  Mrjoshua Member Username: Mrjoshua Post Number: 1316 Registered: 03-2005 |
EYES ON THE ROAD By JOSEPH B. WHITE One System, Two Visions What to Do With an Electric-Drive System? Tokyo's Answer Isn't the Same as Detroit's May 7, 2007 The Wall Street Journal Toyota scored a coup with its Prius, a futuristic midsize car that uses a sophisticated electric-drive system to sip gas like a minicar. Now, General Motors is readying its response: a hulking V-8 powered sport-utility vehicle with a sophisticated electric booster that gives it the gas mileage of a minivan. GM's "two-mode" hybrid gas-electric Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon trucks won't hit the market until late this year, or early next year. But last week, GM allowed journalists a sneak peek at prototypes of the vehicles, including a small amount of time behind the wheel. The contrasting approaches to hybrid technology represented by the Tahoe and the Prius illustrate, quite dramatically, the different world views of GM and Toyota, which as of the first quarter of this year surpassed GM as the world's No. 1 seller of cars.  GM's Chevy Tahoe "two-mode" hybrid. Toyota's "Hybrid Synergy Drive" system is designed primarily to reduce the petroleum consumption of relatively light vehicles operating in the city. That's what you'd expect from a company whose roots are in the small-car-dominated Asian market. Toyota's efforts to use its hybrid technology as a power booster for large cars and SUVs have produced so-so results, both in terms of fuel-economy improvement and sales. GM, on the other hand, is a creature of the American heartland, where lots of people -- including lots of GM employees -- want vehicles that can comfortably haul up to seven people, their gear and a trailer, running a steady 70 miles per hour on the four-hour Friday-night run to the lakeside cottage. This isn't just a Michigan thing: Manhattanites with second homes upstate, or Angelenos who like a weekend in Vegas now and then, raise your hands. The centerpiece of GM's big-SUV-hybrid system is what GM engineers call a "two-mode" hybrid system. Boiling down some fairly complicated tech talk, the system works like this: Two electric motors housed inside the transmission, a 300-volt battery pack and some sophisticated software combine to supplement the energy from a 6.0-liter V-8 motor. From a standing start, the hybrid SUVs can accelerate to about 20 miles per hour on electricity alone, if you depress the accelerator gently. When the big truck gets moving, the gasoline engine kicks in to get it up to highway speed. But once you settle into a fairly steady speed, four of the eight cylinders will shut down. A large SUV only needs about 30 horsepower to maintain its way at steady speeds, says Tim Grewe, chief engineer for the two-mode hybrid system. The hybrid system acts to expand the envelope within which the SUV can operate in four-cylinder mode, thus improving highway fuel economy. "We use a battery to make a six-liter engine look like a three-liter," says Mr. Grewe. The two-mode hybrid system constantly monitors the vehicle's performance, and juggles whether to run the engine on four or eight pistons, with or without electric boost. The electric-drive system regenerates juice in part by acting as the brakes and capturing energy as the vehicle decelerates. (Fully appreciating the hybrid Tahoe/Yukon will make you want to dust off your high-school physics lessons about mass, momentum and energy.) During a brief drive around a GM test track, all this power management goes on almost undetectably. The transition from eight to four cylinders and back is seamless, as is the transition from strong electric boost to none. That can make you forget you are in a hybrid vehicle, which is one reason GM took a page from Toyota's marketing notebook and equipped the Tahoe/Yukon with hybrid badges and special displays to remind drivers (and neighbors) of the value received for the extra money spent on the hybrid technology. For example, a navigation-screen display shows an animation of the power flows between engine and battery, and a simple gauge in the instrument cluster tells the driver when the vehicle is running at peak efficiency. While you shouldn't let playing the "Boost Your Mileage" videogame distract you from watching the road, the displays do encourage you to drive more sensibly. What's notable about the hybrid Tahoe and Yukon, based on the explanations of GM engineers involved in the project, isn't just the "two-mode" electric-boost system. It's all the other things GM's engineers did to make the Tahoe and Yukon more efficient. To reduce weight, the trucks will have aluminum hoods, tailgates, drive shafts and bumper structures. The body has been made more aerodynamic through "thousands of hours" of work in wind tunnels to fine-tune the placement of