By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Has there been any move by Toyota to build the Prius in the USA? We are the largest market for that car. They have built a factory in China and are producing the Prius in that country. Why do you suppose they are not building a factory in the USA? The TCH is supposed to be built here. I think it presents less of a pollution problem. I understand the Camry Hybrid will have a smaller battery and electric motor. Mostly powered by the 4 cylinder engine. Maybe the experts can fill us in on that.
But to make it more graphic for the purposes of this discussion, the cost effectiveness of the (subject) venture has probably yet to manifest itself.
quote Amy Wilson of Auto News-As of early March, Ford had a 152-day supply of the Escape Hybrid at dealerships in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, one source said. One dealer in that market has had a 2005 model parked on the lot for more than a year.
"We move it around, clean snow off it; it sits," said the dealer, who did not want to be identified.
Hybrid Highlander is not selling well. And it is no wonder why. Hybrids - Save Gas, Lose Money
Of course, no matter how much the Prius is hyped, no matter how many HOV stickers are handed out, no matter how much $$$$$ government welfare tax breaks are provide to entice buyers to hybrids, the Prius still fails to match the sales of the F150, or the Silverado. And the availability of Camry-Hybrid will prove that hybrids are a niche. So the consumer mindset is unchanging regardless of whether there are hybrids.
I posted an earlier link which indicated Honda (world wide)wanted to come out with a SUB 13,000 gasser hybrid. The good news is it is rated at 84 mpg. The bad news is CAFE regulations will probably keep it from our shores (USA)
I live in one of three CA epicenters for the Prius and it has yet to even make a statistically measurable reading ,much less a statistically correlated difference.
That sudden surge of panic replies in response to my message was exactly what I had predicted. They were loaded with implications, misleading information, and denial of long-term goals.
Go ahead if you want to keep feeding the anti-hybrid research. It will make for great data later to reflect upon... as the numbers and variety of hybrids continue to grow.
JOHN
This is curious in that there are a host of folks who HAVE declared themselves anti diesel. In fact CA has attempted to and has been successful in BANNING new car diesel sales. So if that is your "ANTI" way of saying you are anti diesel, then I would agree with you saying you are anti diesel. So I would stop mischaracterizing folks as being anti hybrid, when it is your politically "correct" way of saying you are anti diesel.
Wahhaaahhhhaaaahhhaaaaahhaa!
Toyota built and entirely new plant in Texas to build what?
Prius? Nope. Hybrid? Nope? Larger, more powerful, less fuel efficient truck? Yes.
Toyota builds what in Princeton, Indiana? Prius? Nope. Hybrid? Wrong answer. Full size SUV's and trucks that obtain less than 20 mpg highway with a V8? Yes.
Toyota invests in TWO plants in the USA to manufacture large gas guzzlers and has yet to build one Prius in the US.
Does Toyota know something that they are not telling us?
Gosh, I can not condone buying a vehicle from a company that attacks the environment with huge, gas guzzling trucks and SUV's.
Toyota is playing a shell game with it's environmental image and it's environmental reality.
Just as you have fed the anti-diesel diatribe. However I did go and test drive the Prius. Have you driven a modern diesel car. Or do you just listen to extremist sources of information concerning the evils of diesel. I am willing to look at all possible solutions to the energy problems. Are You?
Something interesting in your comments here. I think the correct word is hypocrisy. Toyota is engaging in hypocrisy. They advertise that they are trying save the environment with cars like the Prius but then mostly push their trucks and larger SUVs in their ads.
Toyota offers the Avensis Wagon and Sedan with diesel in Europe, but who in their right mind would buy a Avensis diesel when they could own a Prius? :confuse:
Avensis Wagon different angle
quote Toyota UK -2.2 litre D-4D direct injection engine will take the Avensis past 62 mph in 9.3 sec. and on to 130 mph, yet its fuel economy is rated at just 47.1 mpg combined and its NOx emissions no greater than those of the 2.0 litre 114 bhp D-4D.
2.0 litre turbocharged D-4D engine* - 114 bhp, maximum torque of 280 Nm, maximum speed 121 mph, acceleration to 62 mph in 11.4 seconds, fuel economy on the combined cycle 48.7 mpg, CO2 emissions 155 g/km. * Figures based on Avensis saloon.
D4D engines....drool.....
It makes sense if you think about it....if I owned a Avensis and HiLux with D4D I'd never need to buy a new vehicle again in my lifetime.
Do like the specs on the engine.
This last summer my wife and I took a trip around Europe in a Peugeot 407 2.0 HDI 6 speed that we leased for 1 month.
The car could go 220 kmp on highway and it would corner so well that it was beyond reproach. I don't have the handling numbers for it, but I did drive the new bmw 330i here in the US before I went over there. I know that Peugeot is a FWD and that BMW is RWD, but overall handling of the Peugeot was, in my opinion, superior to BMW.
