Motors ARGH - This is retarded, 20mpg hybrid!!!

The Lexus RX 330 does 9.0L/100km (31.4 MPG Imperial; 26.1 MPG US). I wouldn't be surprised if some European mid-sized SUVs would have similar figures.

 

Pretty quiet as well, there isn't really much wrong with diesels nowadays.

I can see where you're coming from with your comments Sanders, but I think there are very few people who buy SUVs and use them for their actual purpose, they might occasionally but I bet the majority of the SUVs on the road are doing the job a smaller saloon could. All this is doing is making those idiots think that they're being environmentally friendly while doing it . Still, 20mpg for a large vehicle isn't much to brag about, the most powerful VW Touareg is capable of towing a combine harvester and can still beat that in fuel efficiency, and it's not even hybrid, it's a pretty old model, probably at least 5 years old.

But we brits are hardly ones to talk, we do have all those women drivers who insist on driving massive landrovers round towns so they feel safe.

 

Lmao... There's this misonception, especially in Canada, that driving SUVs are far safer during our brutal Winters. I'd like to see a 2-tonne SUV take a turn at an intersection at medium speed. Not surprisingly, an 1986 MR2 would easily outclass SUVs for road-worthiness in adverse weather conditions if consumers would just face the facts. Complex traction control and other driving aids can't account for enormous curb weights when compared to a competent driver in a significantly lighter car. Sadly, if anyone has noticed, vehicle curb weights have risen dramatically in the past 15 years. The huge increase in safety 'enhancements' and 'reinforcements' to car chassis is brutal.

 

Hell, even a 20mpg petrol car is pretty retarded.

 

not when it's an audi rs4

nothing about that car is retarded

 

Nonsense i get nearly 30mpg in the city in a 2L 406. Lets face it if its towing its not going to be using a very very low torque electric engine, this whole thing would be much better as an oil burner, much more torque and much better mpg.

 

But you are using a diesel. I get around 19-20mpg with my mustang in the city and around 28-32mpg highway. At a constant, while not that great economy its not bad for a 4.6L 300hp/320lb car. Not to mention weigh in at almost 3500lb. I do however agree with the diesel coment. I personaly dislike all gasoline hybrids and actually dislike all hybrids. If you want economy get a diesel. The duramax HD trucks are getting better fuel economy than that thing.

 

Nope thats a petrol, a modern good quality petrol but petrol (gasoline if you will) none the less.... I wanted the 406 diesel but couldn't justify the price hike and increased costs of fuel since i don't drive nearly enough.

 

Your missing the friggen point dude. Of course there are better gas mileage vehicles out there but you're comparing a car to an SUV. 20mpg in an SUV is awesome. Could it be better? Yes of course it could, and someday it will. But this card has a 6,000 pound towing capacity man. Try that in any other (car) hybrid. I dare you. You wouldn't make it up a hill with a pair of jetski's behind you. I think it's ignorant for you to compare apples to oranges when this company is trying to fix gas mileage where it matters. In a gio metro you already can get 40mpg.....on a gas engine. what does 65 miles do for you? A little better but the gio metro would be $2000 and that fancy new hybrid is $40,000 + (prius's are about half that). What I'm trying to say is SUV's a big bulky and inefficient whereas cars are the exact opposite. So this company is trying to improve the gas mileage on this SUV because it IS so inefficient and it also happens to be what people are buying.

/served

 

You may have missed the whole crossover utility vehicle craze in the last five years. Hybrid drive for full-sized SUVs is completely stupid--I believe GM has been the only automaker to have done this so far--because it negates the "utility" purpose that owning an SUV entails. GM is simply joining the hybrid-hype bandwagon in an attempt to make their credentials seem legitimately environment-conscious.

 

How does it negate the utility purpose? I thought the whole point was that these vehicles are just as powerful, while being a little more fuel efficient? My family toured the western half of the US with a Suburban and a hard sided trailer, and we would have loved to get better gas mileage. Even the horrible mileage we got was less expensive than staying in hotels, though. And a lot more fun.

