn if off.
E) Cold start, short trip, multiple stop and go's.

This is the results a driver would get say in taking the kids to school then continuing on to work in a local area then driving home 8 hours later.

No vehicle will get good ratings under these conditions.

 

Indeed. The saddest thing, though, is that the VAST majority of non-hybrid vehicles don't REALLY know what they get for gas mileage. Ask around, and you'll be amazed at the people that "have no idea" or worse "think it gets around xx MPG". IF they tout a number, it's likely to be near the EPA number, because that's what they think cars get. (And sometimes, based on a 3-mile trip into work, you know better.) So then, when they happen to read that the hybrids get *substantially* below EPA ratings in CR tests - well they jump to the conclusion that hybrids are all hype.
CR should show some responsible journalism and let people know that: "not only does the Prius get only 38 (or whatever it was) MPG in our testing, although its EPA states 60/51, but the Chevy Tahoe gets only 10 (or whatever) MPG in our testing, although its EPA states 16/22.
I try to get people to start really checking their own MPG. They are often surprised at how much lower they really get, versus what they *thought* they got. It's the beginning of a long educational process.