The transmition of the Peugeot was set up so that you reach 40 kmp in first, 80 second and i think about 115 third. I am a hard-core type of guy when it comes to cars, but given a choice I'd take that diesel over any similarly powered gas engine even if it was a hybrid. PSA rocks.
When it comes to the environment, I'd like to add that the chemicals used to create batteries, and energy used to create batteries and the whole hybrid powertrain is pretty bad. Where and how are you going to dispose of those batteries? What if they leak? What fuel do you think was used to make the batteries out of ore?
There is no way around the fact that people will drive whatever they think will portray them as environmentally conscious or will save them money. If you want to save the world there is only 1 solution. Here it is, so pay attention.
Huge increase of tax on fuel. If I were the government, I'd hit the tax so that gas was 5 dollars. I'd also allow only people who are in transport business to buy gasoline with almost no tax, so that the price of goods delivered does not increase. All of the money extra earned (trillions) I would devote to research of alternative fuels. Since anything short of atomic power won't cut it this is where I'd go.
We don't have much time. Fuel will be running out, and countries that have the last reserves will have great negotiating power. US is not one of those countries. This is a bigger problem than most people realize, and you will see it happen in your lifetime. This is unlike 70's. China and other countries need more fuel to support their growing economies. There will be problems. Meanwhile we are digging ourselves in by having cheap fuel.
Same here. I like that Avensis. I wonder if they have to pay VW/Audi for stealing their wagon design. Or maybe they hired the design team from VW. Good looking wagon.
If you have an image that needs to be seen full size to be appreciated, simply post a link to the pic in your post instead of using the IMG tag.
You can also display your images in a photo album in your CarSpace!
http://www.carspace.com/pf_flyer
I'm still patiently waiting for something constructive to respond to, in other words facts relating to the topic. Those personal attacks aren't worth wasting my time on.
JOHN
Here is a clue why the ads for trucks are so prevalent while the hybrid ads are not. Trucks are not moving as well as hybrids due mainly to fuel prices. They need an advertising boost. Hybrids are selling themselves. Advertising to sell hybrids is a waste of money.
Try to find an ad for the new FJ Cruiser. The decision was made no ads - all word of mouth. It's expected that ads will not be needed to move everything.
I thought Mopar and others had questions that were most pertinent to the subject we all are interested in.
You failed to address any questions posed. You only post snippets of information. None of which is substantiated, except in your own realm of thinking.
If Toyota is truly interested in the environment and hybrids in particular. Why is their effort mostly in expanding their gas guzzling trucks and SUVs?
Why no Prius factories in the USA? They announced, built and put into production the Prius in China. This after the Prius was a big success here. Why are they still dribbling them out a full 2 years after they stated they were expanding production of the Prius?
Quite frankly I thought your Prius had died on the highway and you were leaning our direction, toward the true fossil fuel saving vehicles. You know the diesels that will run on 100% American grown bio-diesel.
As long as there are buyers for big rigs it would be a business crime for Toyota not to attempt to sell these buyers. These buyers are not going to go away. They are not going to suddenly begin riding bicycles. They are going to buy trucks. Why not sell them?
Your stats? Well 'creative interpretation' would be a good phrase.
Prius YTD 14200 vs 12600 +12%
Tundra YTD 20000 vs 19800 flat
Tacoma YTD 26100 vs 20400 +28%
All of the Yr-over-Yr gain is by the Tacoma.. the more efficient and more up-to-date of the two. The Tundra is stagnating since it's in it's 7th year.
The Tacoma is the only 'truck'/SUV that is positive. The Crusher, 4Runner, Highlander, Sequoia are all down while the Tundra is dead flat. Ditto LX470 and GX470 at Lexus.
If it wasnt for the car-like RAV4 which is way up the entire segment would be down in the dumps. The potential profit is all in the other vehicles though.
When products are weak they need a advertising boost.
Ahhh your last sentence. This was beaten to death on the 'What is an American vehicle?' thread. Being worldly I'm certain that you know that 'profit' is a theoretical construct which is relatively meaningless. Cash flow from continuing operations is much more useful. It shows where the green actually goes - usually back into plant, equipment, new investments and eventually into my 401k among others in Hamburg, Paris, New Delhi and Kyoto. But we digress
Deal good only in California, Washington, D.C.
http://autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage?ws=uf
Almost seems like a desparation move.
I do not think there is any disagreement here. I do not even think there is any vilification of in the profit motive. If so, then the so called "environmentalists" and the the more socialist's amongst us should find "perfect" models in GM,DCB, Ford as they are all mostly losing money!!??
(Assumption here is capitalism and profit are bad, no profit is good??)
But even the environmentalists do not shop GM, DCB and Ford. This is even despite William Fords (the younger) mimicing Prince Charles' of England as members of "gentleman's" environmentalists club.
