Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Toyota to add more hybrids.....
Automotive News for 7/14 reports that Toyota is poised to add 3 more Hybrid gas/electric models to it's US lineup for '05.
Toyota, ironically the maker of one of the most comprehensive lineups of SUVs, plans to add hybrid versions of the Highlander and the Sienna
minivan to the redesigned Prius in 2005.
A Lexus RX400H (a hybridized RX330)is due for US sale as soon as Spring 2004.
Engineers are studying possible hybridized Camry and Lexus V8 models for future development.
Toyota Motors, with the largest cash hoard in the industry is clearly willing to spend heavily to dominate the hybrid vehicle maket.
GM, Ford and Honda are also developing hybrids and others are researching them but Toyo's effort clearly dwarfs any known competitive plans.
Toyota, ironically the maker of one of the most comprehensive lineups of SUVs, plans to add hybrid versions of the Highlander and the Sienna
minivan to the redesigned Prius in 2005.
A Lexus RX400H (a hybridized RX330)is due for US sale as soon as Spring 2004.
Engineers are studying possible hybridized Camry and Lexus V8 models for future development.
Toyota Motors, with the largest cash hoard in the industry is clearly willing to spend heavily to dominate the hybrid vehicle maket.
GM, Ford and Honda are also developing hybrids and others are researching them but Toyo's effort clearly dwarfs any known competitive plans.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
If it were possible to get 30 -35 mpg out of a Tundra/Sequoia hybrid or a Tahoe/Suburban hybrid, there would be far less criticism of such vehicles. I just hope they are priced within reach of mere mortals...
Bob
Will try and find the link and post !
Actually, some of the earliest hybrids are commercial vehicles. The house-sized dump trucks used in mining operations are hybrid-electric vehicles.
I think Toyota is making a smart move. Honda is the only company currently presenting any sort of challenge in the NA market. Toyota can out-spend them many, many, many times over. While Honda may have been the first with a hybrid here on NA soil, Toyota will get the recognition. With a hybrid option in most major lines (small car, mid-sized car, SUV, and minivan), they will have far greater reach. This will most likely force Honda to seek out less profitable niches for their hybrid offerings.
As for the others... They are late to the game without much to show for it. Solutions like GM's soft-hybrid option are seen by most hybrid fans as half-hearted attempts. A hybrid that powers only the A/C and other auxiliary systems simply isn't as sexy. Driveline hybrids (which are also in development by GM) are the ones being taken seriously. Nissan, Ford, GM and others have signed up to purchase Toyota systems and electronics. While that may get their name in the paper, I doubt very much Toyota will allow them to become seriously competitive. That is... unless they are making serious cash on the deal. Subaru has only done one concept car that I know of and Hyundai hasn't completed much of anything, either. Economic uncertainties have sent their main product lines into a tizzy. So, the domestic's HEV projects are low on their list or priorities. They have bigger fish to fry and initial offerings are more or less PR moves to prevent Toyota from running away with the market. You can almost hear the marketing guys shouting, "me too! me too!", from the sidelines.
I've seen the claim made on the web. But have not seen any reliable source to back it up. GM is developing its own hybrid program, using technology it already has in place from the EV-1 project.
As far as I know, when the hybrid VUE hits the streets late next year, it will be have the largest hp gas/electric combination on the market. Given Saturn's limited dealership networks, the VUE is selling very well. The hybrid VUE will provide a clear chance to see how much the market really wants hybrids.
My point was not to dismiss the engineering prowess of others. Rather, this shows how Toyota is leading the way. They are the "goto guys" for hybrid technology. This gives them a certain degree of control over anyone using their technologies.
As for the VUE, what are the combined engine and motor ratnigs? Ford has the HEV Escape going on sale this fall/winter (starting with fleet sales). Estimates are around 200 hp, same as the gas-only V6.
But the link also shows that Ford and Saturn will beat Toyota to market with affordable small Hybrid suvs.
IMO, the small hybrid suvs are the best manifestation of the technology for US drivers. On the one hand, a lot more Americans will buy them over small cars. And with the greater hp and interior room, the hybrid suvs will not make their customers feel they are giving up anything by going hybrid.
The Japanese failure to beat Ford and GM to market with small hybrid suvs underscores some points the pro-Japanese people hear gloss over. The Japanese did not beat the US to market with small hybrids because of some internal vision. Rather, the Japanese government mandated and backed up the mandate by paying Toyota and Honda to make hybrids for the Japanese market. Japanese tend to buy small cars, so naturally, the hybrids were small cars.
