Nytimes Rx-400h Opinion Piece

[RedStripe]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/31/automobiles/31AUTO.html

July 31, 2005

2006 Lexus RX 400h: The Hybrid Emperor's New Clothes

By JEFF SABATINI

CHICAGO

ONE question lingers after driving the 2006 Lexus RX 400h: How did it come to this, that Toyota is now selling a hybrid gas-electric vehicle with no tangible fuel economy benefits?

In my test-driving, the Lexus hybrid, which is based on the gasoline-only RX 330, did not achieve better mileage than the 2005 RX 330 that I drove for comparison.

My hybrid tester's window sticker did boast a federal mileage rating of 31 miles per gallon in the city and 27 on the highway, compared with just 18 and 24 for the RX without the hybrid drivetrain. But the government's testing procedure has a habit - one that seems to be exaggerated with hybrids - of rendering fuel economy numbers as relevant to the real world as national energy policies have been to actually reducing dependence on foreign oil.

Speaking of which, isn't that what hybrids are all about: conservation, improved fuel economy, weaning the nation off its oil habit? Perhaps not any longer.

The hybrid version of the Lexus sport utility wagon follows in the tracks of the 2005 Honda Accord Hybrid by offering more horsepower than the conventional version of the same vehicle, a markedly different approach than that of economy-focused hybrids like Toyota's own Prius or Honda's Civic Hybrid. In this case we're talking 268 horsepower for the RX 400h, versus 230 for the gasoline-only RX 330.

True, Toyota is not marketing the RX 400h as being environmentally friendly, focusing instead on its performance and typical Lexus luxuriousness. While this may provide the company some absolution, the RX 400h's failure to deliver, in my experience, even a nominal improvement in gas mileage still seems like a sin of omission. It has been fundamental to the understanding and acceptance of hybrids that they offer better fuel economy than vehicles powered by conventional gasoline engines. Toyota itself helped to establish that impression with its Prius.

A hybrid's improved economy is primarily accomplished in city driving, by using an electric motor to assume some of the motive burden from the gasoline engine, as well as shutting off the engine when the vehicle comes to rest, so it is not idling, burning fuel, at red lights.

Certainly, it is the Prius's above-average fuel economy that Toyota has to thank for its image as a green car company. Environmental advocates do not proclaim the righteousness of all things Toyota based on the 958,888 light trucks and S.U.V.'s that it sold in the United States last year, fully 47 percent of its total sales. By comparison, only 53,991 Priuses were sold in 2004, though the company has stated that it plans to double that number this year.

It is understandable that Toyota would like to transfer the Prius's hybrid chic and green patina to other products. To this end, a hybrid version of the Toyota Highlander S.U.V. was also introduced this year, and the automaker has announced plans to add both a hybrid version of its Camry, the nation's best-selling sedan, and a hybrid Lexus GS sport sedan next year. Whether these vehicles will be gas misers like the Prius or thirstier performance-oriented hybrids like the RX 400h remains to be seen.

My first seat time in the Lexus hybrid came over a weekend in which I drove the 200 miles from Chicago to Grand Rapids, Mich. I spent a lot of time on the freeway, but I also traveled some back roads and slogged through a couple of stop-and-go city stints. By the time I returned to Chicago, I had put 531 miles on the odometer and calculated my fuel economy at 20.9 m.p.g.

I returned this vehicle to Toyota, but later tested another RX 400h for a week. I drove this one 556 miles and did a bit better, averaging 23.0 m.p.g.

In an effort to make a direct comparison with the conventional gasoline-only Lexus, I contacted Toyota and asked for an RX 330 test car. When the company said that none was available, I called on an acquaintance who had recently bought an RX 330 with all-wheel drive, and made arrangements to drive that vehicle over essentially the same Chicago-Grand Rapids route.

While this was not a controlled experiment, the results from my stint in the RX 330 were nonetheless illuminating: 462 miles traveled, at an average of 21.6 m.p.g.

