Drove A Highlander Hybrid Today

[wwest]

Toyota's upcoming pickup:

http://www.motortrend.com/future/concept_c...ruck/index.html

This is crazy...!

Have you noticed that over the past ten years or so that while the interior space of trucks and SUV remains about the same the exterior body panels, doors, fenders, etc, look as if an explosive was placed inside and then set off...??

Now look at this new Toyota, look familier...??

Ford F-150 used to be a nice reasonably sized PU as was the Explorer as an SUV, not they look, are, HUGE in comparison.

IMNSHO Honda should do a Ridgeline on the Ford Ranger wheelbase/frame.

[wwest]

Toyota's upcoming pickup:

http://www.motortrend.com/future/concept_c...ruck/index.html

I would like to think than should this "truck" actually reach production the comfort/space/seats in the front will be replicated in the second row. The folks I transport in the second row are not to be considered 2nd class citizens.

[RX400h]

I, on the other hand, would like to see a smaller, lighter truck (like the first Tacomas) that averages 35 MPG (unloaded).

[Statman]

I sold my GX470 and got a HiHy (highlander Hybrid, Limited) several months ago. Couldn't be happier. Getting over 28 mpg, better pick-up if needed. My wife still has her 400h.

[s10]

jesus christ paying almost 50k for a toyota!? have we lost our mind here? I got my 2008 RX400h for $4k under sticker, you just have to shop around and know how to negotiate. no comparison between the two SUV's, its a lexus, resale will be much better. if the Hylander Hybrid was $40k then i'd consider it, but not at that price!!!!!!! what is toyota thinking?

Neon, your religious slurs are offensive to me. How about keeping them to yourself?

Tom

Original post was altered.

Neon, I don't want to warn you again - please tone down your language!

Dave

are you guys serious? im not cursing i dont see whats the big problem here

Believe me, go around starting sentences with almost any religious figure's name and you will upset many folks. Maybe you didn't realize this, but I advise you not to get on a public forum and do this. Generally-speaking, Christians are peaceful people; you can't assume the same for some people of other religious affiliations. Be aware.

Thanks,

Dave

That last bit sounds a bit discriminatory to me to be honest and in contrast to what you are preaching.

[SOMEONE ELSE'S GOT MY NAME]

If by "pure EV" you mean plug-in to the commercial power grid you may need to read up on just how both our power grid and generating capacity is already currently "over-stressed". We may soon be looking to Canada as the more forward-looking Canadians are already in the process of abandoning fossil fuels.

Methinks the next step, most practical step all things/aspects considered, might well be CNG powered cars refueled at night via "home-brewing", compressing, of CNG using PHILL.

CNG, EV, and numerous other alternatives will be necessary. Cheep oil kept most of glued to it as the 'sole' sorce, but now, there IS no silver bullet. As for pure EV cars and the power grid ... well, the "over-stressed" issue isn't as great an obstical as one might think. Sure, the oilies want us to think this way, but consider this. The grid can (usually) handle hot summers with the central AC running at home, electric ovens baking, etc ... as well as factories. EV charging takes less than that. But "off-peak" (10AM-6PM) charging doesn't "over-stress" the grid. In fact, since the generators are still spinning all night anyway, THAT power is just going to waste.

Then, if you factor in implementing solar panels, at home, on condo roofs, parking structure roofs, etc. You're REALLY styleing because the "grid" power can have as much as 40% loss ... just in transmission resistance. But panels located right at the charging source? Now you're talking efficiency. Sadly, most of our highest efficiency panels / technology get gobbled up by long term european contracts ... where they better understand the wisdom of the technology. Thus, all those photo cel manufacturing jobs end up over seas as well (SHAKING HEAD)

[riwyle]

If by "pure EV" you mean plug-in to the commercial power grid you may need to read up on just how both our power grid and generating capacity is already currently "over-stressed". We may soon be looking to Canada as the more forward-looking Canadians are already in the process of abandoning fossil fuels.

Methinks the next step, most practical step all things/aspects considered, might well be CNG powered cars refueled at night via "home-brewing", compressing, of CNG using PHILL.

CNG, EV, and numerous other alternatives will be necessary. Cheep oil kept most of glued to it as the 'sole' sorce, but now, there IS no silver bullet. As for pure EV cars and the power grid ... well, the "over-stressed" issue isn't as great an obstical as one might think. Sure, the oilies want us to think this way, but consider this. The grid can (usually) handle hot summers with the central AC running at home, electric ovens baking, etc ... as well as factories. But "off-peak" (10AM-6PM) charging doesn't "over-stress" the grid. In fact, since the generators are still spinning all night anyway, THAT power is just going to waste.

