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
However, the Ward's Top 10 Engines remains a fact.
If the engine is that great, it wouldn't need a boost.
So no awards for engines with boost, that's my thing. Naturally-aspirated only. :shades:
DrFill
You have mentioned quite frequently that your dream car was always a 90s turbo Supra. You must really love cars with not so great engines :P
Couldn't agree more.
I am not against turbocharge/supercharge engines but between a force induced engine and a NA one (given that the performance is comparable) I'll choose the NA one without a doubt.
I am a loyal follower of the KISS principle.
I never said the old 3.0 was the best engine in the world. It just was attached to the superior sports car of it's time.
DrFill
I think MB will sell a Blutec version in California that will provide warning signals before the urea bladder empties and if the driver does not refill then the engine will stop(but there will be a lot of forewarning before that happens)
So no awards for engines with boost, that's my thing.
1. The Supra?... BOOSTED!!.....So, you're BUSTED!
2. All those Toyota and Lexus hybrids that are in fact naturally aspirated engines that are BOOSTED with the use of electric motors! BOOSTED!!.....So, you're BUSTED!
So... why would you give the OK to boost with electric and not retain the energy in the exhaust stream that is already there just waiting to be used?
C'mon Doc... I gotcha here on this one!! No excuses!
TagMan
It will be fine.
TagMan
This is all in relation to the Ward's list, which means nothing to me, and I have no stake in.
You can't even include a hybrid, becuase that, in fact, is a combination of engines. So if they included hybrids, they'd contradict themselves.
I don't know how the Supra got into this converstaion? But what's important is you remember the greatness! You show respect! :shades:
You're acting like I asked for some engine award. I really don't care! :confuse:
My point was if you are going to make an awards list, one should be for naturally-aspirated engines, and one for assisted engines.
Then you have to decide what engines to exclude. Do $300k Ferrari engines make the list? Where is the line?
I'm not asking for any compliments here. :confuse:
Let's face it. Does Toyota really need another award?
DrFill
People are biased towards reliability & value, Lexus wins there too
Teflon failed you... you were caught, "tagged", and released by the TagMan. :shades:
You are free again... but beware... never make the same mistake again! :surprise:
TagMan
That's good stuff. Keep it comin'!
DrFill
DrFill
The excuse that the Detroit 3 have made for years is that they do not have the technology or know-how to make fuel-efficient trucks, and that if they did so, the trucks would be too expensive. That's the same argument that we've heard from the Detroit 3 when it came to adding safety standards to vehicles... that it would raise the cost per vehicle too much... and in some cases argued that there was no technology to even build the standard.
Well, time and time again, they figured out that seat belts and air bags, and bumper regulations and braking regulations can be built. Also, they always complained about any type of challenging emissions control standards.
Gosh, they said the catalytic converter would destroy the the industry. What bunk. Every time they've been what I call "challenged" to make certain types of progress, they cry foul... and in the end, they are able to accomplish the goal.
It is reasonable, IMHO, to raise the fuel-economy standards gradually over time. Let them cry if they want to, but they can do it... they just don't want to, if they can have it their way.
The other argument they always resort to is that it is much more profitable to build and sell full-sized pickup trucks as compared to smaller, fuel efficient vehicles. That is the weirdest argument of all... and it's a diversion that has no meaning in the overall picture.
The Toyota Corolla, for example uses a fraction of the sheet metal, smaller amounts of steel and other materials in the suspensions, smaller engines, smaller brakes... all using much less materials than in the full-sized trucks. It's not like these materials are FREE!!
So, yes many Americans love their trucks, no doubt about it, but would also love for them to get better gas mileage, and there's no doubt about that either.
What full-sized pickup truck owner today actually wants his truck to only get mid-teens (some better and some worse) for gas mileage? Practically every one of those truck oweners would endorse a standard to raise the gas mileage. In fact surverys have been done recently that show that to be true.
So, just because they buy those trucks doesn't mean that they endorse the poor fuel economy. It's what comes with the truck... unfortunately.
Another bunch of baloney is that there are folks that shouldn't buy a truck unless they actually need it. Gosh, I feel sorry for the guys that really just simply want a pickup less than need it, but are forced to take the gas mileage that comes along with their preferred vehicle. They also would like to get better mileage. They like the truck, but that doesn't mean they have to like the gas mileage!
There are areas of the country, and you know this as well as I do, because you've lived in other areas than NYC, where it is just considered typical for a guy to drive a truck. It's mainstream in some parts of the country. Those guys don't want to be seen in a Yaris or a Scion, or a Corolla, or even a Camry hybrid!!
So... truck sales will continue no matter what. Large SUV sales, however, are a different story... that's why we are seeing a market open up for smaller SUVs!! It's the fuel economy!! Or do you somehow think that people want less cargo area!! :confuse: And the irony is that some of those smaller SUVs don't improve the mileage at all!... while fortunately some of them do.
I know that those manufacturer's want to take the easy way out on this, and I don't want to see the government cave in. We can argue that the system is wrong, but I like our American system, and I think it is good when our government does the job it's supposed to do. I wish it did a better job in some areas, but I don't want to start a political debate here. (Next thing you know we'll be talking about your NY Senator!
Setting environmental standards is a good thing for the population of this country in the long run, and I support it 100%. This fuel-economy standard is a part of that type of overall standard, and it is for the good of the people that there is energy efficiency, increased energy independence, emissions standards, pollution standards... for both water and air, and ground, as well as the food we consume, which is also affected by the standards for water and air and ground. It all works together... that's why you can't have loopholes and easy ways out for special interests.
And, BTW,... I'd also be very willing to lobby the government for raising another standard...
specifically raising some of the speed limits!! Would any one here like to join me?
TagMan
Darn, I was hoping you'd be right.
I really was!
DrFill
Doc, I wrote all that for you and I could have been watching football... and all you got was that "I disagree?", and you tell me that you have the attention span of a fruit fly?
Oh, wait a minute! Now I get it... YOU'RE watching football!! Why, I oughta......
OK, so read it during the commercial... and you'll understand what I'm talking about and why that pulitzer prize author has a similar point of view.
BTW, you get the all-time prize for the ONLY post on a Saturday! You won it yesterday!
TagMan
Oh, yeah. Watching BC beat Notre Dame and watching the scores flash by in dismay as my UConn Huskies absorbed their first loss of the year to the Virginia Chevy Cavaliers, too.
And let's not mention the Red Sox... On to Cleveland!
'21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)
But you know what? Every single company you mentioned there already has a diesel, in one market or another. Mercedes-Benz and Honda have a ton in Europe.
And you know why they're making these hybrids? Because they have to. It's called demand. Right now, there is a huge demand for hybrids- because they are seen as the "green" thing. Ironically, I'd say the only truly green hybrid out there right now is the Prius. The rest seem like marketing angles on wheels.
Take the Cadillac Escalade Hybrid. Some might think, "Oh, a hybrid Caddy! It must get great mileage and look cool. Right?" Wrong. It gets a whopping 20% MPG better, if I remember correctly- and that may sound like a lot, but consider this: the standard 'Slade gets about 14MPG. That means, at best, it will get 18MPG on a daily basis with the hybrid system. You could say, "That's progress- you have to wait for the real hybrids," but I could say, "Why not go all the way and stick in a torquey diesel?" It would probably be faster than the hybrid, and it would get 25+MPG on the highway. Not bad for a 5500lb SUV.
'06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet • '04 Lexus RX330
I could go on- you get the point. I know there's no replacement for displacement, but turbocharging is a nice shortcut. It has reached a near-perfect state in today's performance-oriented world, and it is the makeup of some of the best cars ever. I would take a 335i over a 330i, or a Turbo over a C4S, in a heartbeat.
'06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet • '04 Lexus RX330
LOL. I completely understand. We're all there at times... sometimes all too often. No prize for lurking or the honey-do's.
TagMan
Is that the same lethal combination that's in my GTI?...
The 2.0 liter FSI... Turbocharged with DSG!!
TagMan
D'OH!
Oh, well. A couple of shiny cars and a neatly trimmed lawn are rewards enough in and of themselves...
What happened to Brightness? Maybe he's moving to the new waterfront home?
Back to the Pats/Cowboys thriller. Wow, Tom Brady and Randy Moss totally out of synch. This is a first this year...
'21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)
Not to mention the wife's appreciation!.... Well... actually.... sometimes there are no guarantees in life!
TagMan
I think you're still selling hybrids short. The LS600hL is disappointing, but that's about it for poorly implemented hybrids from Toyota/Lexus.