I'll be charitable and call the gas mileage comparison between the hybrids and the standard RX a draw, though there is a clear loser - anyone who buys an RX 400h on the assumption that it will use appreciably less fuel in a range of driving situations.

That it doesn't forces one to consider the RX 400h on its other merits, of which there are precious few. The hybrid is visually indistinguishable from its conventional counterpart, save for some cosmetics and slightly different gauges, though it does come loaded with luxury equipment that is optional on the RX 330. It has somewhat lower tailpipe emissions, carrying a "super ultra low" emissions rating on models sold in states that follow California's clean-air rules, compared with "ultra low" for the RX 330.

The best thing I can say in the 400h's defense is that at least behind the wheel of this hybrid, you won't find yourself being cut off by drivers of full-size S.U.V.'s and luxury sedans muttering "tree hugger" under their breath, as you might in a Prius.

The hybrid RX does accelerate briskly, thanks to the addition of two electric drive motors to a detuned version of the 3.3-liter V-6 found in the RX 330. (A third electric motor acts as a starter-generator.)

The ultimate value of this extra thrust is debatable, however, as by Toyota's own admission the hybrid drivetrain cuts only half a second off the RX 330's 0-to-60 acceleration time of 7.8 seconds. The culprit here is the extra 300 pounds of mass the hybrid has to haul around, which pushes its unloaded weight to 4,365 pounds.

Whether those driving the RX 400h will use the extra oomph is another question, as under full power the vehicle's continuously variable transmission tends to rev the engine, producing quite a bit of noise. This is exactly the sort of unpleasantness that causes the average motorist to avoid the upper reaches of the tachometer.

Noise of any sort is anathema to a Lexus, so on the freeway the incessant whirring of the RX 400h's front electric motor was as surprising as it was irritating. Cycling on and off, the sound was not loud, but it was audible above the drone of talk radio.

Though I might be willing to put up with all sorts of annoyances in the name of better fuel economy or enhanced performance, I found not a lot of either in the RX 400h. It doesn't even travel farther between fill-ups, since the hybrid's gas tank is two gallons smaller than the RX 330's. And with very little to make it preferable to a comparably equipped RX 330, the price is more outlandish than the mileage: At $49,185, the RX 400h's sticker is $4,000 more than a fully loaded RX 330's and about $11,000 more than one without options.

Even so, Toyota presold 11,000 of the hybrid sport wagons before they arrived at dealerships, a not-unsurprising development given the popularity of the Prius. At least the people paying so much for this hybrid should be able to afford all the gas they won't be saving.

They will also be eligible, under current law, for a $2,000 federal tax deduction for hybrid-vehicle buyers, and possibly for state and local tax breaks as well. A new hybrid-car tax incentive of up to $3,400 is included in the energy bill Congress passed last week, but it appears to penalize pioneering companies like Toyota and Honda in favor of automakers like Ford and General Motors that have been slower to offer hybrids.

I hope Toyota continues to pursue the worthy cause of developing vehicles that push the limits of automotive technology in the quest for better fuel economy, as it has with the Prius.

That the RX 400h does nothing to further this goal is regrettable. Perhaps even more unfortunate is that Toyota's motivation in pushing hybrid technology may turn out to be a different shade of green than we've been led to believe, one much closer to the color of money.

INSIDE TRACK: Toyota's zero-sum game.

[RolandB]

After yesterday's fill-up at 3,137 miles, I have gotten a lifetime average of 21.53 mpg! That tank had achieved a mere 20.04 mpg. With the exception of one 190 mile trip, this driving has all been in town (which has included some freeway driving).

Jeff, well spoken! I too am very disappointed with Toyota's production of a sub-standard of excellence. With 45,685 miles on my 2001 RX300, I had achieved a lifetime performance of 19.24491 mpg (slightly less than 1 mpg below my RX400h's record). My last fill-up had achieved 18.9 mpg in town! Some of my travels yielded as much as 27.9 mpg and I certainly didn't have to refuel after driving 300 miles as I found I did yesterday (the warning light came on).