What makes the willingness of the Japanese government to underwrite hybrid research all the more interesting is that Japan, in its 13th year of recession has a deficit that by percentage of GDP, dwarfs that of most other first world nations. At the same time, in order to keep the yen weak (and by doing so exporting auto companies' profits high), Japan has been spending billions of dollars it does not have on US Treasury bonds and dollars.
Curiously, either due to lack of political will, or perhaps some odd sense of self-sacrafice for perceived national good, the Japanese tax payer make narry a peep about this extravagence.
In the US, on the other hand, US taxpayers would scream bloody murder if the government spent money at the level of Japan to help private industry. Indeed, many American people would welcome the entire collapse of the US auto industry, if some of the other topic strings are indicative of US opinion.
I am not a flag waver. In fact, I believe in social Darwinisim. I plan to retire to a farm I own with my wife's family in Brazil. But I do find the almost gleeful desire of Americans to bring down what our folks worked so hard to make somewhat odd.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
It also says the Toyota suv is the Lexus 330. I am not aware of the Toyota you are talking about. Is there a link?
Logic1 - Ford has been promising the Escape HEV since the gas model was introduced sometime in 2000. I've had a hard time keeping up with when it would be released as well. Right now, they are saying that the Escape HEV will go on sale to fleet customers this Fall or Winter. It goes on sale to the public in the middle of next year.
I don't see why the small SUV market is such a big deal. Sales of small SUVs from Honda and Toyota average about 18K units combined. Their total sales of small sedans is more like 60K units. The small car segment is obviously a much bigger market for them.
As for government intervention, I don't think it matters. Why Toyota is leading the charge is secondary to the reality that they are doing it. They could have gotten the idea from a fortune cookie and it wouldn't make a difference.
BTW, California is something like the 3rd largest economy in the world. Take a look at how they have been promoting clean cars.
Nippononly - I think he means the small AND inexpensive SUV market. The entry level, not the luxury level. Besides the new RX isn't as small as the old model.
Efforts in California actually explain the headstart Toyota and Honda got in the Hybrid market. In the early-90s California rejected the hybrid idea, insisting on 100% electric. The car companies all told California electric cannot work because battery technology is not a level acceptable to consumers. California insisted and GM spent billions producing what is until now the only commercially sold all electric car, the EV-1.
Toyota and Honda were unable to produce an all electric car. But their lobbyists were able to convince California to follow the Japanese government line of thinking and shift from all electric to hybrid. GM did what California asked.
This is just another case in point about what I said above. The Japanese government is using taxpayer dollars to assist Toyota and Honda in their technology race while the Japanese people are suffering economic hardship. In the US, the Feds stand pat and the largest US state actually takes actions hostile to the local manufacturers.
Then the US citizens, at least as represented by the majority in Edmunds, rant about how it is all GM and the UAW's fault. A curious difference in approaches, imo.
> to underwrite hybrid research all the more interesting
> is that Japan
PNGV was a UNITED STATES funded hybrid project that paid GM, DC, and FORD millions & millions of dollars for producing *nothing* except a prototype. TOYOTA was denied the opportunity to join in, so they funded their own hybrid project with their own money.
So... First, the US did in fact use taxpayer money for the same purpose. Second, JAPAN didn't. I don't know where you got your info from. Had this been true, Nissan would have a hybrid now and Honda could have developed more than just an assist type hybrid.
> Toyota and Honda were unable to produce an all electric car.
Wrong. Toyota developed & sold the RAV-4 ELECTRIC in California. It's a small SUV, perhaps you don't call that a "car". But since it is bigger and more powerful, it definitely qualifies as a genuine electric vehicle.
JOHN
Shouldn't some of the taxpayer money be used to help domestic automakers compete with a product that the foreign automakers already have a significant lead on?
Hybrids are real, they actually deliver as promised. Fuel-Cells offer no guarantee whatsoever. Why invest solely in a risk like that?
JOHN
First, unless I am mistaken, the RAV electric is not a consumer available vehicle. It also was not made in response to the California initiative I was discussing in the early-90s.
I have read numerous resources that said the Japanese government underwrote the hybrid research done by Toyota and Honda. Nissan was on the verge of collapse at the time the Japanese intitiative started. Remember Nissan is only now better because of the Renault takeover.
Where, where or where do you see me saying I was against the Japanese support of the Hybrid program? Rather I pointed out that American taxpayers tend to be hostile to government support of US industry though they can afford it, while the Japanese taxpayers who arguably cannot afford it, are not hostile. I never said anywhere that the US should not support hybrids and I strongly resent your inferring I did. You should either learn to read or learn to refrain from putting words in people's mouths.
