Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
So I briefly reviewed all the other options for a new four-door sedan meeting my criteria (very quiet ride, comfortable for a 5'4" woman, reliable, loaded with safety features, traction control, 4-cylinder, preferably a Japanese manufacturer, preferably a hybrid but good mileage alone might be OK). I re-reviewed the Corrolla, HA, HAH, Mazdas, and Altima which meet some criteria, and VERY briefly looked at Lexus and Acura just long enough to get sticker shock again. I briefly wondered if I should have just gotten an '06 TC but that's a moot issue now. I came full circle back to '07 TCH 4-cyl.
Not to mention that they are only issuing 75000 of the decals, so the HOV deal will run out this year, probably before summer.
The rational side:
- I only considered cars w/ high reliability track records
- mid-size sedan meets my personal transportation needs better than smaller car; also safety needs (larger car size)
- I want a car with decent fuel efficiency, loosely defined by me as "more fuel efficient than most cars on the road" but not exactly data-based.
- I prefer a more comfortable ride than good road feedback.
- I prefer the feel of the Japanese cars I have driven to the feel of German (Jetta, Passat), Volvo, Saab, & various American cars [I travel and rent cars a lot and try for variety]. I have never driven a Hundai or Kia.
- I have a tendency to drive too fast and need a car that doesn't enable that by making it utterly delightful
The emotional side:
- A "luxury" car (e.g. Acura, Lexus, Infiniti) seems excessive for my personal values.
- On the other hand, I want my creature comforts for my sore back; I like a spacious seat and decent right armrest (like the sliding one on the XLE), so I don't want a smaller or too-spartan car.
- I prefer to fit in rather than stand out
- I have some identity caught up in the car I drive, and Camry says to me "a choice no one would question", "practical", "good financial choices" which seem like acceptable projections at this point in my life [my sports car days are over]
- the TC seems to represent a good balance for me between "cheap" / "self-denial" and "self-indulgent"
- I cannot bring myself to buy an American car
- I just plain want a hybrid - it fits my values as an environmental scientist and also as a soul who wants to leave a better planet for our children. This is not a decision based on cost.
- I REALLY like the fact that Toyota made a 4-cylinder Hybrid aimed at greater FE as opposed to Hondas approach to create a higher powered car using hybrid technology and also to only offer it in a 6-cyl. (The Prius is too weird looking for me and the ride is not as quiet or comfortable as the TC.)
- I like the fact that Toyota is doing what Detroit isn't: increasing fuel efficiency ahead of the regulators and expanding the number of FE car options, and I want to reward that with my business.
- I just plain want a new car even though I know it loses $3K the minute you drive off the lot. I've been driving a '93 TC 4-cyl LE for 14 years now.
- I like cars that stick with a generation/style for a few years rather than constant tinkering (e.g. Altima, RAV)
So....I haven't captured it all but these are some of my personal reasons for wanting a TCH.
Please be kind.
Very very nicely done.
Brilliant! That's exactly why anyone should buy a hybrid. Anyone who gets into the cost factor by analyzing and overanalyzing the money saved on gasoline is a fool, in my opinion.
I think that was a very smart move on the part of Toyota. Why would anyone treat a post like yours unkindly? It was well thought out and a meaningful insight into the mind of an environmentalist. I would even consider a TCH other than the hybrid hoopla that keeps the prices too high.
That doesn't bode well with me. Has Toyota given up on six cylinder engines? Besides, why didn't Toyota use I-4 in Highlander and RX hybrids? What is wrong with getting better fuel economy regardless of the engine choice?
Having a very narrow perspective of hybrid technology has been the issue all along, largely from naysayers. But here it comes from the other side of the spectrum!
I dont believe that they have given up on them at all; e.g. the new Lexus. It is a matter of finding buyers for them though. The Toyota brand is not a power-searching one, the Lexus brand is. The 400h is well placed and should sell regularly.