Lexus, we are very disappointed owners! Your engineers need to quickly find the problem and upgrade our 2006 RX400h!

[JasonATL]

These 400h numbers are not representative of my experience at all. I sincerely doubt that the author's numbers are representative of the average realized MPG by 400h drivers.

I can't seem to average less than 24 MPG over a 100 or more mile segment. I can't seem to get over 27 MPG over 100 miles. My overall average is in the 25-26 range. This is all in a mix of city and hwy driving with the A/C on (which I've found greatly reduces by 1 to 2 the MPG).

I read this opinion piece (which is written more as fact, but is fiction in my experience) and was dumbfounded. I can't understand how someone could drive 400 to 500 miles on the hwy and get 21 MPG on a 400h. Did this person use cruise control ever? I have a 1999 RX 300 (which has a 3.0 litre engine vs. a 330's 3.3 liter) and I get 17-18 in city and no more than 22 on the hwy (21 with the A/C). My hwy driving is at 75 or so.

With 2000 miles on my RX 400h, I recognize a 25% to 40% improvement in MPG over my RX 300. No, this isn't the 70% improvement that I'd have if the EPA numbers were realized. But, I'm using 25% to 40% less fuel.

The author also fails to give Toyota credit for other ways in which the Hybrid reduces emissions, through no idling, etc. My guess is that emissions are reduced beyond any realized fuel savings.

There are minor things about the 400h that I wish were different. However, to say that Lexus/Toyota has failed here is rediculous. I'm very pleased with the 400h.

[JasonATL]

Just for fun, I just calculated the average from the Poll: Mileage on your RX400h thread.

Methodology for calculating the average:

I threw out the first and last entries. The first entry had 2 votes for "<21.0" and the last entry had 1 vote for "29.0 - 29.9". Since these are the "catch-all" entries for below or above, they could sway the results depending on what MPG was assumed for these entries. So, my calculated average is based on 40 respondants to the poll.

I calculated the average at the low and high ends of each range as:

Low: 24.5 MPG

High: 25.5 MPG

Of course, assuming the middle of each range would give 25.0 MPG.

I scanned through the RX 300/330 thread on MPG and, with exception of one person who is reporting astounding 22/28 (city/hwy) on his 330, the numbers are (being generous to the 330) 18/22 or an average of 19.5 MPG if we split city and hwy 50/50. Since that thread isn't in a poll format, my number is not a calculated, but just my impression of what most of the people are posting in that thread.

While none of this is scientific by any means, the 400h seems to have >25% better fuel economy based on this forum.

[katzjamr]

Jason I agree wholeheartedly with you. My real world mpg in mixed driving is consistently 25 to 27 after 1,500 miles. It is clear that Sabatini has a bias and an agenda when you read the article. He knows that hybrids get better mileage in the city and the first thing he does is go on a 200 mile trip with little city driving. He claims to be an expert in fuel economy but doesnt understand that learning the balance between power and economy in this vehicle takes longer than a test drive.

The total package of this vehicle including power, safety, comfort, technological amenities and fuel economy is head and shoulders above anything else out there.

In a perfect world i would love a diesel electric fueled by the bio diesel distilled from fry oil that my neighbor is making in his garage @ .50 a gallon. This vehicle does not exist at this time. Nor is there an American hybrid that is not a huge compromise. Toyota will move forward through each generation of hybrid to a mass produced version that even a cynic like Sabatini can appreciate. This is a step along the way, I'm happy to be part of the process.

[uthorns1976]

I think that NY Times guy decided he didn't like the vehicle right from the start. So, he slammed it. You know what they say about opinions and a**holes. Everyone has one...

It's no secret that the 400h is not delivering the mpgs that are on the sticker. That's nothing new. However, for Sabatini to say that the mileage is the same as an RX330 is, IMHO, bogus.

My brother is tickled to death with the mileage he is getting from his 400h. It uses half as much fuel as his previous vehicle, a GM SUV. And I think when the weather cools off here in Texas, the 400h will do even better without the A/C on.