Also, word to the earlier comments about the lack of US public transportation. I had the opportunity to live in London for three months, and I absolutely adore their public transit system. There's very little reason to own a car in the city, and all of us students were able to tour outside the city pretty much on a whim. We loved it. By contrast, if I tried to commute to work via bus here in the states, it'd take over an hour instead of a 20 minute drive, and there would be only one bus an hour, if that. On top of that, American cities and suburbs sprawl horribly. Walking to the nearest bus stop isn't always possible. I guess a transit infrastructure is being worked on (my city at least is trying), but it's a huge cash drain for very little return, at least at first.

 

Quick reality check for all you folks praising the millage in a machine with "6000lb" of towing power... it doesn't, at least not at that mpg an electric engine can barely move the vehicle its in, it does not have any torque its a frigging electric engine! Also you want good mpg in an suv buy a VW diesel much better millage much much more torque and thus towing prowess.

 

According to the manufacturer, a Mitsubishi 2.5 DI-D 4WD Warrior Double Cab Automatic will do 23.9 to 34.4mpg (imperial), and thats a truck, and the Shogun Sport will do 21.7 to 32.1 mpg, and thats an 'SUV'.

So, with the 'you need a truck/SUV' argument overlooked, 20MPG is crap. Diesel is the best fuel for large vehicles, the economy is much better, and the torque is right at the bottom where you need it.

 

A common misconception, I'm afraid - Electrics have an enormous power band that starts at zero RPM. There's a reason that a "diesel" locomotive is actually a diesel-electric. The diesel spins a generator, which runs an electric engine. Obviously, a very high-torque electric engine, seeing as they yank mile-long freight trains around with four of them.

Second example: the Tesla roadster. It has two gears, low and high. It also has no clutch. The rotating bits of the motor are light enough that it can handle being shifted without one. In high gear, it can start from a standstill (no clutch, so the engine isn't even turning over), and accelerate to top speed, 150 MPH. I'd like to see a gasoline (or diesel) powered car do that.

Finally, in your own car, what starts the engine? Unless if your car is really, really old, and has a hand-crank sticking out of the bonnet, you've got a little tiny electric engine that grabs the flywheel and, from a standstill, spins the entire engine. The electric motor clearly has a lot more torque at zero revs than the (much larger) car engine does, or it simply wouldn't be there.

Conclusion: Electric motors have a lot of torque, especially at low RPM. The ones in the hybrid SUV might not be designed with towing in mind (although I doubt it), but that's a design decision, not an inherent failing in the electric motor.

 

i was going to say that.... thanks

I remember a big diesel powered bus being pulled by its starter engine because the main engine malfunctioned, there was no inclination and it was going slow, but it was towing the bus without trouble.

 

Have you ever hit the starter on a tractor when its in gear? And even better is when it starts and tries to run you over.

 

Keep in mind that you can get electric motors up to almost any size, certainly with a lot more HP that these dinky autos produce. The traction motors on locomotives go up to at least 1000 Hp, and probably more. A lot of ferries are diesel electric, as are submarines. The problem is not the motor size so much as supplying it with enough current.

As for tourque, there was a story I heard some time back about a coal train headed up over one of the passes. Two of the three locomotives died and so the third 6,000 HP, AC diesel electric was pulling the entire 18,000 ton coal unit up the pass...at .4 MPH. The electric motors can do it, the question is whether they make sense for a given application.

 

Corvette Z06 does 27 MPG (US) and has 505 HP. outperforming once again.

 

Why is it that people feel the need to bash people that drive SUVs? If you don't like SUVs then don't buy one. Buy a fuel efficient car and be happy with yourself. There is no reason to worry about what other people drive. None whatsoever. If someone likes driving their 77 Chevy 4x4 that gets 8 mpg why do you care? It's their gas money.

 

i've seen a 1970.5 Camaro with a 502 cubic inch engine get 17 mpg. thats like a 9 liter at least engine.

and ya why get all over people who drive big car or car that does bad mpg? id sooner drive a car with more power and worse mpg that gives a comfortable ride than a car that does good mpg and gives a bad ride.

plus i hate anything not north american and more specific i hate anything not GM.