Umm...get a grip.

Hybrid technology is remarkably versatile, and using it for performance in a vehicle like the GS will yield high profit margins that Toyota can use to (you guessed it!) research and develop a better and even more efficient hybrid system.

This is the first example I've encountered of a stereotypical, judgemental hybrid owner.

"Ugh."

 

I was just pointing out that a hybrid passenger car with MPG that poor shouldn't be expecting a medal for environmentalism (it's a stretch to consider this a green vehicle, it's more like a regular guzzler with more power than would have been possible without the hybrid system). I am legitimately frustrated by the current trend to use hybrid technology as a turbo boost instead of an economy boost, and I am as entitled to that opinion as you are to yours. I wasn't judging anyone, and to prove it my post wasn't personal and yours was. So think again about who is being judgemental.

 

I reread my post and it was out of line. Sorry .

I'll reiterate, however, that its important to vary the application of hybrids in order for the technology to gain a wide breadth of acceptance among all segments of the population. Only then can it properly disperse itself throughout all vehicles and really be more than just a niche.

I guess I feel like your first post was sort of biting one of the hands that will play a huge role in the further proliferation of hybrid technology.

Toyota is a company that truly cares about the state of the environment, and even though the 450h won't out-MPG any Prius or HCH, its dramatically reduced emissions must be lauded as a positive step forward. The company that has exploited hybrids purely for PR is General Motors, who uses the Silverado/Sierra Hybrids to portray a green image.

But anyhow, sorry to have been snippy, but I stand by Toyota in their attempts to diversify the application of hybrids throughout their lineup.

 

 

It all goes to show how easy it is to get pretty intense over issues we all care about.


I understand your POV that all hybrid advancements are good in general, though what I fear is that the trend mentioned will simply proliferate our addiction to power rather than foster a culture that is willing to sacrifice a little immediate gratification for the greater good. As americans we make pretty selfish decisions on these matters in general, so I cringe to see hybrid technology worsen that problem when I would prefer to see it mitigated.

 

I think this article in Popular Mechanics puts the argument in better perspective regarding what Toyota can do with hybrid technology when it is directly compared with the same vehicle using gasoline only.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/auto...tml?page=1&c=y

Here is a snippet of what they said:

"More importantly, between the heavy-duty work trucks and the zippy little sedans lies a big part of the current car market, represented by vehicles such as the Toyota Highlander. Of the 68,717 Highlanders sold from June through November 2005, 15,756, or 23 percent, were hybrids. To many critics, that will seem like a lost opportunity--if only these people were buying the Prius instead. But to us, it's promising news.

Ironically, our tests revealed that the strongest benefits of hybrid technology may be found in just such bigger, heavier vehicles. After all, it's hard to squeeze much of a fuel-economy gain out of an already fuel-efficient compact car like the Honda Civic. But give a 4000-pound SUV like the Highlander a healthy electric boost every time it accelerates and the fuel savings can be dramatic. Just look at the data: Buy the Highlander and you get SUV room and performance with a midsize sedan's fuel economy. That's good news--for individual wallets as well as the world's energy outlook."

and this in summary:

"Toyota Highlander Hybrid Limited
Like its Lexus counterpart, RX 400h, the Highlander Hybrid was created to offer both improved fuel economy and performance. It worked: Our front-drive Highlander Hybrid Limited was more fun to drive, handled better and had appreciably better fuel economy than the gas version. Anyone who thinks hybrids are all hype should drive this SUV. It has enough oomph to chirp the front tires and hustle this hybrid to 60 mph almost a second more quickly than its gas-only counterpart. Unlike Honda's, Toyota's hybrid system adds considerable weight to the package: 360 pounds. But you never know the weight is there. In fact, our Highlander Hybrid posted better handling numbers than the regular one. That big electric motor acts like an instant-on turbo when you want to pass. Best of all, the Highlander averaged almost 29 mpg--better than many midsize sedans--and it used about half as much fuel in our city loop as its gas-powered sister. In our book, spending the extra $4500 is worth it."

