Hi Martin,
Some of the hybrid skeptics have claimed that hybrid owners have their egos tied up in "showing off" their hybrids. But that only applies to the current Prius and Insights that have distinctive profiles. Even my NHW11 Prius has a lot in common with the Ford Focus except for the trunk foil. So I used to think 'hybrid specific' bodies were a problem. Then I thought a little more about it.

A hybrid specific body, a separate design from a gas-only vehicle, allows optimizations that may be inappropriate for the gas-only vehicle. For example, gas-only vehicles have a higher cooling air requirement than a hybrid. So things like smaller radiator grills and under-body, aerodynamic improvements may not make sense.

At the risk of sounding elitists, there are sound engineering reasons for the marriage of a purpose built, hybrid body and hybrid drive train. If nothing else, it applies a 'clue by four' to gas-only drivers that they don't have to stay with the same old technology that robs them at the pump.

Other than my license plate, "C-52MPG," I really don't care what my car looks like. But having both a 2003 Prius and 2001 Echo, I'm not sure a hybrid package could fit in the Echo without serious problems. The two body styles are otherwise very similar.

I know it costs a lot to come up with a new body but I notice Toyota did that when they went from the NHW11 to the NHW20 and it did nothing to hurt their sales. IMHO, retro-fitting a gas-only power system to a hybrid body would be a lot easier. We could call them 'mock' hybrids.

Bob Wilson

 

Martin,

Pick a segment, then produce a vehicle that gets really good miles per gallon. I expect many who need a vehicle in that segment that worry about fuels costs will buy it.

If GM picks the minivan segment and does it well, I will probably buy one.

If Jeep outfits a Liberty or Patriot with a hybrid or efficient diesel in the US, I will buy that if available first....

 

Bob,

I understand everything you said and wouldn't argue with any of it, BUT at one point in time, Toyota was on record as saying that all new vehicle programs would be engineered with hybrid accomodation a given. This was before the Yaris was launched and before the Camry was updated. Camry has a hybrid, but Yaris doesn't. Whyizat? Two logical reasons occur to me.....cost exceeds expected customer willingness to pay or they recognize a capacity concern and would prefer to divert the capacity to higher priced (Camry / Prius / HiHy / RX400) applications.

Peace,

Martin

 

Although I haven't seen the new Scion xB, a hybrid version of the 'box' xB would be an easy sell for our family. Although more of a microvan than a minivan, there is a lot of utility in having a large, open space.

I've speculated about taking a Prius hybrid system and force fitting it into the front of a Scion xB. I'm fully aware that the wiring would be a nightmare. But in the end, it would be such a great utiltarian vehicle, it just makes a lot of sense.

My wife wants an RV but we could settle on a minivan. Regardless, it has to be a reasonably sized hybrid drive system with at least 1/3d hybrid and 2/3d ICE. BAS won't cut it.

Bob Wilson

 

Concerning the hybrid Yukons etc., my principal worry is that GM has stated that these will be available on a limited basis, probably meaning west coast. In the end, I hope this doesn't become a paper dragon (like the FEH which I know exists but I have never seen in my small town). In my view, the limited market idea shows no real conviction to the design. I hope that I am wrong and that GM sells all they produce so that they will expand production, availability. With gas prices rising, the demand should increase.
Glen

 

Limited basis is in reference to total volume built each model year, not geographical preference. There are a number of factors that could limit the number expected to be built, most dealing with the availability of critical components. It could also deal with the degree to which dealers participate. In order to be able to sell them, dealers would likely have to commit to purchase of specific repair tools and certification of technicians to work on the hybrid systems. I was once involved in the development of tools and training and dealer certification for Corvette ZR-1. Because of the cost of the tools and the cost to train technicians to repair a vehicle they might never see (only a few thousand were sold each year) some Chevrolet dealers chose not to participate and as such were not allotted any ZR-1s to sell.

Peace,

Martin

 

Hi Martin, thanks for the post:

Your explanation makes sense, as long as anyone actually attempts to compete with the very high MPG foreign automobiles.
Again, I'm not picking on GM specific.

On the other hand, all of the big 3 seem to rely exclusively on defense, rather than to agressively, offensively compete an conquer Japan's high efficiency models. I don't know any winning team that is purely defense.

