Toyota Camry Hybrid Gets The Kid Gloves Treatment

[Shantanu]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drive...rticleId=115799

Quote »

What Works:

Peerless hybrid system, excellent fuel economy figures, refined good looks, kicking audio system.

What Needs Work:

Trunk space very limited to accommodate hybrid battery, sluggish in steep uphill climbs.

Bottom Line:

Toyota is without equal when it comes to hybrid technology.

Quote »

On one 17.2-gallon tank of gas, Toyota claims you can drive 650 miles. Rated at 40 mpg/city and 38 mpg/highway by the EPA, the Camry Hybrid was daring us to test it. So we conducted our own fuel economy experiments and got similarly dramatic results. On our city loops, we made moderate starts at traffic lights and were careful not to exceed 45 mph. We averaged 38.4 mpg.

Likewise, we experimented on the freeway, setting cruise control to 60 mph and watching the fuel economy gauge hover just above the electric motor level, blending electric power with a minimum of gasoline. On inclines, the meter climbed to 40-percent gasoline. We averaged a staggering 42.4 mpg. Granted, this was with a completely charged battery that could draw full electric power. But it goes to show that if you drive this car prudently, you really can travel more than 650 miles per tank.

During our time with the Camry Hybrid, our overall fuel economy was 32.6 mpg.

Compare the Camry Hybrid EPA numbers to the Honda Accord Hybrid, which is rated at 25 city, 34 highway. In fairness, the six-cylinder Accord Hybrid doesn't really use its hybrid technology for maximum fuel efficiency, but rather to supplement its 253 horsepower. Another fuel-efficient option could be the Volkswagen Jetta diesel. It only offers 100 hp, but is rated 35 city, 42 highway.

Quote »

With a 0-60 time of 8.6 seconds, you won't win any drag races in the Camry Hybrid, but no one will make fun of you as you try to merge onto the freeway either. The numbers aren't bad compared to the previous-generation non-hybrid Camry with an inline-four engine, which took 10.3 seconds to reach 60 mph in our comparison test against a Honda Accord and Hyundai Sonata. The Accord, which was also a four-cylinder, managed 9.5 seconds while the Sonata, even though it was a V6, took 8.2 seconds. For the record, the V6-powered 2007 Camry XLE cut 0-60 times to 6.5 seconds.

It looks like they went out of their way to drive it as softly as possible, to maximize fuel economy and make Toyota look good (or at least, not as bad) for once again delivering a vehicle that gets no where near it's promised gas mileage. Who drives at 60 mph on the expressway? That's below the speed limit on most interstate highways. Here in Ohio, most people whizz by at 70, and people say this is a state full of slow drivers.

If they were testing - say - GM's new hybrid the Saturn Vue Green Line, I'd bet you money they would floor the acceleration at each traffic light, and push it at 80+ on the expressway, just so they could later moan about the fuel economy figures.

Or look at this way: they drove it like a 90 year old penny pinching grandma with slow reflexes and they got 32.6 mpg. If you drive it like a normal 25 something guy, what kind of fuel economy do you think you'll manage.

Edited June 20, 2006 by Shantanu

[Flybrian]

I can get 28/9 mpg with cruise set at 60 and no air conditioning out of my decade-old V8 tank. Woohoo.

[Variance]

The Camry Hybrid does get it's advertised mileage (and it isn't the first test where it has, either). In the city, they averaged 38.4; it's rated for 40. On the highway, they got 42.4; it's rated for 38. The combined number isn't to bad, either.

I don't think they we're treating it softly as you claim. Most people do make moderate starts at traffic lights. Do you mash the pedal at every green light? And not 45 miles per isn't usual for city streets, either. Many have 25-30 limits.

As for the highway, around here anyway, 60 isn't that slow; it's above the limit in fact. If you drive at reasonable highway speeds, I don't see how you can't reach those figures.

Guys, the Camry Hybrid lives up to the claims.

[BuddyP]

"During our time with the Camry Hybrid, our overall fuel economy was 32.6 mpg."

The woman's Alero with over 180000 miles just average 32.5 mpg at our last fill up. That was with averaging 75mph on the highway and mixing in some city stop and go driving.

For kicks, my Avalanche got 20.5 mpg driving to Cleveland and back averaging 67-70 mph. It's rated at 17 hwy. It'd be closer to 23-24mpg if I set the cruise at 60mph.

My point with the Av milage is that while Edmonds only got a small percentage better milage while easing along at 60, the Av would be a good 30% better at that speed. I wonder what the Alero would do at 60mph??

