New GM-Led Plan To Challenge Toyota's Lock On Hybrid Market - NYT

IF the crossword puzzle clue is "hybrid car," the answer is probably "Prius." Since Toyota brought that model to the United States six years ago, the company has basked in a green public-relations glow — even though Honda was first with a modern gas-electric car (the Insight) and Ford sold the first hybrid S.U.V. (the Escape). But with a mix of creative engineering, clever promotion and fortunate timing, Toyota has set the de facto standard for the entire class of eco-friendly vehicles. It has licensed its software to Ford and is selling hybrid components to Nissan. Toyota has half a dozen hybrid models in showrooms or on the way — twice as many as any other automaker — ranging from the miserly Prius to the $100,000-plus Lexus LS 600hL.

Yet the domination of Toyota's Hybrid Synergy Drive is coming under assault from some of the auto industry's top engineers. For more than a year, in nondescript buildings in Troy, Mich., north of Detroit, a German-American consortium of BMW, DaimlerChrysler and General Motors has been working quietly to develop a distinctly different type of hybrid powertrain.

On Friday, the consortium's top executives formally unveiled that system, which they call a two-mode hybrid, at an industry conference in Vienna. Until then, most important details were kept under wraps by the joint development group, called the Global Hybrid Cooperation.

The two-mode system will be available in a wide range of cars, trucks and S.U.V.'s made by the three companies, starting with the 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe that goes on sale in fall 2007. G.M. says that compared with conventional Tahoes, the hybrid version will achieve 25 percent better mileage in combined city and highway driving.

EDIT

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/30/automobiles/30AUTO.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

"G.M. says that compared with conventional Tahoes, the hybrid version will achieve 25 percent better mileage in combined city and highway driving." - Yeah, if I were Toyota I'd be running scared for SURE by now!!

:eyes:

GM could have had the hybrid tech, they just didn't want it. They didn't think 'mericans would embrace it.

and further help Toyota get financially stronger and contribute to their own demise? I don't believe for a minute that GM engineers didn't think American's would embrace high-mileage cars. That it is an overly simplistic argument.

where's GM's compact sedan that gets 50 miles per gallon in city driving?

I'm amazed at the lengths many DUers will go to stick to their guns before actually accepting/analyzing information which conflicts with their pre-conceived opinions. This stuff about EPA mileage ratings is OLD NEWS. This came out long ago. So why do you suddenly think that same exposé is bogus because it puts a dent in Toyota's claims? Only GM and Ford and American car companies can be lying and full of shit when it comes to their mileage claims?

Show me the model of GM car that gets comparable city mileage with a Prius, under head-to-head driving conditions.

Show me mileages from a head-to-head experiment. I'm sure that if there is such an experiment, GM will be making it readily available to everyone, to prove that Toyota's got nothin' on them.

Right?

A Scion xA, as does my friend's non-hybrid 2005 Honda Civic. Of course, both of us drive sensibly, we don't stomp the brakes or jackrabbit from stops like most people seem to enjoy doing.

It sounds like the issue is that the Consumer Reports drivers (along with 80% of the US driving population) need to learn how to drive a car properly. Getting good gas mileage is not, and has never been, easy. It is something you have to work on.

ABSOLUTELY LOVES their Prius, in part because they are ALL getting about 50-55 MPG.

How much does Ford pay you to post this nonsense???

I trust Consumer Reports far more than either Toyota or the EPA. Where have you been? The EPA mileage estimate controversy has been around for months now, after INDEPENDENT testing showed that not a single car model even comes close to the EPA estimates. Including you're precious Prius.

I think your friends are thumping their chests in pride, but they aren't telling you the truth. I chalk it up to what Consumer Reports once called "owner pride" or something like that. For a while, many years ago, they wouldn't even review Subarus because they said Subaru owners were almost like a cult, and wouldn't answer owner surveys truthfully. I sense the same thing with Prius owners (have you seen the episode of HBO's "Curb Your Enthusias?"). The Prius is a "statement car." Owners take great pride in the fact that they're saving the world and the rest of us aren't, and they tend to inflate the overall greatness of the car, in part because the spent a lot of money on it.

