I don't expect everyone to drive a compact.

Only the individual knows honestly what their needs are.

I can't "prove" what a specific individual needs, but there is no doubt that in general a lot of people are being wasteful.

I hope in the coming years, the largest of the SUVs and trucks are seldom seen and fuel economy of all other vehicles makes significant improvement.

Sorry if you felt lumped with what I term the "bad actor" SUV drivers....

 

Mike you're doing just fine with one, hey some people say they should ban SUVs but you know you just can't make everyone happy! Good luck with it and let us know how it does as I'm interested in something like the Highlander when our Tahoe gives up. Thanks.Kevin

 

What if we were to replace every gasoline-powered (standard ICE) vehicle with a gas/electric hybrid, with the same characteristics (size, weight, power, hauling ability, cargo/passenger capacity, luxury features, etc.)? The improvement in fuel economy and emissions over the "fleet" would be stupendous! Of course, we could do better, by persuading people to change their habits/preferences, and/or by replacing some or all vehicles with true ZEVs, powered by renewable resources... but in the meantime, I see an "all-hybrid" fleet as a wonderful (and attainable, no?) goal. I think the overall benefits would outweigh those that might realistically be obtained by attempting to convince people to change their driving/buying habits, because so few would/could actually change, and even if a person did give up a large SUV for a smaller more fuel-efficient vehicle, most of the standard ICE vehicles don't come close to the PZEV standard attained by most hybrids.

So I say, let them ALL become hybrids! As long as there is a market for the H2 (and there WILL be, even with gas at $3/gal), a hybrid H2 (while intrinsically funny on some level) is at least somewhat better than a non-hybrid H2.

 

Hi All:

___Here is my take … We will be looking for an MDX replacement shortly ourselves. The SUV/Minivan need is over now that 2 kids are out of college and the house. The 07 Camry Hybrid would have been the top of my short list but it fell mightily with the rumors of the 3.3 L V6 ICE mated to the HSD for maybe 35/32 instead of a 1.8 L I4 w/ HSD and a hopeful 50/40 EPA estimate. No way will the V6 be in my drive for the next go around with gasoline topping $2.60 per this past week.

___With that, I am still interested in the Escape/RXh/HH. Not for a purchase but what they could have been. For the time we have owned the MDX, we most certainly did not need 260 HP/250 Ft-Lb’s of torque. I would have been just as satisfied if the Accord’s J30 (V6) were installed with a tall 4th and 5th gear for much better FE. The Escape was saddled with the 2.3 from the Focus because that is the only relatively fuel efficient ICE Ford/Mazda had in their NA inventory. That 2.3 although decent in its own right does not compare to the 1.7, 1.8, and 2.0 L ICE’s from both Honda and Toyota in the FE department. It will hold its own in the power department but not in the FE department even with HSD/eCVT/IMA making up for any perceived performance shortfall vs. the V6’s. As it stands, the FE performance of the Hybrid SUV’s do stink. It is one thing for the average driver to decide on their own to purchase an SUV (hybrid or not) because of their needs, it is an entirely different matter when they are getting a tax break coming out of my pocket to do so. That is where the hybrid SUV and power hungry hybrid Sedan’s cross my own line in the sand.

___In the case of Honda and Toyota, Honda did not need to use the 3.0 w/ VCM in the Accord nor did Toyota need to use the 3.3 in the RXh/HH. Marketing is still telling the powers that be that the American public wants HP. I also see both Honda and Toyota covering up the cost of IMA/HSD with the higher performance ICE’s. How much does it actually cost the manufacturer to produce an I4 vs. a V6? The Ford 2.3 L ICE costs just $1,200 shipped from Japan! Do you think a V6 costs upwards of $3,000? Not a chance.

___After this past week, if you were to place a Camry 3.3 L V6 w/ HSD and a guesstimated 35/32 EPA estimate for $30,000, a Camry 2.4 L I4 with its 24/34 for $18,000, and a Camry 3.3 V6 with its 21/29 for $25,000 in front of the average consumer, the I4 will still make it into most consumers’ hands just as it does today. The Accord’s I4 outpaces the V6 by a 3:1 margin let alone the ~ 15:1 margin vs. the AH IIRC. If you place a Camry 1.8 L I4 w/ HSD and a guesstimated 50/40 EPA estimate for $22,500 to start, now you have awoke some of the stragglers. 50/40 w/ a 0 - 60 time of ~ 9.5 - 10 seconds is going to mean quite a bit more this month then 35/32 w/ a 0 - 60 time of 6.5 seconds imho.