spoilers and air dams and so direct air around the body more efficiently. The seats have been slimmed down to cut weight, and the power-steering system is electronic, saving the weight of a hydraulic system. The hybrid Yukon/Tahoe's body is about 400 pounds lighter than a standard model -- a significant reduction, but that's before you put in the hybrid drive, battery pack and related hybrid hardware. Once that's done, the weight's about the same, GM engineers say. In many ways, the hybrid Tahoe and Yukon represent a response to the challenge posed to GM by environmental groups such as the Union of Concerned Scientists to sell vehicles that make use of fuel-saving ideas sitting on the shelf. The bottom line for all of this effort, GM engineers say, is that the two-mode hybrid Tahoe and Yukon should consume about 25% less gasoline on average than a conventional, 5.3-liter V-8 two-wheel-drive Tahoe. That comes out to about 22.5 miles per gallon in combined city/highway mileage, based on the government's current mileage ratings. But "your mileage may vary" are the key words. As owners of the Toyota Prius have reported, a lot depends on how you drive. Just because a car is a hybrid doesn't mean you can flog it through jack-rabbit starts and high-speed freeway jaunts and expect to achieve the EPA sticker mileage. You won't. The two-mode hybrid Tahoe and Yukon, by themselves, won't change the energy equation for the U.S. Using the federal mileage estimates, you'd save about $453 worth of $3-a-gallon gas if you drove a hybrid Tahoe instead of a conventional 5.3-liter V-8 model. Gary White, the GM vice president in charge of the auto maker's large-truck program, says GM is looking at other ways to boost large-SUV fuel efficiency, including diesel engines, which can cut petroleum consumption by about 25%. But marrying a diesel to the two-mode hybrid transmission/power management system might result in a truck that's quite expensive relative to its fuel savings. GM plans to spread its two-mode hybrid technology to other models, including front-wheel-drive vehicles and smaller rear-wheel-drive vehicles. GM's partners in the two-mode hybrid development, DaimlerChrysler and BMW, will field vehicles of their own with the system. GM hasn't disclosed the pricing for the hybrid SUVs, but GM executives hint that the prices will stay inside the current range for the models -- that is, somewhere between $35,000 and $45,000 or so. A hybrid Tahoe will likely have the distinction of being the only seven-passenger hybrid vehicle on the market. But it might not be the most-efficient way to carry seven passengers. Unless you have a trailer to tow, a conventional minivan would likely provide equivalent fuel economy at a lower price. The question of whether the hybrid Tahoe will make a big difference in the broader context of the nation's energy debate comes down to economics and lifestyle. The nation's oil bill won't go down if solo commuters who dumped SUVs in favor of Camrys trade back to a hybrid Tahoe. But if the reception for the hybrid Tahoe and Yukon encourages GM to take more risks to push fuel-saving technology and designs into the market, that could mark a turning point. • Send comments about Eyes on the Road to joseph.white@wsj.com. | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1614 Registered: 10-2003 |
Oh boy, 22.5 mpg! Yippee! GM STILL doesn't get it. | ||
Mrjoshua Member Username: Mrjoshua Post Number: 1317 Registered: 03-2005 |
I guess Acura doesn't either, because my sedan doesn't get that good of mileage, even with premium fuel. If 22.5 is a realistic number, I will seriously consider one of their hybrid SUV's in a few months. Stylin, you can help me with the spinners as I don't know enough about them to make a good decision. | ||
Udmphikapbob Member Username: Udmphikapbob Post Number: 345 Registered: 07-2004 |
It's a heck of a lot better than the "use all the corn for inefficient ethanol" plan. Of course, compact city planning and efficient mass transportation are the only real way we are going to reduce consumption in the long run. Hybrids, E85 and the like are only prolonging the "happy motoring" lifestyle a bit longer. And using renewable alternatives - such as solar and wind power - to fuel our grid and buildings will free up some petroleum for our cars too. | ||
56packman Member Username: 56packman Post Number: 1273 Registered: 12-2005 |
Fury13--22.5 miles/gallon depending on how you drive isn't bad for a vehicle that can tow your boat,jet skis, travel trailer etc.--of course you won't be getting 22.5 while towing such items but running with just yourself in the driver's seat that ain't all bad, considering you have the option to tow a heavy load. There are going to be people who need vehicles that can pull these toys around (every one of these toys is an industry) and this would be an attractive vehicle for them. You can't fight physics on this, if you want to be able to pull heavy loads, you are going to go through some fuel. Diesel is more efficient for heavy pulling, but the up-front cost is killer. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 323 Registered: 12-2006 |