Again, even Toyota doesn't claim the Prius gets the mileage your friends states, and it is widely known that the published mileage estimates are inflated. So I'd say your friends are quite proud of their cars, but they're feeding you a line of bunk about getting 55 mpg.

Oh, and I can't stand Ford. I don't even like GM as a company, but I do like my GM vehicle despite it's terrible gas mileage. We'll be buying a second very-small car as soon as we can afford one, hopefully this summer. Possibly a California zero-emissions CIVIC, which does nearly as well as a hybrid without the risk associated with the relatively new technology.

on the first tank with 300 plus miles. I've had her a little over a week and couldn't be happier.

that is, Not Invented Here. The big 3 all made the same assumption in the 90's: that SUV sales would increase forever and that no one gives a crap about mileage.

Honda has a corporate policy to make each car it's designing to be the most efficient in that market segment (doesn't always happen, but they try). Toyota opted for a radical solution to gas mileage in a gamble that has paid off in a huge way. GM/Ford/DC don't appear to have a corporate culture that awards such thinking.

Now, GM DOES have an ace up its sleeve: the EV1. Add more up to date batteries, along with a small charging generator to extend range, and sell it as the ultimate fuel mileage hybrid. They'd sell a ton of 'em, esp. once gas cracks $4/gal.

4 more miles per gallon.

so you get a tahoe that gets 20mpg? Big deal.

closing the barn door after the horse has bolted.

What are GM gonna call it - a pony and trap.

A Tahoe is a massive vehicle. I imagine that if they can make this new drive system increase a Tahoe's mileage by 25%, it will do pretty amazing things to the mileage of smaller lightweight cars.

Just last week, DUers were jumping all over GM's shit for not doing ANYTHING. This article says they were working the whole time on an entirely news system, and this first model will be available next year. So now we roll our eyes at the 25%. Why don't you guys just admit that you hate American cars no matter what, and just stick to your vow to hate them now and forever more. Personally, I think any moves to finally increase mileage and replace the gasoline engine with newer more efficient technology is a win-win.

Unless you're a GM employee who is losing his pension and benefits. Then we have something to discuss!

Toyota needs to have their 4Runner line profitable just as GM needs to have the Tahoe profitable.

Both companies will run the lines until they can’t any more, and they decide what “can’t” is.

The manufacturers will control this by allotment: you don’t get no Priuses (or would Priui be the plural?) unless you sell a bunch of 4Runners.

The Ford Escape Hybrid is a better car than the Toyota RAV4 we traded in almost every way.
It is more comfortable, more fuel-efficient, and less polluting (AT-PZEV).
Toyota's hybrid SUVs have larger engines than the Ford, consume more fuel, and pollute more.

Ford makes a better SUV, but Toyota makes a better car. Ford doesn't have anything to compete with the Prius.

So we ended up with an Escape Hybrid and a Prius.

GM simply doesn't have anything, period. If they are finally developing something, that is good news,
but it may be too little, too late. a 20mpg Tahoe is better than a 16mpg one, but high gas prices are
likely to reduce the market for such large trucks anyway.

Ford and GM are really truck companies, not car companies.

If we did a straw poll on the attitudes towards BP, for instance, we'd probably find they they are fairly nuetral - because although the are a big fat oil co, they do pour a chunk of thier profits into renewables research. Not as much as we'd like, but at least it more than the token effort from thier peers.

GM have gone about this in an arsewards manner. The trick is not to produce a system "particularly well suited to large trucks and S.U.V.'s" as the article puts it, it's to make the cars smaller. Even with the added 5 mpg, my clapped out 10-year-old Nissan pisses all over it for economy: And you can get 25+ mpg out of a diesel-powered Dodge Ram if you really like that sort of thing (The best I've heard of is 42mpg, not bad for 4 tonnes.)