Here is what some Toyota, Lexus, and GM hybrids have done, 2008-EPA-method, combined mpg-wise, versus their ICE counterparts:
Prius 46mpg vs Corolla 29mpg (Corolla is smaller in both passenger and trunk volume), improvement of +59%
Camry Hybrid 34mpg vs 24 (I4), +42%
Highlander 2007 2WD 26 vs 19 (V6), +37%
Highlander 2008 4WD 26 vs 19 (V6), +37%
GS 23 vs 19 (V8), +21%
RX 2WD 26 vs 20, +30%
RX 4WD 26 vs 19, +37%
Yukon/Tahoe 2WD 21.5 vs 16, +34%
Yukon/Tahoe 4WD 20 vs 16, +25%
In comparison, some MB diesels:
E 26mpg vs 19, +37%
ML 21mpg vs 17, +24%
GL 20mpg vs 15, +33%
I haven't re-checked the 0-60 stats (which you or anyone else is welcome to do), but if memory serves, the diesels are all SLOWER to 60 than their ICE counterparts, whereas the hybrids are FASTER to 60 than their ICE counterparts.
So, if the hybrids (except for Prius) are "marketing angles on wheels", what does that make diesels?
I knew it, I knew it!
I don't see how diesels are comparable to hybrids, if you are agreeing to lose performance in direct proportion to the improved economy. It's a shell game, with a poor American heritage.
Plus, Americans love torque, but they buy HP.
That might be why Toyota has gone to such lengths to produce more powerful hybrids than their ICE counterparts, even though it may not be the best use of their technology.
The Kool-Aid taste better with more sugar in it.
DrFill
The only reason the Honda doesn't do quite as well overall is that when city driving, it rarely runs on full electric mode as does the Prius. That is due to it's IMA system, which is simpler but not as efficient or as independent of the engine.
Anyway, it is VERY close to the Prius in fuel economy, and it blows the Prius away in the appearance department both on the exterior and also the interior. The strange thing about the Prius interior is that the driver does not look straight ahead for vehicle feedback and information. It's kind of weird if you ask me. the Honda, on the other hand, has a really nice graphic interface that uses two tiers, both of which are in front of the driver where they belong.
IMO, it's ergonomically correct to look fowrward to find vehicle information, with exception of optional inforamtion such as radio or climate control which is typically found in the center stack. But to put all the vital information in the center is weird. It belongs in front of the driver... and that's what the Honda does very well.
Also, I remember sitting in them at the auto show, and when I checked out the rear headroom in the Prius my head was literally banging into the rear hatch, and I could not lean back all the way. The Prius had a tad more legroom than the Honda. The Honda had more headroom in the rear and was more comfortable overall.
So... I guess I've just made myself a little comparison here between the Honda Civic hybrid and the Prius hybrid.
My obvious preference based on the auto show is the Honda. And... I might add that I consider Honda to be the "greener" company of the two.
TagMan
My apologies, the list wasn't meant to be exhaustive, but rather just a list of the vehicles I'm somewhat familiar with.
Leaving the series of published comparisons between the two out of it, it's safe to say the Civic is no Prius. And sometimes that's a good thing!
Honda is on the righteous path, doh. They have my complete faith. :shades:
DrFill
Thank you Doc! I agree.
TM
Honda seems ready to resurrect the CRX name for a sub-$20k hybrid, and I think that's a great idea (Although remaking the CRX with a stick-shift and a 40MPG ICE engine is a better idea).
Hopefully, Toyota will produce a $19,995 Corolla Hybrid for 2010. I think they can sell 10k a month, given it performs as well as the ICE, and can be brought to market with at least 10 cubes of trunk space.
The Civic Hybrid loses perfromance compared to the the standard Civic, and I think that is what keeps sales down.
DrFill
If we exclude the Lexus side, than I agree for the most part. If we include Lexus, than I have to include the German carmakers.
I don't think the Civic hybrid sales are down, are they? I thought they were better than Honda had expected.
TagMan
Your right on with your comments(#7024) on the truck issue. I currently drive an Audi A3, and while i love this car, i'm seriously thinking of going back to a full size Chevy truck!?!?!
I can't find any SUV's that are in my price range that i like. The only thing upcoming thats looks interesting is the 09 Volvo XC60..but i don't know what price range this will fall into.Looks awesome if they don't change the looks of it when it comes time to make it.
donthegreek
Then get what works for you. Good luck.
DrFill
Your right on with your comments(#7024) on the truck issue.
Thank you Don. Interesting that you mentioned a Chevy truck. If I were to buy a full-sized truck at this point in time, it would also be a Chevy truck. Previously, I'd have said Ford F150 or F250. Of course, the Doc wants you to check out the Toyota, but I'd wager that you'd pick the Chevy over all the rest of them, as I would also.
As well as the truck consideration, I noticed your comment that you are searching for an SUV that suits your needs. I find this very interesting that so many folks now are just sort of frustrated with the SUV selection that is currently on the market. I get the impression that some of the manufacturers could hit a couple of home runs with some new entries, if they are:
- good-looking,
- well-equipped,
- good cargo / passenger layout
- reasonably priced,
- and get good gas mileage with adequate power.