What I wonder is why aren't the big 3 putting more into really fuel-efficient vehicles for commuting. I have a truck, too (F-150) and things I need to pull with it, but that's once every few weekends; I drive a car to work every damned day. It would benefit me a lot more to have a super fuel efficient car than to have a relatively more fuel efficient truck. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 2093 Registered: 06-2004 |
"What I wonder is why aren't the big 3 putting more into really fuel-efficient vehicles for commuting" because few Americans will buy them electric power steering, huh? How does everyone feel about electric control systems - steering, brakes, etc.? | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 325 Registered: 12-2006 |
Few Americans will buy them?! What about the millions of Americans buying foreign-made, fuel-efficient cars? Also, what about the millions of European and Asian consumers, whom the big two-and-a-half claim are an important base of potential customers? Breathtaking. | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2594 Registered: 10-2003 |
The electric steering is just the power assist. The steering is still mechanically connected through the steering column. It’s not a true fly by wire system as used in Airplanes. (Those are being developed, just not ready for use yet.) The only drive by wire system in place currently is the throttle mechanism. You have to go to electric assist systems in Hybrid vehicles. The hybrid systems shut off the gas engine during braking. This would kill the hydraulic power to both brakes and the power steering assist unit. Power steering is most needed at slow speed when the engine would tend to be off in a hybrid system. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 326 Registered: 12-2006 |
I would put up with more personal effort to steer the vehicle in exchange for better mileage. My first car had neither power windows, nor power steering, nor power brakes, and somehow I was able to get around. Gasoline is $3.20 a gallon at many stations I passed today. I would be willing to expend more personal calories in order to use less of it. But that's just me. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 327 Registered: 12-2006 |
Snippet of an article from the Southeast Missourian: "Hybrid sales soaring Monday, April 30, 2007 By Tim Krakowiak ~ Southeast Missourian As the temperature rises, so do fuel prices and a push for cars that get good gas mileage. Across the United States, gas prices have increased about 30 cents over the past month, and hybrid vehicle sales are at an all-time high. Two of the increasing number of places that carry hybrid vehicles in Cape Girardeau are Coad Toyota and Cape Girardeau Honda, both on Siemers Drive, the area's largest car dealer strip. 'Sales this year have increased dramatically,' said sales manager Paul Horton at Coad Toyota. 'There's been a lot of interest in hybrids, especially over the last couple of weeks with gas prices creeping up.' Horton said this is the first time the company has had more than one Toyota Prius -- which is advertised at 51 to 60 miles per gallon -- on the lot at a time. Now they have three or four. Toyota Prius topped the customer satisfaction survey in this year's annual Consumer Reports." That's enough of the article. Now the caption for the accompanying photograph: "Casey and Laura Miller of Cape Girardeau looked at a 2007 Toyota Prius hybrid car Sunday at Coad Toyota. 'We are looking at down-sizing,' Casey said, from their current Ford Explorer so they can get better gas mileage." 'nuff said. The Prof | ||
Sknutson Member Username: Sknutson Post Number: 863 Registered: 03-2004 |
quote: Its too bad that the U.S. automakers don't feel like competing on the coasts anymore. Been to CA lately and seen what is on the road here? | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2595 Registered: 10-2003 |
Professor scott, My comment was targeted at lilpup's comment about the electric poser steering. A Tahoe without power steering assist would be undriveable at slow speeds for anyone without significant upper body strength. They're too heavy, have large tire contact spots and a low ratio of steering wheel turns lock to lock. Add a large trailer to that and you'd have a hard time keeping it on the road. The electric steering assist systems are also far more fuel efficient than the hydraulic ones. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 2096 Registered: 06-2004 |