So my take is this is a PERFECT time to shop GM, Ford, DCB if one is in the market for a passenger vehicle to add to the fleet.
You have generally said that hybrids of the Prius design are the only solution to the fuel economy/emissions problem(s).
In discussions between us, you have stated that diesels are not even clean enough and have even poo-pooed MB's Bluetec solution in this or another forum.
What I and and I believe many others take issue with is your single pronged solution to these problems. You have made statements/comments to this effect. You have made these comments.
When I have time, I will find them and put the post numbers in a reply/posting.
I do not have an issue with that point. Maybe a crime would be a push. My issue is the "Green" image they would like us to believe. You cannot convince me that if they wanted to they could not build more Prii than they have so far. All I have seen from the Pro hybrid camp for the last 2.5 years is they are ramping up production to a million cars per year. I firmly believe they only want to build enough hybrids to maintain that PHONY Green image.
If they were, what you seem to believe they are, they would be building trucks and SUVs with higher FE than the other automakers. They are not. If you compare Toyota trucks and SUVs with GM. Most of the GM vehicles have better FE. GM also offers E85 in most of the larger vehicles that Toyota has not done so far.
If given the chance Toyota would sell as many big trucks and SUVs as Ford & GM. If any automaker should have a green image it would be Honda, not Toyota.
However the technology and its precurser investments and post investments are wearing a hole in folks' investment pocket. This is vis a vie Honda putting out a press release on the topic of SUB 13,000 dollar, 84 mpg gasser hybrids.
If any of you think Toyota has any other motivation than "shareholder profits" and "corporate profits", you are mistaken.
Why is Toyota producing as many hybrids as they do, and no more or no less?
Wake up and smell the CAFE regulations.
Again another good point! This is also in line with (my) a prior posting about the CAFE regulations actually inhibiting more massive offerings of the hybrids. (or whatever for that matter) I am not privy to the penalties or the rules, but I am sure the oems would be penallized if they produce too many hybrids. (or whatever else for that matter) !!!?? So it only makes sense to get the best possible price per unit for the longest possible time. Of course the beans have long since been spilled on how the SUV's etc were to be the UAW's in GM, Ford and DCB contracts, life time and live long benefits plan.
Auto's IMO are on track to offer hybrid options one by one by one. The Sienna is next, then likely the Corolla and a Celica/supra sports car. If the Corolla does come in 2-3 yrs then one could buy a hybrid from Toyota in every $1000 increment from $18000 to $50000+ the choice would be yours.
You and I will continue to disagree about whether they should increase production ( i believe that they are but in a very astute manner ) thereby flood the market in one vehicle. From a profit perspective why do that. It's the detroiters strategy and it doesnt work. Keep the supply and demand in balance and try to obtain sticker for everyone you sell. That's good business.
Rather than 1 Million Prius' why not 10 or 15 separate hybrid vehicles each selling 50-100K units at different price levels to appeal to a wider market.
Every manufacturer is moving to the 'dark side'. Honda is much less 'green' now with it's SUV's/trucks than it was 15 yrs ago when it was only the Civic/Accord. It's just business, everyone is following the money.
Toyota's trucks.... diesel. Again the plodding methodical route may annoy lots of people but neither they nor Nissan nor Ford are going to get into diesels here in a big way until every state allows the use of diesel completely widespread and free. At that point Texas, Tenn and all the Thai imports of diesel will likely wash away gassers and increase the FE of the truck fleets dramatically. But not until all the states permit diesels freely. In addition to Hino building here and in Canada I would bet a clean crisp $5 bill that the new TX plant is being designed to convert part of it's production to diesel in a blink of an eye.
Methodical, at the proper moment flip a switch and BLAM.. 100,000 diesel Tundras.
I suppose "trucks not moving well" is why the Ford F-150 has been the best selling vehicle (not truck - vehicle) in America - for the past 29 years straight?
However, over the long term, the hybrid really does not solve the fuel consumption issue, if for no other reason that it continues to use the stuff we are trying to get away from; "FOREIGN OIL". With a slow long lead in, it literary affects/effects,does nothing. It also creates another problem and that is higher costs. These higher costs outweighs the gains or under correct circumstances take far longer to B/E.
Emissions mitigation for diesels will literally leapfrogand continue to advance. It also offers a 37% advantage over any like gasser product. It also takes less upstream resources to refine: translation? It ACTUALLY uses less oil!! HELLO!!?? . It also can be grown from domestic RENEWABLE resources!!. Unleaded regular is literally a one trick pony in comparison. The caveat is unless of course the environmentalists see Nirvana and Nirvana is defined as unleashed domestic exploration and drilling for oil (aka unleaded regular) . My own take here: a miracle is NOT likely here.