Then, if you factor in implementing solar panels, at home, on condo roofs, parking structure roofs, etc. You're REALLY styleing because the "grid" power can have as much as 40% loss ... just in transmission resistance. But panels located right at the charging source? Now you're talking efficiency. Sadly, most of our highest efficiency panels / technology get gobbled up by long term european contracts ... where they better understand the wisdom of the technology. Thus, all those photo cel manufacturing jobs end up over seas as well (SHAKING HEAD)

Generators produce power on demand. Power (more correctly energy) is not wasted when at night they are operating at a lower load. You might say, which may be your point, that installed capacity is being wasted. It is like buy a car that can produce 600 hp and never utilizing more that 150 hp. I guess you could say you are allowing the unused power and the extra money you spent to purchase the high power vehicle to go to waste, but you are not spending money on the extra energy (fuel) which would be needed to produce the 600 hp.

Combined transmission and distribution losses in US are about 7.2%, and in the UK about 10%, not 40% as quoted above. You may be referring to the cycle efficiency of steam generator/turbine/electric generator. Of course if steam is generated in a nuclear rector, as it should be, this efficiency is a mute point

Sorry to sound picky, but I think a correct understanding of energy and energy production is important in today's climate when important decisions both personal and governmental have to be made.

[riwyle]

If by "pure EV" you mean plug-in to the commercial power grid you may need to read up on just how both our power grid and generating capacity is already currently "over-stressed". We may soon be looking to Canada as the more forward-looking Canadians are already in the process of abandoning fossil fuels.

Methinks the next step, most practical step all things/aspects considered, might well be CNG powered cars refueled at night via "home-brewing", compressing, of CNG using PHILL.

CNG, EV, and numerous other alternatives will be necessary. Cheep oil kept most of glued to it as the 'sole' sorce, but now, there IS no silver bullet. As for pure EV cars and the power grid ... well, the "over-stressed" issue isn't as great an obstical as one might think. Sure, the oilies want us to think this way, but consider this. The grid can (usually) handle hot summers with the central AC running at home, electric ovens baking, etc ... as well as factories. But "off-peak" (10AM-6PM) charging doesn't "over-stress" the grid. In fact, since the generators are still spinning all night anyway, THAT power is just going to waste.

Then, if you factor in implementing solar panels, at home, on condo roofs, parking structure roofs, etc. You're REALLY styleing because the "grid" power can have as much as 40% loss ... just in transmission resistance. But panels located right at the charging source? Now you're talking efficiency. Sadly, most of our highest efficiency panels / technology get gobbled up by long term european contracts ... where they better understand the wisdom of the technology. Thus, all those photo cel manufacturing jobs end up over seas as well (SHAKING HEAD)

Generators produce power on demand. Power (more correctly energy) is not wasted when at night they are operating at a lower load. You might say, which may be your point, that installed capacity is being wasted. It is like buy a car that can produce 600 hp and never utilizing more that 150 hp. I guess you could say you are allowing the unused power and the extra money you spent to purchase the high power vehicle to go to waste, but you are not spending money on the extra energy (fuel) which would be needed to produce the 600 hp.

Combined transmission and distribution losses in US are about 7.2%, and in the UK about 10%, not 40% as quoted above. You may be referring to the cycle efficiency of steam generator/turbine/electric generator. Of course if steam is generated in a nuclear rector, as it should be, the this efficiency is a mute point

Sorry to sound picky, but I think a correct understanding of energy and energy production is important in today's climate when important decisions both personally and governmental have to be made.

[SOMEONE ELSE'S GOT MY NAME]

Sorry about that... writing too fast ... but yes. The 40% loss is based off conversion (heat source to steam to generator to transmitted source). Whereas locally located photo cels are more efficient. So with fossle fuel costs, it only makes sense to me ... to tell the dealer (when (s)he asks what model I want) the next vehicle I buy, will only have an electric motor ... whether it's a hihy, an RX, or one of those little 'think' EV's which are schedueled to come out next year (62mph for over 100 miles ... woo hoo!).

[wwest]

Sorry about that... writing too fast ... but yes. The 40% loss is based off conversion (heat source to steam to generator to transmitted source). Whereas locally located photo cels are more efficient. So with fossle fuel costs, it only makes sense to me ... to tell the dealer (when (s)he asks what model I want) the next vehicle I buy, will only have an electric motor ... whether it's a hihy, an RX, or one of those little 'think' EV's which are schedueled to come out next year (62mph for over 100 miles ... woo hoo!).

According to EPRI the OVERALL efficiency of the US commercial power grid is only about 40%

The availability of nuclear power generation will not change that aspect, only a reduction in the emissions level. More accurately stated, a reduction in atmospheric emissions in trade for an increase in radioactive material storage and disposal problems.

I think we'll see a move to CNG powered vehicles long before electric only.