At one time Lincoln was going to go all fiber optic in their vehicles - what happened to that? | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 328 Registered: 12-2006 |
Ndavies, My problem is the domestic industry's focus on making behemoths like the Tahoes slightly more efficient instead of building actual efficient vehicles that people can use to commute. I'm not opposed to the notion that large vehicles should be more fuel efficient; I'm just saying the domestic industry's focus should not be entirely on that but should be more holistic. The Prof | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 329 Registered: 12-2006 |
...by the way I realize this whole discussion is kind of a thread jack - sorry about that aspect of it | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 2098 Registered: 06-2004 |
Focuses are selling ok, but not seeing a lot of people flock to the Aveo - both fuel efficient cars In March four of the top ten selling vehicles were trucks/vans/SUV | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2597 Registered: 10-2003 |
American drivers want vehicles to support their lifestyles. Micro cars can't always do that. Americans still need trucks to pull their boats, tow their trailers, fix up their homes, cart around their family, friends and a whole lot of crap. It was the Fuel economy regulations that drove drivers out of full frame cars that could tow into SUV's. It was these same fuel regulations that have allowed the number of miles driven to skyrocket over the last 25 years. The Camry is the number 3 vehicle in this country not number 1. The Ford F-150 still outsells the Camry almost 2 to 1. The Chevy silverado is number 2. The Accord is number 4. Even Ford's lowly econoline Van outsold the prius in the first quarter of this year. It doesn't matter if the 25% savings comes on a 3 ton truck or a 1500 pound car the savings is still 25%. All vehicles need to get better fuel economy. Spending the money to improve the fuel economy on their biggest selling vehicles makes the most sense. The Tahoe has the same powertrains as the pickup trucks. They're using the Tahoe as the proving ground before they put it on their biggest sellers. These systems will find their way onto the pickups within 3 years. It's also much easier for a $30K to $50K vehicle to mask the added price of a hybrid system. | ||
Futurecity Member Username: Futurecity Post Number: 533 Registered: 05-2005 |
Tahoes? Towing boats? $5.00 a gallon gas can't get here quick enough. | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2525 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote:Yes, and a 25% improvement in a pickup that uses 1000 gallons per year is better for the environment, our energy security and the owner's wallet than a 25% improvement in a small car that uses only 500 gallons per year. This same principle could be applied to the GM hybrid buses. Buses are inherently low MPG and high use vehicles. One hybrid bus saves more gallons of fuel every year than a fleet of Priuses, yet I'll bet most have never even heard of GM's hybrid buses. There's certainly merit in making a fuel-sipper of a car even more efficient but if you want to make big gains in overall fuel consumption you'll target low MPG, high volume and high usage vehicles. There's an element of "green bragging rights" or something that puts the focus on the smallest vehicles instead of where you get the most improvement. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 1232 Registered: 04-2006 |
If you want to get serious about saving fuel, we need to have a national policy to drop the speed limit back to 55 mph. We also need to promote living closer to where you work as a strategy to reduce our dependance on oil. Stress needs to be placed on saving time/money by living where you don't need to transfer to get to work. An added benefit is that when you live closer to work you increase your commuting options so that you might be able to take the bus or bike to work (Saving both money and reducing the demand for oil). I read this article today about oil producing countries, subsidizing oil, and how we are not getting a fair deal on the open market. http://biz.yahoo.com/cnnm/0705 04/050407_gas_demand.html?.v=1 &.pf=family-home (Message edited by Detroitplanner on May 07, 2007) | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 2101 Registered: 06-2004 |
^^Nah, never happen, it's easier for the rest of the country to use Detroit as the scapegoat | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 330 Registered: 12-2006 |
