Hybrid SUVs are actually a bad thing.

I also feel that hybrid technology should not be retained exclusively for use by smaller cars. I get the impression that the objections to SUVs having hybrid engines are actually objections to SUVs in general. Consider a more extreme case; would it be wrong for someone to manufacture a hybrid bus (BTW, GM already has) or a hybrid tractor-trailer? If they burn less fuel and have lower emissions, then who could possibly object to that? Another thing to consider is that most people who are in the market for an SUV are not likely going to change their mind because of guilt about fuel consumption. So, if they are going to buy an SUV anyway, why not one that consumes a little less fuel, and produces fewer emissions?

Having said that, I'm also not a big fan of SUVs either. However, it's not so much the vehicles as it is the drivers. Most of the SUVs around here are driven by aggressive drivers who are trying to intimidate those around them. I don't fault the SUVs though, there is definitely a market and a need for that type of vehicle. My current car is a Subaru station wagon and I really love the AWD, not only in snow, but on wet roads as well. However, it can't carry enough stuff for a family vacation, and the tow hitch is only good for my bike rack. If I had a larger family or needed to be able to tow something, then I'd probably own an SUV.

For those of you who do not think kindly of SUVs, and feel that everyone could be perfectly happy with a compact car, here's something to consider. What do you think the bicyclist commuter thinks of you as you whiz past them in your compact car?

 

If there is a net energy savings by using hybrid technology in any vehicle, how can it be inefficient?

Do you believe there no legitimate use for the SUV class of vehicle?

 

I hope that hybrid SUV's ARE marketed throughout the prospective buyer range. If everyone purchased hybrids, be it cars, trucks, vans, or SUV's, then our fuel consumption demands would drop substantially. The public is going to buy what they perceive they want and need. You can either offer them a hybrid model that gets 30 to 50 percent better mileage, or they will buy the same old thing. It's not, nor should it be, up to anyone to decide for another, whether that buyer really "needs" that car or not.

 

I think you missed the point. Hybrids powertrains offer the capacity to reduce or eliminate that foreign oil, and emissions, while still allowing the public a choice in what they wish to own and drive.

Where I live, we do burn our trash. It's legal, and far less expensive than what the various collection companies around here, want to charge to haul our stuff to an ever filling landfill. It works out to be a lesser of two evils. I do not subscribe to the line of thought that SUV's are going to kill us all either. They have the same OBD II equipment that is used in cars, EPA mandates notwithstanding. They do not create any more emissions, gallon for gallon of fuel consumed than any other modern vehicle. They just burn more fuel, and through that means, create more overall emissions. Hybrids offer a solution in this regard.

As for seatbelt and helmet laws, sorry, but I do not think the government should be in the business of protecting people from their own stupidity. If people wish to allow for darwinism to take it's course, far be it from me to prevent them from doing so. Personally, I've never needed laws to tell me what is the best means of protecting myself. I wore seatbelts long before they were mandated, and wear a helmet on my motorcycle, even though it is not required for me to do so. Personal responsibility is rapidly becoming a thing of the past.

 

The rest of us pay for their stupidity in the form of higher insurance premiums. Protecting them from themselves helps protect our pocketbooks.

Banning SUVs will not be politically feasible until the situation is dire. Like abortions, SUVs should be safe, legal, and rare :_>

 

Exactly. I think that the insurance companies should only have to pay costs for injuries that would likely have occurred had the person been wearing their belt or helmet. Let these people fork out for their poor judgement, and have their rates raised since they do not follow reasonable safety practices.

 

I think there is another reason why its a good idea that they are making SUV hybrids.

And that is research.

Billions and billions of dollars have been spent on R&D for the ICE.

If many more people buy SUVs then the SUV makers will want better and better batteries. More money will get spent than is spent now on research. Batteries will get smaller and more efficient.

And who knows, maybe batteries will get so small and so efficient, that a realistic totally electric car will get invented.

And by that I mean a totally electric full size vehicle that can go 500 miles on a few minute charge and go 100 miles per hour and seat 6 to 8 and carry luggage.

From what I've read, the 2004 Prius battery is one half the size of the first Prius battery back in the mid 1990s.

So hybrid research could lead to a totally electric vehicle that works for the masses of people.

And the more people who get hybrids, the more money will go to battery makers, the more money will get spent on battery research.

That can't be a bad thing.

Then we need to figure out how to get the free market to make cheap clean electricity. And I'm very leery of hydrogen, especially hydrogen made from natural gas. That to me is just another dead end.

 

I think that this "transitional" technology should be widely disseminated through all product lines. I hope the Prius evolving. Prius "to go before" I see the Prius changing allowing those who choose to be beta testers of each new technology towards oil independence then use of energy sources that are renewable.

 

please don't take offens for my using you as an example, but whatever happened to the mini-van? I'll consider the fact that the hybrid highlander will be out before any hybrid mini-van, but why do people look straight at the SUVs when often the vans have way more cargo room etc. ?

please do enlighten me, I don't have childeren so maybe I'm missing something important in the decison making process of SUV v Mini-van

 

I would consider buying a car-based SUV such as the Highlander because I do a significant amount of recreation-related driving on irregular dirt roads. Also, I would be interested in all-wheel drive for safety in winter driving.

I would not consider buying a minivan, because I don't need to seat 7 people. The extra seats would be in the way of my bicycle, skis, and other junk that I keep in the car.

Just comparing Toyota's current (2004 model year) offerings, the Highlander and Sienna are roughly comparable, both based on the Camry platform. But the Sienna is heavier (4120 pounds vs 3750), bigger (200" long vs 184", 77" wide vs 71", 68" tall vs 66"), and gets worse gas mileage (18/24 vs 21/25).

So, aside from the political incorrectness of getting an "SUV", why wouldn't I prefer the SUV to the more obese, less energy efficient, minivan?

Now I'd prefer even more a smaller SUV, say, about the size of the Prius, with AWD and more ground clearance, with a 4-cylinder engine and hybrid synergy drive. Unfortunately, the hybrid version of the Highlander is way overkill for my purposes, so I'll probably just get a Prius and hope that the undercarriage doesn't get too scraped up.

 

Something like a hybrid RAV?

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but, for me, the RAV4 is too small (in the length dimension), about 8" smaller than the Prius. And the Highlander is too big. The Prius is just about the right size for me. But, as I said, the ground clearance problems that others are reporting have me a little skittish.

 

get it raised an inch or two, though that will hurt your milage

will the hybrid hylander be the same HSD as the prius except for the bigger battery and the third motor/generator?

will that third MG attach directly to the rear axle?

 

From what little I know, yes. Except that the third motor would be only for the all-wheel drive version, to drive the rear wheels. I don't know if it would also function as a generator. Also, I don't know whether the rear-drive motor would be on most of the time, or only on an as-needed basis. (I suspect the latter.)