[jerryray]

I agree, My RX400 is only 3 days old, so reserve the Gas mileage information for now.

But the article was biased.

I think that NY Times guy decided he didn't like the vehicle right from the start.  So, he slammed it.  You know what they say about opinions and a**holes.  Everyone has one...

It's no secret that the 400h is not delivering the mpgs that are on the sticker.  That's nothing new.  However, for Sabatini to say that the mileage is the same as an RX330 is, IMHO, bogus.

My brother is tickled to death with the mileage he is getting from his 400h.  It uses half as much fuel as his previous vehicle, a GM SUV.  And I think when the weather cools off here in Texas, the 400h will do even better without the A/C on.

←

[markatty]

The thing that bugs me about this article is that the RX-400 is a great car for NYC, but the vaunted the NY Times does not test the car in NYC, they test it on the highway in the midwest.

I live in the NY metro area and got rid of my sports car because the roads and specifically the NY state highways and NYC roads are horrible with potholes and other road hazards year round either from ice in the winter and construction at other times. The RX-400 handles most of these road hazards with ease (though I did have a piece of construction debris pierce the sidewall of the Michelin. I'm driving on the spare and the tire is back order.)

Driving on highways makes the least use of the electrics and the flatter the roads, the less you get any advantage from coasting. Also the hotter it is the more the air conditioner has to work, and the faster you go the less benefit you get from the electrics, so the only way this guy could have been more unfair to the mileage claims is to do what one of the NYT's Highlander Hybrid reviewer did and drive it between LA and Phoenix

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/31/automobiles/31TOYOTA.html

So the 400 and the HH would benefit many of their NY metro area readers and they test it on Michigan highways and test the HH on AZ highways. (They did also tested the HH in eastern CT and in upstate NY. Doesn't anyone who works for the NY Times actually live in NYC?)

I don't understand why there numbers weren't at least a little better, but clearly the authors did not do any of the things that encourage better fuel economy and that all the instrumentation in the 400 makes both relatively easy and even fun. (This is the only car I've ever enjoyed applying the brakes or even thought about how I apply them. )

I'd love to see an all city comparison of the RX-330 and the RX-400.

[wwest]

Sadly, it begins to appear that the RX400h's highway fuel economy is substantially better that city. Not an owner, but here on the internet I keep seeing postings of 28 highway vs less than 24 for city.

Certainly better MPG than the RX330 in any case, but the above is an oddity no one has yet explained.

[RX400h]

As I tell people all the time, if you take a leisurely drive to work, either on an empty highway or down a lonely country road, you will gain nothing in fuel mileage if you choose a 400h vs a 330. Unfortunately, the majority of working folks have to put up with a tememndous amount of daily traffic, five days per week, 47+ weeks per year. I have two coworkers who drive RX330s, both are achieving no more than 16-17 MPG on average. Our RX400h, on the other hand, is averaging 25+ MPG.

Okay, now let's look at some other "real world" mileage numbers taken from Road & Track:

Acura TSX: 24.3

Acura RL: 18.4

BMW 530i: 21.1

Chrysler 300C: 18.3

Ford Mustang GT: 18.0

Honda Accord V6: 23.3

Lexus GS430: 17.6

Lexus IS300: 23.3

Mazda 3s: 26.6

Mercedes ML500: 18.0

Nissan Maxima 3.5SE: 21.0

Porsche Cayenne Turbo: 12.8

Toyota Celica GT-S (2500 lbs): 24.7

Volkswagen Toureg V8: 14.8

Volvo XC90 AWD T6: 17.0

Needless to say, hybrid technology WORKS!