In closing, the one's advocating NOT using unleaded regular, incredulously do not see the logic that it is illogical to demand folks use alternative fuels when they outlaw or make literally impossible to improbable the use of alternative fuels !!!!!! ???????
Constructive means: "not personal". Commentary about a person isn't the slightest bit helpful. Instead of attempting to discredit, stick to the facts. And try being objective.
FACT #1 - Clean Emissions means the vehicle achieves a rating of at least SULEV. Percentage of improvement is not appropriate, since that is only a relative measure. The rating is a precise ppm quantity, and using that is the truly objective approach.
FACT #2 - Stop & Slow traffic is a common problem a majority of the population has to deal with. So MPG data must include this requirement. The exclusion of that is an obvious attempt to mislead. It must be included to be objective.
FACT #3 - Automatic Transmissions are what over 90 percent of the drivers in the United States have purchased. That makes the “not required to shift” type the undeniable preferred choice. Yet the discussions here quote MPG values from the Manual Transmission instead but fail to point the efficiency difference out. That is not objective, it is deceptive.
FACT #4 - Full Hybrid technology can be implemented in a very wide range of vehicle types using a variety of engine & motor sizes. The flexibility of configuration is astonishing; however, responses dismiss this inferring that isn’t actually possible. But it is, and will be expanded upon as the years progress. Being objective means not ignoring that.
JOHN
The only way you can truly save fossil fuel even with a Prius is to park it and not drive it.
And the only attempt to be objective claims that I'm "incapable of compromise". That's clearly not correct. I accept SULEV, it's a compromise.
PZEV is cleaner (since it also requires significantly reduced evaporative emissions). No compromising means that I'd insist on PZEV (especially since Prius & Camry-Hybrid have that rating). But I don't. You have been proven wrong. Now stop with the personal attacks.
JOHN
You can insist all you want. PZEV is a CARB rating. Without the designer gas sold in the CARB states you will not get that rating. As it is currently sold in 45 states the Prius is BIN 3 with an 8 rating. Prius is not the cleanest gas car available in your area. As I have already pointed out. There are several cars that rate cleaner in the 45 non CARB states. Cleaner than any of the hybrids except the Honda Civic Hybrid. So I apologize you have accepted a compromise by buying the less than SULEV II Prius.
Automobiles receiving a Partial Zero Emission Vehicle (PZEV) credit have met the Super Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (SULEV) tailpipe standard which is 90% cleaner than the average new 2003 automobile. In addition, they have near-zero evaporative emissions and their emission control equipment has a 15-year/150,000 mile warranty
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/ccbg/atpzev.htm
Check out PZEV. It is SULEV with a 15yr 150k Mile warranty.
http://www.epa.gov/autoemissions/detailedchart.pdf
Sebring diesel
First, since all 50 states now required to sell that "designer" gas, known as LOW-SULFUR, that claim is meaningless. The nationwide mandate took effect January 1, 2006.
Second, it doesn't really matter anyway. The purpose of the reduced sulfur level was to ensure emission ratings would be retained for their entire required duration. They will initially achieve their clean rating even with really dirty gas.
SULEV = 120,000 miles
PZEV = 150,000 miles
By the way, that is yet another compromise I have accepted. I would very much like that additional 30,000 miles. But I chose to accept the lesser distance instead.
JOHN
That's not true.
The newest hybrid from Lexus, GS450h launched yesterday in Japan, can go 0-62 MPH in just 5.6 seconds.
JOHN
It is a fast hybrid from the reviews I have read. It will get some diesel competition later this year. We shall see how it matches up to the Bluetec CDIs from Mercedes. If it gets mid to high 30s on the highway it should be a decent car. My only complaint so far is the very small trunk space. I have read figures from 7.5 to 9.9 cu ft. At this time I prefer the LS430 to the GS models. They are only a few dollars more, with a lot more room and luxury. Not sure why they did not hybridize the flagship model first.
Gasoline is low sulfur but will be going to Ultra Low Sulfur (< 15ppm of sulfur). There still going to be specific "designer" blends for various regions of the country.
And actually, it does matter. Sulfur poisons some of the catalysts used to control certain emissions, especially NOx. Sulfur also contributes to another serious problem or two, namely acid rain (in the form of an acid) and to global warming (same acid compounds).
For the price of a GS450h you can just about buy a Honda dealership. They are supposed to start at $60k and go up from there. That is without the gouge factor. It is going to be built in such limited supply that the dealers will get what they want. I imagine most will go to Hollywood stars that are tired of driving the Prius and want their old luxury back with a green halo.
No.
Did a diesel engine powered Audi take the pole at Sebring?
YES!
JOHN
E320 CDI 0-60 mph in 6.6 seconds for only $51,825. 27 mpg city 37 mpg highway.
Thank you Rudolph Diesel.
GS450h mpg 27 city 28 highway mpg :surprise: