As I understand it, the NAH's hybrid transmission is actually made for Nissan by Toyota (or at least is identical to the TCH's). Nissan's ICE is, however, not the same as the TCH's ICE. Apart from its slightly larger displacement, the Altima's ICE is not an Atkinson/Miller-cycle engine, and thus does not have the efficiency advantage of that design. Nissan also does not have Toyota's ten years' worth of hybrid experience, and this probably is reflected in their hybrid programming. I'd expect these to be factors that might also be responsible for any lower FE performance in the NAH.

Stan

 

The Camry Hybrid is a GREAT car. We would have bought it, but Toyota installed an ionizing air purifier in it... and there isn't a way to take it out or turn it off. My husband has severe asthma... and for us the device makes the Camry hybrid an absolute NO go.

We really wanted to get the Camry hybrid... and we were very surprised to find how much we love the Altima hybrid. It wasn't our first choice at the time, but we've been very happy with it.

 

Are you sure about that? Can you give a source?

 

If that's true (and I'm not sure that it is - the Altima's ICE is definitely tuned differently than the same engine in the base Altima model), that still doesn't explain why the gap has been widening over time. I still think the shorter database history and smaller sample size has a something to do with it.

That said, I agree with you that we should expect the NAH to have somewhat lower overall mileage than the TCH. The larger engine alone should ensure that.

 

There are so many reasons.

First, there are more folks who own the Camry and therefor more folks exaggerating their MPG. I'm not saying they are lying, but I believe that anyone getting over 40 MPG, in ether car, is doing so with serious hyper-techniques that most folks don't or can't do. The Camry is NOT a Prius and anyone claiming better MPG then the Prius is not driving normally.

Second, the NAH is only sold in the Northeast where is is bitter cold and has terrible traffic or California where it gets very hot and also has horrible traffic. Where are all the results from southern or mid-west drivers where traffic is more normal and driving conditions are much better? They are driving Camrys.

Third, the ICE is different but this is not a bad point on the NAH. Many folks believe Nissan's 2.5 engine compares very well fuel wise to the standard Camry. The NAH uses the same engine but as far as I know it HAS been retuned to the Atkinson cycle. This is why it only has 158 horsepower while the regular 2.5 has 175. That combined with the 40 HP electric motor gives the NAH it's biggest advantage over the Camry, 198 HP with almost no difference in MPG in federal testing.

Finally, the Camry does have the ECO button which the NAH does not have. I am still not sure what this does, but from what I gather it cuts power to the AC/Heat and only cycles them very low. The NAH has built-in cycling but is probably a compromise. I have been told that the Camry's MPG is not that great at all without the ECO button on.

If you get over 34 MPG, you are doing fine, but I can't wait for spring to come back.

 

I hadn't thought of the geographical skew, but you're right. That probably makes the seasonal differences more extreme. That effect should average out over the course of a year, since the northern folks won't need AC as much in summer (the traffic congestion, however, won't get any better).

 

I, just like you, live in NJ. Remember that the "city" FE for the TCH is higher than the "highway" FE so those in traffic congested areas would definitely get better FE in a TCH than a NAH.

The ECO button does help. Getting over 40mpg in my (I'm starting to believe that some people might have a defective TCH) TCH DOES NOT require "serious hypermiling techniques." It might (notice how I said "might" because I haven't driven the NAH) be required in the NAH. I've gotten several 700mile tanks using less than 16 gallons in the summer. Winter tanks are usually around 600miles with less than 16 gallons of gas.

I own a TCH and regularly get over 38 mpg if I don't drive like a maniac (NJ to Boston in 3hrs ).

I have a daily commute of 84 miles.


I've taken and posted several pictures. The only thing left for me to do is to record my commute and post it on youtube. I didn't take a picture of it, but today (did you see all that snow?) I got over 40mpg (as per the display) when I got home from work.


I love the way the NAH looks. As a matter of fact, if it was out at the same time as the TCH, I would have gotten a NAH simply based on the looks. I'm a young guy, so I could care less about the 2mpg difference.

 

Actually, I do believe those numbers are possible, without serious hyper-miling. All it requires is a driving pattern that plays to the car's strengths. I know (from repeated tests) that I can get a sustained 45MPG out of my Altima - I just can't do it with my own real-world commute (which is much too short for good mileage). If my daily commute were 30 miles (and I avoided highways), I would probably be getting 40+ MPG even in winter.

Of course, if I were driving a Prius under those conditions, I'd probably be getting 50+.

 

JTirak — Offhand I'm afraid that I cannot remember where I read that the Altima's ICE was not an "Atkinson"-cycle engine. It's also possible that I may be recalling this incorrectly. Perhaps a NAH owner could check the NAH's brochure to see if it says that the ICE is an "Atkinson." If it doesn't say this, then it almost certainly isn't.

Stan

 

yup, i have read that somewhere b4 too that is not Atkinson-Cycle Engine