[dreamchaserflorida]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/31/automobiles/31AUTO.html

July 31, 2005

2006 Lexus RX 400h: The Hybrid Emperor's New Clothes

By JEFF SABATINI

CHICAGO

>>ONE question lingers after driving the 2006 Lexus RX 400h: How did it come to this, that Toyota is now selling a hybrid gas-electric vehicle with no tangible fuel economy benefits?<<

Since the author of the NY Times article states that there is "NO tangible fuel economy benefits" over the RX 330 and since this is not an honest or accurate assessment based on factual owner reports, I can only infer that the author has a negative bias which is NOT good journalism.

I have driven 855 miles in the RX 400h and have averaged almost 24 mpg.

I live in a very hot SW Florida climate with flat terrain. I use the air conditioning all the time at about 78 degrees and I have always had excellent cooling.

There are frequent times when I am parked for a short time with the engine/AC running or I am going through a “stop and start lane” such as at a bank or store “drivethrough” (with AC running).

My car is always garaged but I only drive short, quick trips for errands in a small city so that reduces my mpg. I try to drive in a manner to improve fuel consumption but that is not always possible.

I think the two major factors in my lowered mpg are the heavy use of air conditioning and the type of short trips I make. I am curious to know how my winter fuel consumption will be especially on longer trips or highway travel.

Some of the Forum messages have ranted excessively about how horrible the RX 400h is, especially for fuel consumption, In my opinion, the messages are impulsively written from a petulant, immature viewpoint. A more objective, thoughtful approach would be better for accuracy. Granted, I had hoped for a higher mpg but I would never take the approach of one member who traded in his RX 400h thinking he did not lose a lot of money. I doubt that he succeeded in avoiding a significant financial loss.

[uthorns1976]

I read the entire Sabatini article. Sounds to me like he slammed the vehicle because he can't afford to own one. Where I come from, we call that sour grapes!!

Those who follow this forum regularly know that his article is totally inaccurate.

[LexRexBlue]

The sad part is, if they had used a "broken in" 400h and been given a few clues about driving it they may have obtained a whole lot better mileage. I was told NOT to use the cruise control until it is broken in. I have learned to let the car coast a whole lot. It will coast "forever" unless there is a hill. It actually accelerates on an incline so that I have to use the brakes. It doesn't mean to drive like a grandma, on the highway I've averaged 75-80 mph. I have had better mileage on suburban driving and country roads than highway or city, but then my car isn't fully broken in yet. Using the air conditioner does kill the mileage as do short trips, but even in non optimal conditions the worst I've obtained is 21.5 mpg. As soon as the weather or roads (that was stuck on a highway for an hour in 100 degrees with the air conditioner on) the mileage climbs up to a respectable number.

One of the authors had contacted me and had better numbers and was aware of the changeable conditions and improved mileage. He sent me what he was submitting to the Times. However, he didn't know what his editor would cut. His editor cut out a lot. So, it seems that the Times had in mind to blemish the 400h. My husband read the article and was appalled.

Good question for Toyota-Lexus, how do you plan to refute these articles?

[lexus411]

This just goes in line with the recent rash of bogus reporting from the NY Times. Capitalizing of the popularity of Lexus. If they wrote a glowing piece let most others did nobody would be talking.

[katzjamr]

I wrote a letter to the nyt correcting the errors in the article and questioning the tone and intent of the whole piece. They have responded that they are looking into it for what ever that is worth. I have also written to their public affairs editor to inquire how much of the story was changed by their editors, and asking them why they would want to smear the 400h, Toyota, and a fairly large advertiser to thier newspaper.

[LexRexBlue]

Let us know the results. I didn't really see where to write back to them on their site. Do you have the link?

[katzjamr]

its always inside the first section on A2. they are one of the only papers to publish their corrections in the front of the paper where they can actually be seen. news coverage messages can be sent to nytnews@nytimes.com Readers dissatisfied with a response or concerned about the paper's journalistic integrity can reach the public editor, Byron Calame, at public@nytimes.com He can be reached by phone 212.556.7652 The news dept can be reached by phone at 1.888.698.6397

Keep giving em hell.

[Philly400h]

Keep giving em hell.

←

You're darn right... that's our (eventual) resale values they're affecting with that kind of biased article.