Toyota is the #1 automaker worldwide. Remember Americans aren't the only people on Earth who buy cars. If Detroit's big 2.5 insist on making gas-hog behemoths for the American market and nothing else, then they will sell only to that segment of the American market and Toyota and friends will gladly displace them the rest of the world over, and to an increasing extent here as well. Futurecity hopes for $5 gas; it is nearly here in Canada, half a mile away, and has long been here in Europe. This is why Detroit's automakers will continue to fall further and further behind, and shed jobs here and elsewhere. We can't keep pretending that we can all keep our jobs by selling cars to each other, here in Michigan. The rest of the world doesn't see it the same way Ford and company see it. Detroitplanner, you can only live near where you work if your job is reliable or if you don't mind having to move pretty frequently. Of course, if you live in a region where most jobs are focused on one central area, that's easier; but this is Detroit. Also, everywhere else if you live near a big city you have the option of taking the train. That's a large mass-transit vehicle with steel wheels that runs on a pair of parallel steel rails, for those of you who've lived here all your lives and don't know. They are faster and (some say) nicer than buses. But we know better. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 2103 Registered: 06-2004 |
Prof, the worldwide reality is the exact opposite of what you write - American automakers dominate overseas Another thing - before all the trimming in recent years, American automakers were grossly overcapacitized ~ they were carrying the ability to build 125% of what the domestic market demanded ~ due primarily to increased manufacturing efficiencies And Toyota has been #1 for only one quarter so far (and I think that was in units only, not revenue) so don't get too excited | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1415 Registered: 11-2003 |
Track75. You made the point I was planning to. Good post. Putting this hybrid system on 500,000 trucks and SUV's (might be possible, say if Ford, GM, Dodge, Toyota trucks and SUVs had a decent take rate on a hybrid system...that itself is another debate) that will save far more fuel than switching from a Corolla to a Prius at 75,000 units per year. This makes sense. It also makes sense because these vehicles are more expensive with higher profit margins, which means they can better hide the hybrid cost. If they started by putting this system on a Malibu, that Malibu would likely be too costly relative to its non-hybrid version and nobody'd be interested. Lastly, Americans do dominate overseas. GM is number 1 in China. I believe GM Europe is #1 or #2 behind VW in Europe. Ford Europe also does very well. Same in Australia. This is actually beneficial as the companies are finally starting to use their global resources to bring all the best of all areas of the world where they're needed. In the coming years, we'll see hybrids from the USA, diesel from Europe, rear drive cars from Australia, small econo cars from Korea, etc. Lastly, GM is planning to offer this system in upcoming vehicles over the next few years, including smaller/midsize cars. It is likely they will also start to bring diesel engines to the US as well. Most of their cars are ethanol capable. The plug in hybrid is another. GM is also the world leader in hydrogen propulsion for automobiles. Maybe only Honda comes close. I think this is a very smart strategy actually. There is a lot of uncertainty as to the power source of vehicles in the coming decades. Oil will likely still be around, but will we be seeing more ethanol? Will hydrogen be ready to roar? Will diesels become popular or will Americans embrace hybrids? By having (and expanding) options in all these categories, GM is positioning itself to be ready to react to whichever direction the market takes. Very smart. Could also end up like Europe, where most cars come with a slew of engine options. A VW Jetta can be had with about 5 gasoline engines and 3 diesel engines there. Perhaps GM is setting up to offer similar here. Want a Malibu with a hybrid, gas, diesel, or plug in? We got it for ya! And the 55mph speed limit is just stupid. That mockery was probably the most hair-brained law related to fuel economy (made worse by the "speed kills" garbage they brought with it). People won't go 55. By setting speeds at that limit, you end up with more dangerous situations (speed differential), plus people will go fast anyway. Bottom line, people will never give GM credit. I personally am impressed with their 2 years of turnaround and their upcoming products, technology, and ability to adapt to whichever propulsion system comes into vogue sets them up to be a world leader in transportation. There is no end to the "war" in the auto industry. I do think GM is setup to win an awful lot of the upcoming battles. They will need to continue that trajectory to remain a force in the industry. | ||