That's the real combination that will win over buyers, IMO.
The Honda CR-V is the #1 selling SUV because it comes close to that combination, but it still doesn't hit the bullseye for many. The upcoming VW Tiguan had me very excited for a while, but then the official pictures came out and its appearance was diluted from the original concept... not nearly as exciting, and it looks a bit generic... still nice though. The diesel version could still prove to be a good choice, but we won't know what this machine will really look like until we can see it in person sometime around next Spring.
The '09 Volvo XC60 you mention has a more dramatic body style, but the final production car might be toned down a bit... hard to say. But, I strongly believe that the XC60 will end up retaining most of its concept appearance... which should please you, and then you will need to discover its price tag, and hope for something reasonable.
BTW, I notice you've been a member for over two years, yet you don't post very often, so I am glad that you took the time to reply to my post. I hope to hear from you again sometime.
TagMan
The 5.7L V8 will surprise you no doubt.
By the way, are you looking for a workman's truck or a daily commuter? Would you be frequently haul people with this truck or it'll be mostly you only? Any towing capacity requirement?
Silverado IMO is just too blue collar (of course nothing wrong with that, it's just not my cup of tea), if I am getting an American truck it'll no doubt be a GMC Sierra.
When I previously owned the GMC Denali XL, it was the premium choice between Chevy's version and GMC, without a doubt... and I put my money where my mouth is, and selected GMC.
But, there just isn't the same level of difference this model year, and the Chevy actually looks better this time around. So normally, I'd definately agree with you... but not this model year.
BTW, there was a time years ago when I'd have said the American truck to buy is the Ford F-Series, but no more.
TagMan
'21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)
Absolutely true. Showing off one's eco-credentials, instead of one's wealth.
Wagon SUV/crossovers and hatchback cars are the most functional of all hybrids especially if you need cargo space.
Eco-green badge hunting is not necessarily the whole story for the Prius as Eco-wealth badge hunting is not the only reason why people buy exciting performance or comfortable luxury cars.
Every single Three Box hybrid has pathetic trunk space. Compared to these sedans a Prius looks quite compelling IMO.
Not sure how long it would take to amortize the additonal cost of a Prius vs. one of the ICE mileage champs... But, hey, any kindeness to Mother Earth is apprecitated. Be it the electric or diesel kindness.
'21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)
Not saying it is the whole story, but it is a contributor to the car's success, inluding its success relative to other hybrids.
TM
You may remember that despite a promise back in January of 2006 that its E320 BLUETEC would meet emissions standards in all 50 states, Mercedes-Benz announced eight months later that its new diesel sedan wouldn't be sold in California and the contingent of states that have adopted its stricter emissions standard. Mercedes went back and tweaked the BLUETEC design and today marks the first day that the E320 BLUETEC sedan goes on sale in California. It's the first diesel powered model that meets California's strict emissions standards and certainly won't be the last. Mercedes-Benz is offering the car only as a lease vehicle for 2 years/24,000 miles for roughly $600 per month.
Merc chose to lease the car because only about 100 units will be available. This will be expanded next year along with the rest of the diesel lineup when the M, R and GL Bluetec diesels arrive in August. By January next year the E320 Bluetec will be available in all of the other states that have adopted California's stricter emissions standards. These include New York, Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut and Pennsylvania.
The E-class is expected to go in for a redesign for the 2010 model year and will also be offered with a Bluetec diesel option when it arrives in mid-2009. Click here to view several spy shots of the next E-class including a couple of its interior.
link title
And that's EXACTLY why I don't think it makes the better choice this year. ELEGANT just doesn't always go hand-in-hand with a truck. For some it does, of course. But for me, I like the cleaner more purposeful lines of the Chevy Silverado this year, and I'm NOT talking about the "classic" version that they also offer, which I do not like... I'm referring to the all-new appearance.
Anyway, to put this in perspective, I was originally responding to donthegreek's post and his reference to the Chevy truck, so other than that, I don't think you and I really need to post more about which is the better-looking truck.
TagMan
So... we all got sidetracked a bit back then. But, I knew about this in advance and shared it with all of you. A good contact at the Mercedes dealership had told me about it. It's GREAT news! I think I won a bet with brightness! He owes me his house now.
Anyway, I've still got the bug for the upcoming GLK diesel. It's the vehicle and diesel I think I want. Until it shows, I can not be certain. Assuming I do like it, I will likely trade-in the GTI for the GLK diesel when it becomes available.
TagMan
Gee, now there's an upscale pair of brands.