I can't believe those mpg numbers - I haven't seen anything like those since the very first tank of gas.

The timing of the article is also suspect to me. Why- after all the other reports on the release of the 400h have died down completely - does this article come out of nowhere?

[LexRexBlue]

Thanks. I respect you for doing your homework from across the country! I'll send a note, too. However, it should be Lexus that does something!!! I've loved driving my car. I don't fill it up as often, I'm getting 58% better gas mileage than on my RX 300 which is being driven by my sons.

[dreamchaserflorida]

Let us know the results. I didn't really see where to write back to them on their site. Do you have the link?

←

thanks to katzj for the email address of ny Times... I just wrote a message.

I hope other owners write them, also.

=============

To: nytnews@nytimes.com <nytnews@nytimes.com>

A message to the general Editor and to the Letters to the Editor section.

RE:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/31/automobiles/31AUTO.html

July 31, 2005

2006 Lexus RX 400h: The Hybrid Emperor's New Clothes

By JEFF SABATINI

CHICAGO

>>ONE question lingers after driving the 2006 Lexus RX 400h: How did it come to this, that Toyota is now selling a hybrid gas-electric vehicle with no tangible fuel economy benefits?<<

Since the author of the NY Times article states that there is "NO tangible fuel economy benefits" over the discussed RX 330 and other hybrids and since this is not an honest or accurate assessment based on factual owner reports, I can only infer that the author has a negative bias which is NOT good journalism. Please print a correction/retraction in the newspaper.

Sabatini did not do his homework and based the article on his very limited personal experience in driving the Lexus RX 400h several times. Factually, the majority of owners of this SUV are reporting an average of 25 mpg (approx) with several others reporting lower and higher mpg. The non-hybrid version (Lexus RX 330) gets a much worse fuel consumption.

If Sabatini is too lazy to do his own research, perhaps he should plagarize a review from

Edmunds.com which does not seem to have personal biases. Additionally, there are many online Forums where owners are reporting their mpg.... factually.

I was especially saddened to read this article because ordinarily, I value the opinions of the New York Times.

owner of a Prius and a Lexus RX 400h

[bainse]

I read the entire Sabatini article.  Sounds to me like he slammed the vehicle because he can't afford to own one.  Where I come from, we call that sour grapes!!

Those who follow this forum regularly know that his article is totally inaccurate.

←

Sour grapes is right.

I joined the fray in submitting an annoyed letter to the NYTimes.

[LexRexBlue]

I have been asked by the writer of the "When Your Mileage Doesn't Match the Window Sticker" to gather your true feelings about your mileage and the car. He had submitted more info than was printed in the NY Times. He is sending a hybrid newsletter and wants to include info from the real owners of the RX 400h. I plan to work on my submission to him tonight, so please get your 2 cents in earlier this evening.

If you reread his article I think you'll agree that even though the Times slanted it, it was the most objective of the 3.

[ultra63]

I have been asked by the writer of the "When Your Mileage Doesn't Match the Window Sticker" to gather your true feelings about your mileage and the car. He had submitted more info than was printed in the NY Times. He is sending a hybrid newsletter and wants to include info from the real owners of the RX 400h. I plan to work on my submission to him tonight, so please get your 2 cents in earlier this evening.

If you reread his article I think you'll agree that even though the Times slanted it, it was the most objective of the 3.

←

We see no better mileage in a rx400 after 1500 miles vs our prior 2002 rx300. We do like the power and steering better.

[markatty]

I have been asked by the writer of the "When Your Mileage Doesn't Match the Window Sticker" to gather your true feelings about your mileage and the car. He had submitted more ...

←

I get 26 - 28 mpg on mostly highway driving on my commute. I don't do a lot of pure city driving, but the times that I have, I've gotten 28 to 31 mpg. The only thing I do different from my previous car is I try to coast and brake gently for a longer time when I can see a stop ahead. I actually tried for 30 minutes to see if I could reproduce the NY Times reporters number and even with jack rabbit starts, the A/C on, and 80 mph on the highway the worst I could do was 23 mpg. The only time I regularly see bad mileage is running consecutive short errands with where segment is less than 5 minutes of driving. I actually got over 40 mpg in a traffic jam and I'm using regular gas, another thing that saves money.