Finally, the fuel cell initiative is not auto manufacturing specific. Rather, it is an energy system wide program aimed at creating a US that does not need any foreign oil. Moreover, while the Bush administration heavily touted the intitiative, I have seen reports that say the research money is not readily available for non-military applications.
> much the market really wants hybrids.
Not really, especially since only a single configuration will be available for it. There is a HP/MPG trade-off. Choosing the wrong ratio could mislead the market.
And Prius, Escape-Hybrid, LX400-Hybrid, Highlander-Hybrid, and Sienna-Hybrid will also be available then. All of them will be FULL type hybrids too. So drawing any clear conclusion will be difficult, especially if the limited supply cannot keep up with demand. Knowing the true demand will be a challenge.
JOHN
It indeed was. (That was pretty cool, none this fleet-only garbage.) And you could buy it too, unlike the lease-only offer from GM for EV-1.
> I strongly resent your inferring I did
Sorry. Not including details causes that. (It was the "would" comment about something that already happened that lead me astray.) You provided additional facts in reply. That ended the mystery. In the past, threads have went on for weeks from people not answering specific questions. You did now. Thanks.
And to move on, discuss the fact that R&D is now complete. Both Ford & Nissan will be purchasing hybrid technology from Toyota. That adds a whole new twist to playing market catch-up. The expense of R&D isn't an issue. They can fire-up the assembly lines and start flooding the streets with their own brand of hybrid.
JOHN
And RAV-EV was available here for about 18 months to retail consumers. The MSRP was $42K, and even with the $9K rebate from the feds, the net MSRP of $33K for a RAV4 was enough to scare away most consumers...they did not sell all that many and discontinued it last year for slow sales. I think they should have emphasized that here in CA the all-electric vehicles can use the carpool lanes all the time, and they can recharge for free at public stations located all over the Bay Area and the L.A. basin, as well as Sacramento.
I think it is fair to say Toyota has led the charge in hybrid tech, as witnessed by the fact that they are introducing their second gen this fall, when many other manufacturers are just getting out their first, and in many cases are merely buying Toyota's tech (Nissan, Ford).
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
One of the California requirements -- goofy from a market point of view -- was that the all electric cars sell at a price within range of similarly sized cars.
A 33k Rav would not have been close to its gas powered competitors, so Toyota must have been offering the car as part of meeting the California regulation.
I think you are both right about Toyota licensing hybrid technology to Ford and Nissan. Some here have extended this to them licensing to GM and DC, which is not accurate.
GM has changed course several times in the last couple of years as to what they would do with hybrids, but at one point they were in discussions with Toyota to purchase hybrid tech, just like Ford is now. They have since changed course, and now will only offer mild hybrids for a while...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The importance of building a small SUV hybrid is lost on me (and I own one). Especially when Toyota is getting ready to launch a mid-size SUV, family sedan, and minivan. Toyota is swimming in the ocean while the domestics are dipping their toes in the kiddy pool.
Seriously, GM is doing well with the VUE. And the soft-hybrids they are planning are better than no hybrid at all. But Toyota is the one pushing the envelope. There's just no comparison.
Thank you for clearing that up. I was unaware that GM had opted out. When last I'd heard, they were moving forward with some Toyota electronics.
One, the Small SUV market is growing and the compact car market, at least for now is shrinking. Tastes change, but absent a really boost in gas prices, I do not see a lot of the US market going for compacts.
Two, (closely related to one) hybrids are pricier than their plain gas burning cousins. The NA market rarely pays a premium for compacts. A hybrid will not attract the buffs willing to pay top dollar for a small car the way a 3 series or 9-3 will.
Three, there is more room in the small suv than in the compact. Hybrids have at least two engines. The GM design will add extra (albiet rather small) engines for air conditioning and power steering as well. Americans like to put a lot of stuff in their cars. Japanese do not. A hybrid compact loses space, so it loses American customers, imo.
Like any large company, GM most likely considered all sorts of options when it developed its hybrid systems. It has a duty to the share holders to do so. I doubt very much licensing Toyota's system was every a very high priority. GM has its own technology. There is fair reason to believe GM's technology will suit this market better. We will know in a year or so.
Two - Have you checked the sales of the Freelander? Small SUVs are the compact sedans of of the SUV world. The models that offer high levels of content at higher prices are the ones that do not sell well (or are highly discounted).
Three - This has the ring of truth to it. At least in a mixed sense. Yes, there is more room in a larger vehicle. Because the VUE and Escape were designed with big V6 engines in mind, there is probably a decent amount of room in the engine compartment when it's occupied by the smaller I4 blocks.
However, the notion that a commuter car needs extra space more than a utility vehicle seems a bit odd to me.
I'm not convinced. If you want to make a big splash and gain some street creds with a new technology, you do it in a major segment. Small SUVs are a middle ground.
I suspect that Ford chose a small SUV because there was no other market left for them to be first. Toyota and Honda had small cars, Chrysler was planning (at the time) a hybrid Durango and minivan, and Ford's family sedan has not been well-received. The big markets were covered, so they started publicly laying claim to the small SUV segment a long time ago.
Why GM decided to take the same approach, I have no idea. With Ford beating them to the punch, it makes little sense as a PR move. Especially since Ford has been promising a no-compromises approach to the Escape with power and towing similar to the 3. V6. Perhaps the VUE's architecture was the easiest to transform.
> engines for air conditioning and power steering as well.
Prius doesn't need an engine for either. Both of those functions are electric in the 2004, they run off of the battery-pack instead.
> I do not see a lot of the US market going for compacts.
That's why Prius is growing to a MIDSIZE sedan this year, and without the price increasing.
So with less of a price difference and the more of an efficiency gain now, you really can break even on just gas & oil savings. That makes all the extra goodies only the hybrid offers frosting on the cake, an extra you didn't have to pay for.
> There is fair reason to believe GM's technology will
> suit this market better.
How? (I'm genuinely curious what configuration you think they will choose for their dominant hybrid technology.)
JOHN
And we do not have to think how the VUE hybrid will be set up. We know. Just go to Saturn fans or media.gm.com.
You join what is becoming a favored and very annoying ploy in the Edmunds TH by putting words in my mouth. I did not say anywhere that GM's hybrid technology will be dominant. I stated correctly that GM will use its own hybrid technology and that I thought hybrid cute utes are the better manifestation of the technology for the NA market. Utes make up almost 50% of the US market. The small utes from Ford, GM and Honda are selling very well (for whatever reason, the RAV4 has been going backwards). Making a popular line hybrid seems to make sense to me. The fact that Toyota is floundering in the cute ute market does not make it a bad one.
The VUE hybrid will combine the regular 2.2 ecotec with the pre-existing electric power steering, a small electric engine for the airconditioning and a large electric engine to add to the drive power. The result will be great gas mileage with performance almost the same as the base V6 VUE. I think it an attractive combination.
To answer Varmint's question, along with what I said here and above, the VUE is selling very well for Saturn. GM obviously wants the franchise to keep going by adding an ecological varient along with the performance varient.
More importantly, the VUE platform will base the upcoming Chevy Equinox. With Chevy having three times as many dealers as Saturn, the Equinox has a chance to sell in the high 100s and maybe even push 200k if the execution is right. GM will not have to drop a dime to move the hybrid mechanicals from the VUE to the Equinox. If hybrids win broader market acceptance, GM could sell 50k hybrid VUES and Equinoxes per anum.
> is being taxed -- say going up an incline, heavy stop
> and go -- the air conditioning weakens and the power
> steering boost lessens, leaving occupants hot and grumpy.
That's a misconception about power needs.
You obviously haven't driven a Prius at 70 MPH up a 6% grade. IT DOESN'T USE THE BATTERY-PACK AT ALL DURING THE CLIMB! In fact, just the opposite happens; it's charged on the way up.
The engine revs to full RPM, that provides more than enough thrust to turn both the wheels and the small motor (generator). Not all that electricity is needed for the bigger motor (thrust), so the extra is routed to the pack. You literally end up at the top with more stored electricity than you started with at the bottom.
JOHN
> will be dominant
I asked which of GM's hybrid technologies within the company itself (hence the word "their"), not an industry-wide question.
GM with offer "FULL", "ASSIST", and "NOT REALLY" type hybrids. Each will a different configuration of motor(s), battery-pack capacity, and electric support.
If GM selects to push volumes sales, they may push the "NOT REALLY" type (just a 42V battery offering nothing but auto-stop/rapid-start).
If GM chooses to lead the market with the most technically savy hybrid that breaks the records Prius is currently setting, they will go the "FULL" route. How many they sell and how they choose to promote it would be a total mystery. So I'm curious what others think about this approach.
"ASSIST" is the happy medium technically, but they way it could be perceived makes me wonder. Having a number of "FULL" hybrids exceeding 150,000 miles at that point and showing there really are no concerns about reliability could change the attitude about this type rather significantly.
And then of course, the thought about Toyota "floundering" is a bit premature. Their new hybrid system is componentized. That means they will be able to insert it into other platforms fairly easily. In fact, they have already announced upcoming SUV and minivan hybrids. Offering an "ute" to compete with the VUE-Hybrid is completely realistic. Don't forget, Toyota has a new vehicle coming out next year that falls into that category. It very well could be available in hybrid form a year afterward.
JOHN
I have read on numerous occasions that Prius owners in warmer areas are disappointed with the air conditioning and power steering. I believe the JD Powers customer satisfaction survey also mentions this.
To answer your other, interesting question, IMO from a purist green perspective, the FULL hybrid set up Toyota uses in the Prius and GM will use in the VUE Greenline is the best. The VUE Greenline will have mpgs in the high 30s and lower emissions than any other IC GM product.
I believe that the NOT REALLY and ASSIST efforts have merit. By simply adding electric power steering and a motor for airconditioning across the entire GM line would save millions of gallons of fuel every year.
The ASSIST approach with a standard IC engine may leave Green thinking people wanting. But in a year or so, GM will have DOD engines starting to flow into its lines. Combine an ASSIST approach with a DOD engine will allow the driver significant fuel ane emissions savings for most situations, with the advantage of the full power of a V6 IC engine for the few times the drivers really need it.
All of this is stop gap, of course. What the market really needs is bio hydrogen extraction so we can all go fuel cell and leave the IC engine to hobbyiests and museums where it belongs.
That also means the small 10-20% efficency improvements some hybrid designs offer is no where near enough. The more advanced hybrid designs (like the 2004 Prius) offer a 100% efficency improvement.
JOHN
By the way, I meant "population".
JOHN
I hope as more models hit the market we start seeing the number of posts in Hybrid posts as on some of the other boards.
Activity died afterward. There was nothing to debate. The aspects that some people had identified as shortcomings had been overcome. The new Prius fulfills even their criteria.
Discussions instead could evolve here, but realistically those kind of posts are only popular when only the vehicle itself is discussed. Off-Topic message content that deals with politics and other vehicles tend to make people lose interest.
JOHN
Ford keeps pushing availability dates back and back, GM waffles over what it will do and when, and I do not even remember hearing anything about DCX's future offerings.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Not true. They know hybrids will take off.
What they don't know is what the configuration will be.
So they are evolving the technology while at the same time trying to figure out what power/efficiency/size ratio the market prefers.
JOHN
>By the way, I meant "population".
There's a difference? ;-)
> The aspects that some people had identified as
> shortcomings had been overcome. The new Prius
> fulfills even their criteria.
You do have a knack for overstatement! We don't know what the new Prius fulfills or what has been overcome since it is not yet available and has not been tested. It promises to be a significant improvement and I certainly hope that it is, but it is still in the FUTURE. Your use of the past tense is premature.
Enthusiasm has its place, but not at the expense of objectivity.
What more do you want?
The acceleration increase is already documented. It achieves what others have desired: less than 11 seconds 0-60. (10.7 seconds to be precise.)
The size increase is already documented too. People wanted a midsize with a large trunk. That is exactly what the new model delivers. No testing is needed. Just look at the measurements & photos.
The performance increase doesn't need to be measured beyond the EPA numbers, which are now also documented. The new model will deliver MPG above 50. That's enough to fulfill requirements too. Whether it really does achieve a 55 MPG average (50 highway, 60 city) doesn't matter. It's already high enough to clearly outperform all other midsize vehicles by a noticable margin. It even competes dead on with diesels of that size.
The price is also documented already. The no more than $3,000 of a price difference is satisfied. There's not any part of that in question.
What more do you want?
The engineering details clearly show the system has been modified to increase efficiency. Aspects like making the body shape more aerodynamic is a no-brainer. That will obviously help. Changing the A/C to electric is another. The engine is gross overkill to power nothing but the A/C pump when stopped at a light. Using the battery-pack instead is quite a bit more efficient, since only the actual needed power will be drawn instead. The thermal retention system for artifically keeping the catalytic-converter warm (by using already heated liquid) is a bit more complicated, but still easy to understand. As long as the CAT stays warm, the engine doesn't have to start back up (which again is overkill, since just a little heat is needed). Certain components within the engine have been changed to reduce friction & weight, that will help too.
What more do you want?