I'm certainly no marketing whiz, and I know that every region is different. But I do notice small, efficient sedans outnumber large utility vehicles perhaps 4:1 (or greater) in my area.

What a wonderful marketing opportunity, if GM, Ford or Dodge would only make the cars!

Who knows, perhaps someday my HCH will be replaced with an ultra-efficient, sharp looking Impalla or Malibu. Maybe our Grand Caravan pig will be replaced with a clean burning, efficient diesel Uplander minivan.

Mabe even ditch the pump completely and plug it in at night.

Today the ball is in Japan's hands. Hopefully (at least one) of our big 3 will at least attempt to take it back.

-Steve

 

My thanks too Martin! You're insights are a delight and gives credence to not only your experience and love of cars but credit, indirectly, to your employer.

One question about the two-mode transmission and I'll understand if it is proprietary. Can this unit be built in different power scales? For example, 'slimming' the electric motors might make the unit more compatible with lower powered vehicles . . . possibly the Impala or other Camry-killers?

I would not expect it in an Aveo, the bottom end. Heck, it probably weights half of their payload capacity. <grins>

Could you publish or point us to an open source of the two-mode transmission specifications?
- power
- weight
- torque-rpm curve(s) for each motor
- interfaces (I'm curious if there is an external oil cooler and filter)

Past published technical content have been fairly 'thin' understandable since the production models hadn't started rolling off the assembly line. However, these units will soon be showing up at dealers and the service departments. Once they reach there, the maintenance manuals will have a lot of this information and no doubt they are in final editing now.

Questions that I still have about the unit are:

1) at high-speed, is there an internal 'lock-up' mode that lets the ICE provide the bulk of the power augmented by one of the motors for 'passing' power?

2) is the shifting done with a syncro-mesh (sorry if this the wrong term) style of gear changing or something more akin to planetary gears and internal braking?

3) are GM spin-offs in the pipe? A two-mode transmission has application in other industries, not just moving folks and goods about the highway.

Toyota wrote a number of SAE papers that are readily available on the net. If you come across some GM equivalent papers, let me know. For a couple of bucks, it would be worth while to see the details.

Thanks,
Bob Wilson

 

No disrespect intended, but I have to say that you're wrong on this point. Fuel efficiency is not part of most companies' strategies, including their best-sellers. Looking at an entire brand's roster, I believe Honda has the most fuel-efficient ICEs, followed closely by Toyota. Honda identifies with fuel-efficiency, and they still have the character and spirit to express their convictions in their product... To take chances. Just look at their Element SUV and try to find the sex appeal. Toyota has ambition, but they're also nipping at GM's heels, so some of their cars are starting to look and feel like American domestic ones, at least on the inside. They also produce very competitive base models with inferior safety packages, just like GM. But I believe GM is the one, truly world-weary, cynical, and chauvinistic auto manufacturer. It's all manufacturing-by-numbers to them: Cater to the baser natures of the public; Sacrifice a model's identity to resemble more successful ones (eg. Chevy Impala). GM, along with Daimler-Benz, would have the gall to condescend the buying public by chalking up Toyota's success with the Prius to "good marketing". But they just don't get it: There is a culture and diversity to the consumer, and auto manufacturers can be judged on their attitude to these things.

It's great that GM is finally putting forth the effort to put out hybrids, but they are the followers, not leaders, in this trend.

 

I think you missed my point. It could be as simple as comma placement on my part.

My point was.....

Each automaker is going to focus on protecting the strength of their portfolio. To the extent that fuel economy technologies can protect the strong parts of their portfolios, they will deploy those technologies in those products first.

Toyota and Honda have strength in profitable small cars and midsized cars, so that has been the primary focus of their hybrid activity. They would like to continue to conquest luxury cars and luxury SUVs. That explains the Lexus line of hybrids.

GM has strength in full size trucks and SUVs and mid-sized cars. Hybrids are being launched on full sized SUVs, pickups, and mid-sized cars.

I agree with you that fuel economy, at least up until now, has not been a singularly focused strategy point. On the other hand, if you've been to either the Frankfurt or Tokyo Auto Show, you'd recognize that it has become an increasingly important strategy element.

Peace,

Martin