Edited June 20, 2006 by BuddyP

[siegen]

During our time with the Camry Hybrid, our overall fuel economy was 32.6 mpg

Assuming that 32.6 figure included some performance runs, it isn't half bad. Although I'm sure they babied it considerably to get the 38/42 mpg figures. I'll bet the 32mpg combined is more indicative of real world conditions. And for a 190hp mid size sedan, it isn't bad at all.

The Hybrid Accord on the other hand, doesn't have to be babied to get its fuel economy figures, which aren't half bad either (28 combined from normal drivers). Considering only 4mpg difference, and the Accord can be driven like a normal V6 sedan, I know what I would buy.

Edited June 20, 2006 by siegen

[pow]

Apart from the smallish trunk, this seems to be the first no-compromise full hybrid. It has the performance and price of most V-6s, but the consumption of a 4-cylinder compact.

[thedriver]

But if it is rated 40 city and 38 highway, why are they happy with 32 combined? Shouldn't it be more like 39 or so?

[sciguy_0504]

Cue MPG stories.

Oops...too late.

[Newbiewar]

I can get 28/9 mpg with cruise set at 60 and no air conditioning out of my decade-old V8 tank. Woohoo.

yea and if you draft off of a big rig you could also see a 10-15% gain in fuel ecconomy as well

[siegen]

Apart from the smallish trunk, this seems to be the first no-compromise full hybrid. It has the performance and price of most V-6s, but the consumption of a 4-cylinder compact.

I wouldn't say no-compromise. It has the performance of a 4cyl, not a 6cyl. 0-60 in 8.6s? That's grandma speed. The Accord EX V6 6mt Sedan does that in 5.9s. Now there's a respectable family sedan.

Maybe it's due to the 3,680 lbs curb weight of the Camry hybid, that's 100 lbs more than the V6 Accord hybrid!

And it isn't exactly cheap, starting at $1,000 more than what the Accord V6 EX starts at, and then add on the probable dealer markup. I'm willing to bet Camry hybrids will start at $28,000 or so at most dealers (MSRP is $26,480 after destination).

Then there's the plentiful transmission options for Toyota's hybrids... oh wait, you only get one option, a CVT. No 5at, no 6at, no 6mt. Too bad. Just a boring CVT.

[pow]

I wouldn't say no-compromise. It has the performance of a 4cyl, not a 6cyl. 0-60 in 8.6s? That's grandma speed. The Accord EX V6 6mt Sedan does that in 5.9s. Now there's a respectable family sedan.

Edmunds does 0-60 consistenly slower than everybody else. R&T did it in 7.3, C&D in 7.7, and M/T in 7.9. Those are certainly the performance figures of an average V-6.

Maybe it's due to the 3,680 lbs curb weight of the Camry hybid, that's 100 lbs more than the V6 Accord hybrid!

And it isn't exactly cheap, starting at $1,000 more than what the Accord V6 EX starts at, and then add on the probable dealer markup. I'm willing to bet Camry hybrids will start at $28,000 or so at most dealers (MSRP is $26,480 after destination).

The Accord EX V6 starts at $27,850...

Then there's the plentiful transmission options for Toyota's hybrids... oh wait, you only get one option, a CVT. No 5at, no 6at, no 6mt. Too bad. Just a boring CVT.

Yep, a CVT, for performance and fuel economy.

[siegen]

Edmunds does 0-60 consistenly slower than everybody else. R&T did it in 7.3, C&D  in 7.7, and M/T in 7.9. Those are certainly the performance figures of an average V-6.

What is the average V6 then? Apparently much slower than the Accord, since even with a 5sp Auto, it lays down a quick 6.6s 0-60 (as does the new Sonata by C&D's test). The average of all of those Camry hybrid times comes to 7.88, which is almost into Accord 4cyl range with a 5sp manual trans.

The Accord EX V6 starts at $27,850...

Sorry, I meant LX V6, which is $25,650 after destination.

Yep, a CVT, for performance and fuel economy.

Unless Toyota made some sort of CVT break through, a 5sp Auto should still be more efficient. And a 6sp Manual would be even better. Come to think of it, Honda should offer the 6mt for the Accord hybrid. Now that would be a quick hybrid.

Edited June 20, 2006 by siegen

[pow]

What is the average V6 then? Apparently much slower than the Accord, since even with a 5sp Auto, it lays down a quick 6.6s 0-60 (as does the new Sonata by C&D's test). The average of all of those Camry hybrid times comes to 7.88, which is almost into Accord 4cyl range with a 5sp manual trans.

No one mentioned the Accord but you, and the Accord isn't the only family sedan that exists. The Camry hybrid has a 0-60 time comparable to V6 competitors, including the Ford 500, Chrysler 300 3.5, Pontiac G6 GT (and Grand Prix GT2), Mazda 6 V6 (mt), and Chevy Malibu LT (all C&D data). That's also identical to last year's Camry V6.