The HH should be mated to the 2.4L IMO. It would sell much better. The buyers next year should have two V6 choices, the 3.5L 268 hp ICE and the 2.4L 192 hp HSD. Why wasn't the HH linked to the 2.4L from the start? The Lexus model was the point of this 'hybrid' step that is to show that linked with a V6 a hybrid would give phenomenal FE for a 'V8 equivalent' SUV. This was always Lexus' play. The HH was a tagalong, since they are essentially the same vehicle. It also increased volume and reduced costs on that line. It also allowed Toyota to gauge the reaction in two different buying segments. I think the market has spoken - correctly.
The only caveat is that it is much more efficient ( less costly ) from a production point of view to make both the 'Yota and Lexus vehicles the same.
Next Highlander iteration is 6 years... a diesel or diesel/hybrid.
Nothing wrong with it. Just seems to be reaching the point of diminishing returns. The car makers seem to be able to squeeze more HP from their engines. They just are not getting much better mileage. Why does a family sedan need a V6 with 250+ HP? My 3 ton Suburban only had 235 HP. Which was enough to haul 8 people and tow a decent sized trailer.
We can discuss and argue here. However in trying to sell a vehicle to a potential customer one should never argue - ever. If the customer wants/demands a V6 then that's what he will buy.
Ditto SUV's, trucks, used vehicles, etc. A large manufacturer has to make as many options available as possible.
Now give a potential buyer choices and that's a winning formula.
268 hp ICE 27 mpg combined
192 hp HSD 38 mpg combined
158 hp ICE 29 mpg combined
110 hp HSD 48 mpg combined
The choices are all yours.
The question that you raise, which is a valid one I think, is why Toyota didn't focus even more on fuel economy with its hybrid option, like getting the performance of a regular 4 cylinder out of an engine that would provide the fuel economy of say a 2 cylinder, if such a thing existed. My guess is that Toyota realized that they already have the "green niche" (those who value the environment and/or fuel economy above all else) pretty well covered with the hugely successful Prius, which itself can be purchased all the way from quite basic to pretty well loaded with NAV, leather, etc. The traditional Camry buyer, who does the math and pays closer attention to the value/cost equation (practical) isn't going to pay the going extra premium now to add the hybrid technology unless there is more of a tangible benefit, above and beyond what they would get with the cheaper 4 cylinder model. This added benefit which can be immediately felt and appreciated comes in the way of added performance while still being able to achieve even better fuel economy than the regular 4 cylindar. I think this will attract a much wider potential audience to the hybrid than if they had just focused on fuel economy alone. If anything the knock on the Camry from many is that the car has been a little boring, or at least didn't provide much in the way of driving excitement for those who want something a little more rewarding to drive, and if they had made the Camry Hybrid so that it put out say only 120 HP it certainly wouldn't have helped on that score, even it would have gotten 55-60 mpg, which may not have been possible anyway given the car's size and weight. But being able to achieve 40+ mpg while still delivering 190+HP is pretty exciting in a vehicle of this class. At least it's gotten my attention more than it would have if it was designed as just a larger, sedan-styled version of the Prius.
My 2 cents!
I much prefer an I4 to a V6. Why? Ease of maintenace and cost of maintenance . . . an I4 is much easier to work on than a V6 any day, thus labor costs for routine service items on a V6 are always more expensive. Toyota's I4 is plenty smooth and powerful enough for me.
Has the EPA put their stamp on that 38 MPG combined yet? It is hard to imagine that the TCH will best the 4C by much out on the highway.
IMO 36-38 mpg is realistic to consider, possibly slightly higher, as always YMMV.
In general it's pretty consistent with all the HSD vehicles. As compared to a similarly-sized ICE vehicle,
the HSD vehicle offers ~50% better FE in the city as does the ICE;
the HSD vehicle offers ~20% better FE on the Hwy than does the ICE;
The HSD vehicle offers ~30% better FE overall than it's ICE sibling.
Actually because my driving demands are unique it's the small Hwy differential in FE that pushed me toward the Prius last year rather than wait for the TCH this year. I am very very satisfied with the 'normal' 4c performance of the Prius and 46-48 mpg rather than opt for the V6 performance of the TCH and get only 36-38 mpg....for the same price or less. And I love Camry's, especially this one - the best ever.