This really is lipstick on a pig.

The bar is really low if you're comparing to the regular Tahoe.

If every vehicle on the roads today could boost their mileage by 25% you don't think that would make a difference?

It most certainly would.

If one in four vehicles was a Tahoe, We'd be fucked.

over the years have preferred bigger vehicles. What did Americans buy in the sixties? Large four door sedans and station wagons.

What did Americans buy in the seventies? Vans, large four door sedans and station wagons.

What did Americans buy in the eighties? Four door sedans, pick up trucks, vans.

What did Americans buy in the nineties? SUVs, Minivans, pick up trucks.

Historically, Americans have preferred larger vehicles. And that's what the American car manufacturers built. Yes, there have been some convertibles, sports cars, and others along the way, but what did you see the most of on the streets?

America has largely defined the wide open spaces theme, and Americans like to have lots of room for their stuff and themselves. You just can't do that so much in a cramped Camry or Civic. Tastes and needs have changed over the years, but given a choice, most still prefer a larger vehicle to drive until something like high gas prices changes that perception. Whether it's the false sense of security you get driving them, the ability to extend your storage space, cram a team of soccer players inside, or whatever, there has always been a place for large vehicles in America.

During the fuel shortage of 1974, people bought smaller cars, but returned to larger ones when the shortage eased. Same thing happened in the late seventies, when American car makers downsized everything for better fuel economy. But they grew again during the eighties and nineties.

When American taste for large vehicles subsides for good, I suspect there won't be any large cars built any longer. But historically, Americans have always come back around to their lust for a big vehicle.

This may be the straw that broke the Camel's back, we'll have to see.

over their lifetimes have developed the best engines and drive lines ever, well actually four if you throw in chrysler's engines and drive lines. i`m sure they can think of something.....

The original Prius concept car dates from the mid 90's, IIRC. They've got a hell of a lot of catching up to do...

The big SUV/hybrids don't sell very well.

People, of course, who drive big SUV's in the first place aren't giant fans of the environment. It's not like you can actually give a shit and own a Hummer at the same time, or for that matter a Chevy Tahoe. So why would a person in the market for a Tahoe be willing to pay extra for the hybrid? By definition the Tahoe owner is not too concerned about environmental issues.

Priuses sell because they're environmentally attractive. I'm sure a huge fraction of their ownership consists of people who basically want to do their share for the environment. Probably the percentage of Prius owners who would not be mortified to be seen driving a Chevy Tahoe is close to zero.

the tahoe will be the first hybrid these doofuses role out?

20 mpg is still pretty bad, but it's up into the minivan range instead of the barge range.

I think it makes a lot of sense to measure fuel consumption the way the Europeans do, as liters per 100 km (or gallons per 1000 miles, to use the archaic units).

12 mpg barge = 83.3 gallons/1000 mi
16 mpg Tahoe = 62.5 gallons/1000 mi
20 mpg hybrid Tahoe = 50 gallons/1000 mi
25 mpg = 40 gallons/1000 mi
30 mpg = 33 gallons/1000 mi
35 mpg = 28.6 gallons/1000 mi
40 mpg = 25 gallons/1000 mi
50 mpg = 20 gallons/1000 mi
80 mpg = 12.5 gallons/1000 mi
150 mpg = 6.7 gallons/1000 mi

You can see that the fuel consumption difference between 16 and 20 mpg (12.5 gallons per 1000 mi) is bigger than the difference between 25 and 35 mpg, and the same as the difference between 40 and 80 mpg. So it does save a lot of gas and CO2, even if 50 gallons/1000 mi is still a high consumption rate.

You can also see how just getting vehicles out of the teens would drastically cut fuel use and CO2 emissions.

as you represent. MPG is an inverse function and does not realistically represent the performance of the vehicle. Good post

at least to my knowledge, have considered using a microturbine to power the generator. Maybe it's an infrastructure issue, but it seems they'd be more efficient.