Tomorrow's 56.2-mpg technology showcased today in Toyota Highlander Hybrid

Source:

Tomorrow's 56.2-mpg technology showcased today in Toyota Highlander Hybrid

 

Mine was just under $36k in the USA, before tax. Based on the numbers at fueleconomy.gov, it was about a 5 year break even compared to a similarly equipped base Highlander V6 AWD with the tech package. That model is about $5k less. Of course, with a 4-cylinder base Highlander that is much less expensive and has better fuel economy, I would never break even. Of course, I'd still be cutting the use of foreign oil and emissions from day one.

 

Still, the AWD Escalade hybrid gets 20/23, or 21 mpg overall according to fueleconomy.gov. Compare to the AWD Escalade that is 13/19 or 15 mpg overall. A 6 mpg improvement doesn't sound like much, but it's actually a considerable gas savings because it's like a 40% improvement. Yeah, most people that buy one don't actually need anything an Escalade offers and could probably be in a smaller SUV or even a Prius, but comparing apples to apples, the hybrid is a big improvement.

What is really needed is more small or midsize 3-row SUVs or minivans with a hybrid option. I'm getting 32mpg around town on my current tank with only moderately conservative driving. Someone could do much better with a smaller SUV or minivan that is optimized for fuel economy.

 

Good point, I forgot the CAFE method was completely unrealistic in absolute terms.

 

Well that's just it. If you can get rid of tanks, or get everyone to drive a Prius, that's an amazing accomplishment. In the meantime, a tank that gets twice the mpg means the fleet uses half as much gas. Still impressive if there's going to be a tank fleet anyway. In terms of the Escalade, logic suggests that a lot of gallons of gas could be saved on each Escalade replaced with an Escalade hybrid, much as the article says about a Highlander replaced with a Highlander Hybrid vs. a Corolla replaced with a Prius. It's the logic of diminishing returns.

Well, according to the source of the article, anyway, the FEH isn't really much more efficient than the Highlander Hybrid. In fact, overall, they claim it is slightly less fuel efficient, at least for the models they tested...

 

That may well be true and that's why it's not trivial. As for sales, that's because for the past few months, there has been virtually no new supply of Highlander Hybrids due to issues in Japan. Prior to that, the Highlander Hybrid didn't sell well, but well more than the GM trio combined. This is a good resource for hybrid sales: Hybrid Market Dashboard | Hybrid Cars . I didn't bring up the Escalade, but I do think that there is a huge potential for realizing gas consumption decreases by improving light truck fuel efficiency (including small/mid/large SUVs) in general.

Not sure about the last few years, but for the past couple decades, light trucks as a segment made up around half of passenger vehicle sales.

Well, needs vary, of course. If you have 3 (or more) kids that sit quietly and happily for a long trip in the back of a Prius, great. If not, that third row is very useful. Minivans are still popular, though no hybrid or diesel has entered the market, yet. Like I said before, if you can get people to switch from a large SUV to a small car, that's amazing. If not, getting them to switch to a more fuel efficient SUV, truck or minivan can still cut gas consumption significantly.

Right, a difference of 1 mpg. Not much more efficient, as I said. I referred to the source of the original article, whose testing compared the Escape Hybrid, 26 mpg overall, to the Highlander Hybrid, 27 mpg overall. Also, not much of a difference. Kind of surprising considering the Highlander is bigger, heavier and has an extra row of seating, much more power and more towing capability.

I don't see what you'd really gain in efficiency comparing the FEH to the HiHy. On the other hand, going from a 13mpg Escalade SUV to a 21 mpg Escalade Hybrid SUV saves about 350 gallons of gas a year, at 12k miles driven. Going from a 25 mpg car to a 50 mpg car saves about 240 gallons. That's the effect of diminishing returns.

 

Exactly, big pickups are the prime example of light trucks that could make huge reductions in gas consumption by getting a 40% boost like the big GM SUVs. Extend that to popular sellers such as midsize SUVs and minivans and you have a potential savings of as much or potentially more gas as moving small and midsize car buyers to hybrid cars.

Lots of SUVs and minivans have 3 rows of seating. Highlander, Pilot, Flex, Traverse/Enclave/Acadia trio, CX-9, Sienna, Odyssey, Grand Caravan, Town & Country, Durango, Explorer, etc, etc. Almost all large SUVs have a third row. Even a few small SUVs like Rav 4 and Sorrento have optional 3rd rows. Getting a 40% boost in fuel economy would be considerable savings in gas consumption for light trucks in general. Whether people would buy them or not is an entirely different matter. For example, the vast majority of people buy non-hybrid cars over the Prius and other hybrids.

I still think the point about consumption is quite valid. Even 40% fuel economy increases by going hybrid in a full size or midsize SUV has the potential for even greater reductions in gas consumption than moving people from small and midsize cars to models that could double their fuel economy.

Whether people would buy them or not is most likely dependent only on gas prices. If we paid what people in Europe pay for gas, you'd see very few large passenger vehicles (like full size pickups, SUVs or minivans) on the road at all, just as is typically the case in major European cities. With cheap gas like we have here and a government that seems to prefer even cheaper gas, the trend away from light trucks isn't a guarantee, at least in the short term.

 

If only it wasn't just a very small minority of the general public that shared this sentiment strongly enough to act upon it, then there would be little discussion about this article!