http://www.forbes.com/home/vehicles/...8vehicles.html

This article has merit because it begins to address the spectrum of hybrids and what works and doesn't work. A great believer in "the right tool for the right job" and "what is the value added engineering," I think this article finally addresses in a clear and concise way, why we need to step back and look at both the good and bad hybrids. Not every hybrid criticism is from a 'brain dead' skeptic and by no means does every hybrid 'walk on gasoline.'

I think it is a serious article that expounds on topics not necessarily well addressed by either the advocates or the skeptics.

Bob Wilson

 

With the possible exception of Saturn, which seems more serious about its hybrid products, I think GM puts these dogs out just so they can justify their position that no market exists for hybrids. They make it a self fulfilling prophecy.

As far as Lexus, Toyota should know better that to put out a car that does no better on FE than its conventional siblings. Perhaps, in this case it is more about gaining or retaining a market share amoung the affluient in our society that want to be "seen green" as far as their public image, but in reality don't really give a d**n about FE or environmental issues, to which I say "shame on Toyota".

But in the next breath, I readily give them kudos for putting real effort toward corporate responsibility with the Toyota line hybrids. My TCH is an amazing vehicle that gets almost twice the mileage of its convential counterpart. I have owned sedans from Audi, 'Volvo, and Infiniti in the past and I honestly think I would take a new TCH over any of the other '08 lines from them if offered the chance again today.

 

I think there is a point being missed here. Some people buy Silverados because they need trucks. You can't run a home improvement business out of a Prius. Let's just take an example of someone who drives 15,000 miles a year and use the EPA 2007 city mileage ratings. If you need truck, a hybrid Silverado (16 mpg) will use 134 gallons less per year than a conventional Silverado (14 mpg). If you don't need a truck and buy a hybrid Camry (40 mpg) you will save 200 gallons per year over a conventional Camry (24 mpg). If you compare the regular and hybrid versions of the Saturn Aura, you find the hybrid would save over 200 gallons per year. Does it really make sens to label GM a failure?

 

In engineering we call this managing user expectations. But I've long felt hydraulic based hybrids were a better solution for 1-5 ton trucks due to the energy required.

Bob Wilson

 

I know that > I < want a highly fuel efficient vehicle and don't care if I beat anyone off the line when the traffic light turns green. But I think what many of us (probably like-minded folks reading this forum) forget is that there's a HUGE audience of people who want the power and really don't care about the economy (they still like to complain about the price at the pump).

In the meantime, the flawed CAFE standards are still mandating fuel economy averages and I believe the manufacturers are pumping out these poor excuses for hybrids because they do help them achieve those CAFE standards at least a little, while still selling the consumer the powerful car they want.

Although the Lexus and GM hybrids are gas guzzlers, at least by OUR standards, to Lexus and GM they are more fuel efficient than their non-hybrid counterparts but still offer all the power that they believe their buyers want.

 

The impact of the small volume of Sierra / Silverado hybrids or Saturn VUE hybrids on CAFE is ridiculously small. In order to even move the needle by 0.01 mpg on a fleet average, GM would have to put several more zeros behind the production numbers of each.

The reasons for having them in the portfolio are actually fairly clear. There are some who NEED pickup trucks either as work trucks or to double as a work truck and family transportation. Many of them would also like to have improved fuel economy. Granted, 14 mpg for a Silverado doesn't compare to 24 for a Camry (using KenG's examples) but if the Camry doesn't provide the utility the Silverado owner requires, he can take comfort in knowing he's driving the most fuel efficient Full Size pickup in the market. The hybrid variant gets him a little more fuel efficiency and the bonus of an on-board generator that can be used on work sites.

From GM's perspective, it provides a level of technology learning that has filtered into development of a 2-Mode system that will enable the existence of a 20 city / 22 highway Chevy Tahoe & GMC Yukon.

Similarly with the Saturn VUE. It provides the buyer a fairly significant improvement in fuel economy (12 - 15%) for not a lot of money.

If you want the absolute highest mpg you can get, you look for a Prius, HCH, or Jetta Diesel. Unless you're in Europe. Then you go for a Mini Cooper diesel with start/stop (72.4 mpg). If you need more passenger room or hauling capability, you start to look at Escape, Highlander, and VUE hybrids. And soon you'd consider the Tahoe and Yukon 2-Modes. If you have to have a pickup, your options are very limited. You either go for the FAS Silverado and Sierra currently available or you wait for the 2-Mode versions to launch.

Peace,

Martin

(someone in my building has been assigned a Tahoe 2-Mode. I'm gonna have to find out who that is and see if I can grab it for a weekend)

 

Choices are almost always good. And I personally don't see this as just about good or bad mileage. Some of it is about air quality for me. Mileage and air quality are linked some but they are 2 distinct issues. And I know some may disagree but this topic is a perfect example of how government can work in the country's favor. All government is not bad.

Imo there would have never been a hybrid at all if it weren't for the CAFE standards, unchanging as they were for 20 years, working in concert with the CARB (California Air Resource Board) decisions of the '90s. The recent raising of the CAFE standard assures that alternatives will continue (perhaps accelerate) to be offered by the manufacturers in self defense. When CARB got tough in the '90s the tough (Toyota and Honda) got going and started to innovate. Toyota even makes very good money on their hybrids. The other big players in our market figured they could out lobby and out PR and out last and out legislate these decisions. And now they are behind the 8 ball.

How does this work in our favor. Simple. Who could argue against energy independence or cleaner air. All of us consider both of those as desireable don't we? I bet if you asked Exxon or GM or Toyota or Shell (you get the idea) employees this question they would all answer yes. But there is a disconnect between the answers and what we are all doing individually. I can and have made fun of California but my hats are off to them for having the guts to stand up and say "no, we aren't going to bankrupt you businesses but we are not going to breathe dirty air either. And you ARE going to help us clean it up or you can't sell cars here". That is where government has stepped in and helped us decide to do it, incrementally and woefully short as it maybe. Its a start. And that is what matters to me.

 

Abowles - preachin' the truth. Amen!