Was that on the non hybrid Camry?
I suspect because the heavy weight of the HH would have put fuel economy into the dump with that setup. Don't believe for a second that Toyota didn't think about trying out the I4, and probably actually produced a prototype of that version. There is only so much you can do with 2.1 tons of metal with a very large, not-so-aerodynamic cross section...
OTOH that makes the TCH an no-brainer-purchase because they just shrunk the difference between the ICE and the TCH by about $1800.
The ICE 4c Highlander now is rated at:
22 mpg City
27 mpg Hwy
A hybrid 2.4L 4c would likely be rated at:
36-38 mpg City
30-32 mpg Hwy
If no TCH's have been built...has the press corps. been test driving imaginary vehicles?....did the EPA certify the TCH based on faith....are the photo's of the TCH not real?...they are very convincing!
Now add the extra weight for the battery pack, and the fact that the batteries would quickly deplete because the I4 ICE is using the less powerful Atkinson cycle.
That's a whiner.
Battery depletion? Youre kidding right? Is it your impression that the battery is used up and then the ICE takes over and powers the vehicle while hauling around a dead battery pack?
Yes the 4c ICE in the Hybrid would be less powerful by some factor ( I believe it's 140+ hp vs 158 hp in the TCH ) but the HSD has the constant presence of the ~50 hp electric motor in addition to the ICE. How could you consider that the combined 192 hp would be less powerful than the 150+ hp in the current model?
There's far more torque at start up, or when passing, while the 140 hp is far more than needed when cruising at highway speeds.
Even considering the added 400# of weight in the hybrid version, the weight/HP ratio is >10% better in the hybrid.
I have no idea where you get your impressions/info.
Just today he was under the impression that the IMA ("assist") system had 2 motors, so I too would like to know.
There's quite a bit of incorrect information on the web. So odds are, we'll never know. Passing from one message to the next introduces the opportunity for detail mix ups too.
Whatever the case, "full" hybrid owners are well aware of the fact that the ICE doesn't take over. It contributes routinely, so battery depletion never really happens. After 110,000 miles of driving a Prius, I still don't have any idea what low means. There's always an ample supply of electricity available, even after 2 miles of stealth.
JOHN
I don't know where all that came from, but IMA has been demonstrated with two (2002 RDX, 2003 Euro Accord Muscle-tec) and three (2001 Dualnote) electric motors. Of course, in production, only one motor is being used (not counting a separate ac compressor motor in Accord hybrid and Civic hybrid).
John:
Motor 1: ICE.
Motor 2: Electric motor.
In my math, that is two motors.
Were you somehow thinking I meant two electric motors?
I have no idea where you get your impressions/info."
My "impressions" come from Toyota's decision not to put the I4 option in the HH. I have to suspect that they would have preferred to put in the I4 (like the Camry), but did not for a reason. Heavier weight and poorer aerodynamics for a larger vehicle mean that the electric motor would be called upon more frequently to provide power, making it more probable that the battery would deplete. I suspect (note the word, not "know", but "suspect") that HSD and the currently available traction battery/electric motor combination did not support the I4 HH.
Comparisons of the Prius battery seldom depleting are meaningless, since it is smaller, lighter, and more aerodynamic.
They were already making V6+HSD's for Lexus so a few thousand extra Toyota vehicles per month helps reduced fixed costs and keep production smooth. Now that the HH has hit the market IMO they have seen that it's too pricey for Toyota budgets.
Now next year when the Highlander is redone and it gets bigger and heavier and gets the 3.5L 268 HP high performance ICE as the 'base' engine it makes perfect sense to drop the 4c ICE ( now called the RAV4 ) in favor of a high efficiency 'V6' - the 2.4L +HSD.
You can't deplete the traction battery in the HSD system unless the ICE is shut off. As long as the ICE is running the NiMH battery will always be kept in a narrow SOC. In fact in most cases the more you drive the higher becomes the charge on the battery.