 

This is a better article than most on the topic. They do a pretty good job of highlighting the main issues. However they still fall victim to the "economical payback" argument. Look at this tired old question:

"There's no denying that hybrids use less fuel than similar, gas-only vehicles, but are the fuel savings enough to make it a good financial move to buy one?"

When has popular mechanics, or any other such media source ever asked a question like this about ANY other upgrade? Consider this question:

"There's no denying that turbocharged, supercharged, or v8-upgraded vehicles get accelerate faster than their traditional counterparts, but is the time savings enough to make it a good financial move to buy one?"

Nope, I have never seen ANY media outlet, magazine, car show, etc ask a question like this about any other upgrade, including many that cost much more than a hybrid system. It proves that they just don't get it. There's more to hybrids than money savings and they can't be judged on that criteria alone, especially whan no other car upgrade is judged by that criteria ever.

As for the particular example of the Toyota Highlander:
That's great, and its nice to have that comparison from a reputable source, but imagine what kind of mileage it would get if it didn't have a power upgrade over the regular Highlander. Why must every vehicle continually come out with more and more power in each version? Evidentally at one point they thought the highlander had the right amount of power or they wouldn't have released it originally. So when they convert to hybrid, why the power boost too?

They claim 29mpg which seems pretty high compared to other numbers I have heard. The database shows 25/26, still more than 10% behind the Escape, which I would buy if I could stomach spending money on a Ford.

In any case 25-29 is pretty good mileage for an SUV - beats some of my Forester tanks - but it's still not a true economy SUV, which is what I would really like to see and I would buy in a heartbeat. I don't need extra power so I am still waiting for my model to come out. I want better than just "better MPG than it would get with a turbocharger or V8", I want truly the best MPG they can get with the power it actually needs (not the power people think they need). Yeah they think americans demand power, but the sales data and waiting lists for the HCH and prius disprove that every day. We don't have a real economy SUV yet so we don't know how it would sell, but I sure hope somebody gives us a chance to prove that we'd buy it if they made it.

On that note, where's the CRV hybrid they were promising anyway, wasn't that supposed to come out in 2006?

 

There is no doubt that there is a wide chasm between a real need and what most people actually buy. If people purchased the most basic form of motor vehicle that provided them with reasonable transportation, a large majority of us would or should be driving something along the lines of a Honda Fit/Toyota Yaris/Scion xB.

Instead, we have manufacturers like Ford spending their dollars and development efforts on vehicles like the Mustang, Shelby GT500, and the Ford GT. GM is reintroducing the Camaro for 2008, and builds the Escalade and Hummer. DaimlerChrysler has the Viper and the SRT family of gas hogs.

None of these vehicles are very practical for most of their owners. At least when Toyota/Lexus makes a new vehicle with a performance focus, they make it a Hybrid, to showcase the technology and to provide a substantial improvement in fuel economy and emissions over comparable vehicles.

Forward progress in the FE/emissions area will not happen across the board until the economic incentive is there is a meaningful and sustainable way. Right now the manufacturers are starting to get the message that high priced gasoline is here to stay and that they better get their product mix adjusted to the realities of the 21st century.

Is a 339hp Hybrid a good idea? That remains to be seen, but I sure think it is a better idea than the reintroduction of the Camaro.

I will propose that a 339hp hybrid is a step in the right direction. A much better step than what the big three American manufacturers seem to be capable of right now.

 

I bought the GS 450H and its not great on mileage; in the city 22, 28 on the highway, contrary to the EPA ratings. Maybe I drive it wrong...but anyway, at 22 mpg, it's still 20% than the non-hybrid version and it does reduce emissions. Your comparison to the BMW is appropriate.

So, I know other front wheel models with moderate engines get much better mileage, but I feel like I am doing my part.

 

As a 450H owner, I have to disagree with your point. I get 20% better mileage than the non-hybrid and produce less emissions in the process. Maybe I am not getting 50 mpg like a Prius, but if everyone bought a vehicle with 20% improvement, we'd be in a lot better place. I would have liked Lexus to make the GS a little more productive in mileage, but I am encouraged that the sedan is out, and options are available via the Toyota/Lexus line from top (GS and RX) to SUV to small sedan (Prius).