Supersport Member Username: Supersport Post Number: 11557 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: It's not like you can fit 7 people in your little Yaris and haul a boat behind it. There are certain people who need an SUV, GM is catering to that crowd. Some people bitch just to bitch. If they weren't working on making their full sized SUV's more efficient, people would complain. The fact that they ARE making them more efficient, people still complain. Lastly, how in the hell is Toyota getting a free pass here? Didn't they just release their biggest truck ever? Is it available in hybrid, since they've had the technology forever! How about any news about their big truck getting 25% better fuel economy? As I've said, and I know I'm not alone, I don't care how expensive gas gets. I'd NEVER drive a car as small as a Yaris, Prius, or the other econo boxes out there. That's great that there are those who are willing to, but that's not me. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 1234 Registered: 04-2006 |
Professor Scott, many folks are clogging the roads during the peak travel periods mainly due to not living by where they work. Just think about savings in time if everyone cut their commute in half. This would lead to less cars on the road overall. It would also increase the productivity of trade in the area, reduce fuel usage, and make it easier to use transit. Like it or not, most folks make irrational decisions about locating where they do, or taking a job across town. The more rational we can be as a whole will help solve several ills. | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1621 Registered: 10-2003 |
Well, Sport, we definitely know where each of us stand, right? I DO see the need for some people to have a large truck or SUV as a secondary vehicle. Sometimes you have to haul people or large objects around. However, my position is that those kinds of vehicles are too expensive to operate as everyday drivers. I likewise understand the lure of owning a classic or "muscle" car that one drives once or twice a week in nice weather. Nothing wrong with that, if you decide you can afford such a luxury in this economy we have. Someone mentioned the Aveo earlier as a fuel-efficient car. It's not. I looked at it. It gets only maybe 25 mpg (real world) in the city, which is very poor for its class (subcompact commuter car). Build quality is total crap too (it's a rebadged Korean Daewoo). It feels like a cheap, poorly made car inside when you sit in it. The Toyota Yaris and Honda Fit do not; they have a much more solid, well-made feel. The Focus is a little better than the Aveo, but still feels pretty downscale when you're sitting inside it. MPG is a little better than the Aveo but nothing special -- a Focus still generally doesn't even achieve 30 mpg in the city. 30 mpg city, to me, is the minimum. ProfessorScott gets it: the US automakers need to make the super fuel-efficient (hybrid or not) daily commuter vehicle their bread-and-butter. This is what more and more Americans are buying as gas prices continue to increase. Sure, strive to better the efficiency of the SUVs and the trucks as well, but those are strictly niche vehicles and their market is shrinking. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 333 Registered: 12-2006 |
Detroitplanner, These days people take a job wherever they can get one. I know a lady who lives in Dearborn and works in Port Huron, not because she wants to, but because that's the closest she could find a job. And forget about trying to sell her house. Jobs are scattered all over the metro area; it's not as simple as just take a job near where you live. Nobody is hiring near where I live (for instance). So the next best thing would be to have access to a super fuel efficient car, but since I buy American, I'm locked out. Varying work shifts would help - if the rush hour was five hours instead of two and a half, you'd have nearly no congestion at all. But how do you accomplish that? | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 1622 Registered: 10-2003 |
"electric power steering, huh? How does everyone feel about electric control systems - steering, brakes, etc.?" My Yaris has electric power steering and I love it. It handles great for the type of vehicle it is, and the turning radius is small. Easy to park and maneuver. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 334 Registered: 12-2006 |
Incidentally, if Toyota is outselling GM worldwide (granted, so far only for one quarter, but watch) and if GM is outselling Toyota "overseas", then exactly how is it that Toyota is selling GM worldwide? If Toyota is selling more than GM in the United States, then how can some of you make the arguments you do? And if they aren't outselling GM in the US or overseas, than precisely where is it happening? My math is pretty good, and I don't see how this works. | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2599 Registered: 10-2003 |