Are you magically going to change your attitude when the above are all confirmed by real-world data rather than just the testing results?
JOHN
It doesn't take a rocket-scientist to know that nearly doubling the voltage will contribute to the overall efficiency gain in the new model.
JOHN
I wonder if Honda's Acura DNX (nee Dualnote) is on target for an '05 entry? Real performance in a 40mpg car, that's for me.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
And IF a 10.7sec 0-60 time is indeed "precise" and verifiable, it will be a welcome incremental improvement, but insufficient to win a space in my garage, particularly considering its lofty price. Even more important is whether suspension tuning has been improved to surpass the rather low dynamic limits of the present Prius.
$20K for a midsize is fairly typical, close to average. So "lofty" seems inappropriate.
> rather low
That's a relative term, not a measurement or a reference to fulfilling need.
JOHN
Unless you are actually competing with a minivan, what difference does that make?
If the car can avoid the obstacle, the need is fulfilled. More doesn't provide any benefit.
JOHN
Believe what you want. But in reality, there is a point of no gain, and we've reached it.
Here in Minnesota over the last 3 years, there simply is no benefit of 4-wheel drive on typical roads. My Prius hasn't ever had any problems while driving through 6 or less inches. And the ability to stop makes no difference either. Where's the benefit of your "superior" vehicle?
The same goes for highway handling. I swerved around a kayak that suddenly appeared while driving at 65 MPH with a bike on back and a full trunk. The Prius managed that without a lick of trouble. What more would I need?
You can only go so fast. The roads can only hold so many vehicles. Risk taking will only save you a few seconds.
Choosing a vehicle that is less likely to rollover and will provide better side-impact protection should be features that make purchase decisions, not squeezing out greater acceleration for driving where you can't (or shouldn't) use that ability anyway.
Believe what you want. The technology isn't intended to serve 100% of everyones requirements anyway. If it can fulfill the needs of a large majority, mission accomplished.
JOHN
And to limit lateral grip is a very poor approach to create "a vehicle that is less likely to rollover"! That was Ford's approach for their dismal handling Explorer and look what resulted.
To drive a vehicle of very low dynamic limits is more "risk taking" than I'm prepared to accept. Accident mitigation is nice, but collision AVOIDANCE is the first line of defense.
I said the TECHNOLOGY, not the vehicle.
> but collision AVOIDANCE
Prius is a smaller target and is more nimble than many vehicles on the road. That gives it a clear advantage over a monster SUV attempting the same avoidance manuever. So finding ways to make smaller vehicles, like a practical-size SUV, a minivan, or a large car, more appealing by adding hybrid techonology will draw market attention.
Prius clearly handles what real-world encounters have required from owners. Whether that achieves high ratings in a controlled lab test really doesn't have that much relevance, since those tests exceed requirements (but look great on paper). In other words, don't fall victim to marketing. Each year automakers tell you "more is better". Well after decades of doing that, you've come to expect it even though road conditions have changed very little (if at all). In my area, road conditions are actually better than they were in the past. Now the speed limit matches what people actually attempted to drive in the first place and highways have been expanded (both lanes and alternate routes) to handle the growing population. An assault vehicle is not needed, even though advertisements on television say otherwise. They aren't going to tell you the product they made years ago satisfy your actual needs, they will force the "more is better" thought to get you to buy the newer product. It's all a marketing game. Think about what is really needed. The gimmicks to make their product appear better than the competition is just fluff, providing no actual benefit for real-world encounters.
JOHN
Sensations are important as feedback in the control loop, but if they suggest capabilities greater than can actually be delivered by the machine, they can be a liability. Instrumented testing under controlled (and therefore repeatable) conditions can define the ACTUAL limits of reality (and to date, the Prius has not acquitted itself well in such tests). "Seat of the pants" testing and anecdotal experience may be fodder for conversation but are good for little else.
Time and time again I focus on *DO* but that fact continues to be discredited by emphasizing perception instead.
You can't FEEL anything (a sensation) in a Prius. The nimble nature is very disappointing. Yes disappointing, since you can't FEEL the agressive steering ability. (Of course, some people like the smoothness.)
Your eyes see it though! I am in fact able to perform those manuevers. I *DO* it. The same goes for the other owners too. But that continues to be ignored by those that don't even drive a Prius.
When you drive it, you find out firsthand. I've slammed on the brakes at highway speed. I've climbed snowy hills in the winter. I've climbed up small mountains with a loaded interior & trunk. I've swerved around objects in the road suddenly. None of them have ever caused the so-called problems you suggest.
JOHN