Sorry, I meant LX V6, which is $25,650 after destination.

Unless Toyota made some sort of CVT break through, a 5sp Auto should still be more efficient. And a 6sp Manual would be even better. Come to think of it, Honda should offer the 6mt for the Accord hybrid.    Now that would be a quick hybrid.

If you expect to feel the difference between a 5A and theoretical 6MT Accord hybrid, you won't be getting anywhere close to EPA MPG figures.

[Shantanu]

As for the highway, around here anyway, 60 isn't that slow; it's above the limit in fact. If you drive at reasonable highway speeds, I don't see how you can't reach those figures.

Maybe in your lame state. Here it's 65 and everyone drives 70+. In many nearby states, it's 70.

[regfootball]

The Camry Hybrid does get it's advertised mileage (and it isn't the first test where it has, either). In the city, they averaged 38.4; it's rated for 40. On the highway, they got 42.4; it's rated for 38. The combined number isn't to bad, either.

I don't think they we're treating it softly as you claim. Most people do make moderate starts at traffic lights. Do you mash the pedal at every green light? And not 45 miles per isn't usual for city streets, either. Many have 25-30 limits.

As for the highway, around here anyway, 60 isn't that slow; it's above the limit in fact. If you drive at reasonable highway speeds, I don't see how you can't reach those figures.

Guys, the Camry Hybrid lives up to the claims.

the two main tests I've seen now have said 32.8 and 33 mpg. that's NOT the epa claims of 40/38. I'd say it underdelivers. The proof is in the numbers!

most intown freewy traffic exceeds 50 and 55 mph. most is 60-75 mph. rural interstate speeds hit 80 usually.

[siegen]

No one mentioned the Accord but you, and the Accord isn't the only family sedan that exists. The Camry hybrid has a 0-60 time comparable to V6 competitors, including the Ford 500, Chrysler 300 3.5, Pontiac G6 GT (and Grand Prix GT2), Mazda 6 V6 (mt), and Chevy Malibu LT (all C&D data). That's also identical to last year's Camry V6.

I mention the Accord because I can remember most of the numbers off the top of my head, and it is the main competition to the Camry. I know there are other midsize sedans out there with a V6, which will be even less expensive than the Accord, but I didn't feel like looking them up. Call me lazy. :AH-HA_wink:

If you expect to feel the difference between a 5A and theoretical 6MT Accord hybrid, you won't be getting anywhere close to EPA MPG figures.

I don't understand what you're saying. I would expect to feel a difference between a 5at and 6mt. The 6mt will probably get better mileage too, being lighter and with less drivetrain loss (and having better gear ratio's to some extent). I'm not saying it would be a good idea or profitable, but I think it would be neat, if anything just so Honda could brag about having an even faster hybrid.

[pow]

Another source to consider... the Camry hybrid is averaging 37 MPG here: http://www.greenhybrid.com/compare/mileage/

[Snate]

Well...at least it doesn't completely underperform like the Prius. I still stick by my statement that the eventual hybrid Malibu will be a much better deal with this if GM doesn't mess it up.

[RBB]

Re: the kid gloves thing - it seems to me Edmunds was evaluating Toyota's claim of a 650 mi range between fillups. They found that if you treat the car with kid gloves, then that range is attainable.

I don't think they were babying it just to prop the car up, though I'd like to have seen them done a cycle with more normal driving conditions (harder starts, stop-and-go, keeping up with normal traffic flow instead of cruising at 60 mph) for comparison.

It's okay to admit that Toyota does hybrids well. For those who are environmentally conscious (or at least want to appear that way) and don't mind 4-cyl-esque performance, it's a nice choice.

Personally, I don't care for hybrids b/c they're not cost effective. But, they do have a place in the market, and the Camry Hybrid is a decent entry. Lets hope the Aura hybrid holds its own when it debuts.

-RBB

[regfootball]

Another source to consider... the Camry hybrid is averaging 37 MPG here: http://www.greenhybrid.com/compare/mileage/

you're not talking normal drivers there. those are candy assers who turn off their air and coast 1/8 mile into the supermarket parking lot.

[regfootball]

Re: the kid gloves thing - it seems to me Edmunds was evaluating Toyota's claim of a 650 mi range between fillups.  They found that if you treat the car with kid gloves, then that range is attainable. 

I don't think they were babying it just to prop the car up, though I'd like to have seen them done a cycle with more normal driving conditions (harder starts, stop-and-go, keeping up with normal traffic flow instead of cruising at 60 mph) for comparison.

It's okay to admit that Toyota does hybrids well.  For those who are environmentally conscious (or at least want to appear that way) and don't mind 4-cyl-esque performance, it's a nice choice. 