___Rant mode off … I guess I will be looking to the Ford Fusion hybrid but not if Ford/Mazda haven’t significantly increased the 2.3’s FE. 30 + mpg for the average sedan does not cut it in my world anymore. 40’s are just enough to tickle my fancy. 50’s say come and get it. 60’s say we should all be driving this now!

___Does anyone remember riding in an SUV of any sort with a family of 4 or 5 across the country 30 + years ago? I remember a lot of station wagons and sedans jammed to the headliner but I don’t remember seeing or riding in any SUV’s? Maybe I just missed them? How did the world get by without SUV’s prior to the mid 80’s?

___ Finally, how did the world get by with 0 - 60 times of 11 + seconds all those years? I have never floored my 05 I4 Accord, my 03 I4 Ranger, my 03 I4 Corolla, my 03 V6 MDX, my 00 I3 Insight, my 98 I4 S-10, my 95 I4 Nissan P/U, my 91 I4 Previa, my previous 87 I4 Accord, my 87 V6 Sable, my 85 I4 XR4Ti, or my first car, the 82 I4 Chevy Chevette? Does the world really need 250 + HP V6 SUV and Sedan hybrids?

___Good Luck

___Wayne R. Gerdes
___Waynegerdes@earthlink.net

 

SunByrne,

I agree with you that it would be a good thing if all conventional gas vehicles were hybrid instead. A lot of Americans eat way more than is good for them - a netional health problem. A lot of Americans drive more that what they really need - an environmental/ecological/road maintance problem.

 

IMVHO, the reason Toyota is not offering a Hybrid Camry as a "low-end 4 cyl" is because it would then be competing with the Prius.

In the marketing department, they can reasonably say "Why would anyone want a 4-cyl Camry with about 38 MPG for about the same price they could get a Prius at 50+ MPG?"

They don't want to compete with themselves with such similar models....

 

Has anyone stated the obvious - the Camry is competing with the Accord?

 

We got by with large station wagons. You remember these things, big beasts, many with wood paneling on the sides (Chevy Chase's thing in Vacation). Most or at least many had three rows, often with the third row facing rearward. Most were also massive gas guzzlers.

What happened to them? CAFE killed them! Yep, because it was hard for the carmakers to get these massive wagons to meet car CAFE standards, especially when they realized that if they made them "light trucks" then they'd be held to a much lower standard. Hence, the birth of the SUV craze. Basically created by a loophole in government regulation. (Take a look at the Bradsher book High and Mighty for details on this history; very informative but a bit polemic.)

The only part I can't figure out is how the auto industry convinced middle- and upper-class America that what they wanted to drive were pickup trucks. I'll never get this. When I was a kid, I thought the middle-class car dream was a Porsche, not an F-150.

Car-based SUVs (which came later) I at least kind of get since these are basically station wagons which have been jacked up a little bit and had the back squared off. (In fact, I'm pretty sure the Highlander is based very directly on the the Camry wagon platform.) I'm not thrilled with the high seating position but at least it doesn't drive like a truck.

Oh, and of course the wild overnight success of the minivan when they first came out contributed to the death of the big wagon. The minivans were (and still are, I believe) also classified as light trucks for the purpose of CAFE standards, so that worked for the automakers.

 

This a reply on the way out of work so it won't do justice, but here goes.

At least station wagons are lower, meaning they slice the air better and roll over less.

 

Tall people are perceived as powerful. Trucks are tall. Seriously, how many ads do you have to see where they tout the "above everybody else viewpoint" of that high driver's seat. The "I own the road" mentality of being taller than everyone. Men buy it because they equate being high up to being tall and manly. Women buy it for the same reason they buy shoes with high heels - they want to be high and mighty too because ultimately there's no difference between men and women at the basic level of desire for power.

As for why they sell better than a sports car - that's easy, price. You can get a basic F-150 or Silverado with all the discounts and rebates for $20-30k easily. Any sports car that will get you noticed is going to be $30+ and even $80+. Sports cars are very impractical whereas a truck or SUV can haul all kinds of stuff, run over debris in the road without a problem, smash through potholes without bending a rim, and so on. The mid 1990's saw the death of the bloated grand touring sports car and rise of the truck/SUV simply because GT's were too expensive and too impractical.