The only location Toyota is consistently outselling GM is in Japan. Japan is a very closed market to US manufacturers. This is actually a bad situation for the Japanese auto manufacturers. Their home market is dying due to the rapidly aging population. Total Vehicle sales declined sharply in Japan during the first quarter. If the Japanese market continues to decay Toyota won't hold on to their number one status for very long. This is the reason all the Japanese manufacturers are dumping huge amounts of money into development for the North American market. This is the reason Toyota upsized their Tacoma pickup into the fuel sucking behemoth it now is. They know their home market is quickly declining and need to grow in North America. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 335 Registered: 12-2006 |
Ndavies, Fascinating stuff. I had known about Japan being a closed market but I never considered that market to be big enough to make much difference. I was listening to WWJ this morning and a gentleman came on and said two things I found interesting. He was introduced as some kind of expert. He said: 1. Gasoline use in the United States is up 1.7% from last year; 2. If instead it were down 2% from last year the retail price of gasoline would be at least 50c per gallon less than what it is. The moral of this story: Please, kids, use the Hummer to tow the camper, but take the Escort to work  Professor Scott | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2600 Registered: 10-2003 |
Japan was the third largest vehicle market in the world last year. It was the second largest market up until last year. It was just passed by China. Europe would be the largest buyer of vehicles if they are treated as one block. 5.74 million vehicles were sold in Japan last year. US Sales were just shy of 16 million vehicles last year. The Japanese market is about 1/3 the size of the US market. I would consider that a very large market. Total European sales were in the 18 million unit range. | ||
93typhoon Member Username: 93typhoon Post Number: 20 Registered: 04-2006 |
A good % of Toyota's sales increase here in the US comes from Trucks and SUV. This is a huge % of the US car market (over 40%) GM builds the most fuel efficient vehicles in these segments and the Hybrids will only make them better. It is just stupid to state that "GM don't get it". GM makes the best vehicle in the highest profit market segment. GM is making a very smart business decision. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 2105 Registered: 06-2004 |
quote:and this is exactly why trying to conserve only by boosting CAFE standards fails - people just drive more | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2601 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: I'm sure that number tracks the GDP growth from last year to this year. I don't think the fuel prices will have an effect until the summer. That's when most people make their discretionary trips. It's not possible to cut out the trips to work, school or the kids events. What can be cut is a trip up north or the planned vacation to visit all the relatives around the country. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 1235 Registered: 04-2006 |
Professor Scott I am speaking in terms of general goals. You will always find folks not following them. However, congestion would be much less along I-94 for instance if so many folks would not drive such long distances for work. Needless to say, folks would also be a lot less stressed out. | ||
Mercman Member Username: Mercman Post Number: 22 Registered: 10-2006 |
The technology has existed for years, but the US auto makers bought the patents and surpressed it. Out of fear. Regenerative braking? This isn't a new thought. It's only now, when forced, that the US auto makers are dusting off their patents (usually created by individuals apart from the big 3; who were cast off as "weirdos" at the time - and snapped up and bought out when they realized they posed a threat to the big 3.) 22 MPG? With all this "technology"? B/S Big improvement. GM needs to dust off the battery technology patents they stole from that old guy in Troy. He was on to something. But like anything else revolutionary his ideas were bought up and he was told to shut up. I think everyone needs to see this: "Who Killed the Electric Car" http://www.amazon.com/Who-Kill ed-Electric-Martin-Sheen/dp/B0 00I5Y8FU/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-6 025888-0508642?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&q id=1178948528&sr=1-1 Answer- GM did, when they found it could be successful, and piss the oil companies off. I'm a die-hard gearhead and all about 70's muscle cars, but it made me think twice... We're all sheep. We can put a man on the moon in the 1960's, but we've struggled for 30 years to average 30 MPG? Come on. (Message edited by mercman on May 12, 2007) |