Personally, I think the RX-400h is the most technologically sophisticated production car on the planet. Its not perfect, but its makes the other luxury cars looks so 20th Century.

[patt]

I have been asked by the writer of the "When Your Mileage Doesn't Match the Window Sticker" to gather your true feelings about your mileage and the car. He had submitted more info than was printed in the NY Times. He is sending a hybrid newsletter and wants to include info from the real owners of the RX 400h. I plan to work on my submission to him tonight, so please get your 2 cents in earlier this evening.

If you reread his article I think you'll agree that even though the Times slanted it, it was the most objective of the 3.

←

That article looks fine and factual to me. The things he points out are all reasons why real mileage is different from EPA numbers. That applies to all cars but, as he points out, the numeric difference with a more efficient car is more startling. I think it is useful to people that he pointed out the conditions for the two EPA tests. Until I looked at fueleconomy.gov (an EPA web site he might inform readers about for more information) recently, I assumed that "highway" in the EPA tests meant "freeway". The actual test is more like driving on a rural road. Who averages 48 mph on the freeway?

Our objective in buying this was to get a car that would be good both for our commute and road trips and had at least as good mileage as our Camry. With the RX400, we got a car with better gas mileage than our Camry even though it is larger and more luxurious.

We are happy with the fuel usage of our RX400H. I didn't expect to get quite as good numbers as the EPA and I was surprised how close we get. For freeway when we got the car in April, we were actually getting the EPA highway number of 27. Even now with the AC runnning we get around 25 to 26 mpg. The adjustment they did to the EPA number really seemed to work for highway. I find the freeway cruising number is much less sensitive to driver style since one isn't accelerating and braking. (I don't understand how the NYTimes review managed to get mileage under 21 mpg for a mostly freeway drive of 500 some miles. It was numbers like that in both the review articles that make me feel they are so slanted - either that or they are driving a car very different from mine.)

The city mileage varies a lot more. When I'm driving something close to the EPA test profile without AC, I see something around the EPA city number. (We got our RX400H in April and it was a cool spring so we didn't need much AC for the first two months.) Unforunately the lights around here aren't synchronized so I often end up having to stop more often than the EPA test profile. The speed limits are higher than the EPA test profile too. Therefore much of our city driving is harder on mpg than the EPA test. Also, you take a bigger hit, in terms of mpg, for the AC in city driving than in highway. The air conditioner is having to cool as much per hour but you are driving fewer miles per hour so the mpg cost of the cooling load is greater.

He missed one of the major factors that produces the difference between EPA and real numbers - the penalty on engine efficiency for short trips. This seems to be a significant factor for the people who are getting really disappointing fuel economy numbers from their RX400's. Our RX400H has been getting between 25 and 27 mpg per tank with our normal mix of normal length drives (11 or more miles) and short errands. Recently we had two tankfuls while we were preparing for a big family event with all the driving being short errands (1 to 6 miles) in hot weather. For those two tanks we got a bit over 22 mpg. There is a significant cost to getting the engine up to the temperatue where it is designed to operate. In hot weather where that is happening at the same time as maximum AC demand to cool the passengers down it is really bad.

He also missed the most important factor in driving style for improving mpg in a hybrid - braking. I find my mpg is more sensitive to that than to the acceleration.

If the driver speeds up to the stop light then stomps on the brake, energy has to be dumped into the brake pads. If you can anticipate stops enough to brake more gently, then much of the energy goes to the generator for storage and reuse. To get the best mpg in the hybrid, one has to get use to doing that. On the other hand, reasonably brisk acceleration doesn't seem to cost as much efficiency in the hybrid - one ends up drawing energy from the battery plus the engine instead of reving up the engine as one would in a gas only car.