Education would go a long way. I'm a Camry owner since 1989. It was an automatic 4cyl wagon and one of the most dependable vehicles I owned. In the 80s Toyota gained marketshare by building smarter. People wanted economy my car got 30 highway easily with a 4 spd overdrive. I forget the exact hp, but it was something like 105-115. I didn't fear for my life entering the highway because it had a button to change the shift-points. I could drag out the lower gears a bit longer for acceleration.
When it came time to purchase a new car in Aug2001, I checked the 2001 Camry and was pleased. After driving the 2002 Camry on the lot, there was NO turning back! Increased interior space and the 4cyl got a nice boast in hp for that redesign. Today I'm getting 31 highway despite the increase in size and weight. You can say that all the manufacturers have squeezed out more performance out of their engines, but FE is lost on our driving habits.
During the purchasing period of my 2002Camry, I got input from alot of people and they all had that V6 mentality that I just didn't get. I was mocked by the new Nissan Maxima drivers. I was even balked at by the 60yr old (pre2002 design) Camry drivers. Maybe my age group or maybe society in general just didn't care with the stock market bull in the 90s. The consumers just couldn't resist the urge to indiscrimiately upgrade which brings us to the current SUV era. If I buy a TCH, it will cost twice the price of my 1989 Camry Wagon. I'm amazed how casually people handle debt. With gas prices in great fluctuation, increasing health costs, and poor news on many retirement funds ... I can't justify a V6. For the sake of the environment, I hope increased FE (of the ICE), smarter designs (marriage of engine & transmission), and smarter driving rules the next few years. I'll be closely watching the unveiling of the TCH.
Unfortunately, this statement is not correct. There have been cases where the HSD has run out of electricity, mostly in cases where there is all uphill for a long stretch (like approaching the continental divide). Normally, mountain driving is no problem because the battery will recharge on the "downhill" side.
You are correct about the traction battery being kept between 20 and 80% charge - this is precisely why the car can stop using electric boost. If the traction battery is depeleted, the vehicle stops using the electric motor in order to route all available electricity to the battery.
It is a rare situation, but one which has been described in these forums.
I too heard about it too in going west from Denver.
NO H 4 Me,
MidCow
Now that I think about it, I guess maybe I'm skewed!
My cars have been: Oldmobile 442, Alpha Romeo Alfetta GT, Datsun 280 ZX Turbo, Taurus SHO, Honda CRX SI, Taurus SHO, Acura Integra GSR, BMW M3, Lexus IS300, Honda Accord EX V6, Honda S2000 - ALL MANUAL SHIFT
Shiftng :shades: ,
MidCow
Did you one say that the Prius didn't have Gears ? I beleive that was incorrect information. The power trasport systme actually does use gears , so even experts like you ocassionally get the facts wrong also!
"Full Hybrid" : means twp powers sources either of which can power the vehicle alone or in combinmtation with the other.
Toyota's HSD has always been full hybrid, The earlier Honda IMA systems were not full hybrid because the electric motor/battery was only an assist to the ICE. The newer Honda Civic hybrid is a "full hybrid" becuase the Electric motor can independently power the car.
No H 4 me,
MidCow
Technically, yes, but in practice it resembles an IMA car much more closely than a "full hybrid".
I said what I meant. I was wondering if anyone would pick up on it...
A lot of people have made this statement. Of course the HSD is centered around a planetary gearset. I think what they meant was that it doesn't have a conventional geared transmission.
Many people also claim the HSD has no transmission for the same reason. However, I think a transmission should be defined as the mechanism by which the engine power is transferred to the wheels. Let's hope the Prius has one of those!
I have to agree; the IMA cannot power the car from zero speed; the electric-only mode is used at cruising speeds only, in special circumstances.
It IS using IMA, and this version of IMA is capable of propeling the vehicle in electric only mode. Of course, Honda's choice to go with smaller electric motor and smaller battery pack puts a restriction on how often and how long that operation can continue. But, it is a trade off, like in any design, going for a simpler, lighter and less expensive package. In the end, however, results are all that should be counted. The rest is theory, and opinion.
The battery will not "depleted" but no longer aid even needed. True, you are running by the gas engine only while the battery will be charged to certain pecentage, than the Synergy system will activate it for exessive torque needed.