Personally, I don't care for hybrids b/c they're not cost effective.  But, they do have a place in the market, and the Camry Hybrid is a decent entry.  Lets hope the Aura hybrid holds its own when it debuts.

-RBB

what pisses me off about auto journalism today is that most of the time when they do mileage testing, its for maybe a couple thousand miles if we're lucky. the only milegae test numbers I consider highly trustworthy are say, 40,000 mile tests. Or even 10,000 mile. I read one test lately where they said 'mileage on a 200 mile test loop'. PLEASE! 200 miles, that's worthless! 650 is no better. What if your tank was topped off low when you started and didn't fill 105% when you filled it at the end of the test? That alone could mess up your real numbers 10%

[siegen]

what pisses me off about auto journalism today is that most of the time when they do mileage testing, its for maybe a couple thousand miles if we're lucky.  the only milegae test numbers I consider highly trustworthy are say, 40,000 mile tests.  Or even 10,000 mile.  I read one test lately where they said 'mileage on a 200 mile test loop'.  PLEASE!  200 miles, that's worthless!  650 is no better.  What if your tank was topped off low when you started and didn't fill 105% when you filled it at the end of the test?  That alone could mess up your real numbers 10%

You don't need to travel 10,000 miles to get an accurate test of mileage. 600 miles is sufficient, assuming they do two individual 600 mile runs, each with 100% city or freeway driving. And with the performane testing seperate.

It's up to the consumer to look at the city and freeway figures, and decide how much of each they will be doing, and how aggressive of a driver they are, to figure out what kind of mileage they'll be getting.

I think the main problem with reported mileage by these guys, is that they won't always truthfully report the kind of driving they did. And "aggressive" driving or "light" driving can mean two entirely different things between two reviewers. Then there's the problem that not all reviewers follow a strict procedure for getting accurate mileage ratings. Hell, some of the guys even go off of what the mileage guage says.

[Robert Hall]

Maybe in your lame state.    Here it's 65 and everyone drives 70+.  In many nearby states, it's 70.

75 here... and when it's dry and sunny (75% or more days per year), the traffic usually flows along at 80-85 outside of the metro areas on the interstates. The 2-lane state/US roads are usually 65.

[The O.C.]

I can get 28/9 mpg with cruise set at 60 and no air conditioning out of my decade-old V8 tank. Woohoo.

I just averaged (only) 21.5mpg in a Grand Prix 3800 V6 over 300 miles. For comparison, the trip computer showed 22.1mpg.

That was with very little lead-foot-driving....but not feathering the throttle either. It was mostly two-lane highway driving in and around 50mph-70mph. Next to no stoplight or city driving. There was about 20 miles that was climbing from about sea level to 4,000 feet which would drag it down, but the vast majority of my driving was "normal."

Thing is....I'm not complaining. I would expect just about any V6-powered midsize sedan to average low 20's in mixed, normal driving.

Sure....on a straight, 65-70mph, cruise-controlled freeway cruise the Grand Prix would probably have moved up around 26-28mpg....but more realistic driving is closer to 20mpg.

A Camry Hybrid averaging 32mpg in realistic driving, with the performance capabilities of the Camry Hybrid, is a pretty good deal and worth some praise.

[Flybrian]

A Camry Hybrid averaging 32mpg in realistic driving, with the performance capabilities of the Camry Hybrid, is a pretty good deal and worth some praise.

Okay. How about this - its a good economy car wrapped in a disjointed, discolored wrapper with no trunk space?

And I'm serious about the color. Toyota could not have chosen a worse 'exclusive' paint scheme for this car. It really reminds me of that "Metallic Pea" wagon from Vacation in person. I also don't understand why the infinitely more appealing Aloe Green and Sky Blue aren't even available on the hybrid, much less black. Its like you're rewarded with fuel economy, but cursed with a horribly bland selection of paint. What the heck?

[The O.C.]

What is the average V6 then? Apparently much slower than the Accord, since even with a 5sp Auto, it lays down a quick 6.6s 0-60 (as does the new Sonata by C&D's test). The average of all of those Camry hybrid times comes to 7.88, which is almost into Accord 4cyl range with a 5sp manual trans.

C&D got a Malibu LT V6 sedan and (ironically the same time) a G6 GT at 7.9secs from 0-60 with the 3.5L engine.....so according to the "numbers" the Camry Hybrid would stay a bit ahead of either of these cars in a stoplight drag race....

[CaddyXLR-V]

I just averaged (only) 21.5mpg in a Grand Prix 3800 V6 over 300 miles.  For comparison, the trip computer showed 22.1mpg. 

That was with very little lead-foot-driving....but not feathering the throttle either.  It was mostly two-lane highway driving in and around 50mph-70mph.  Next to no stoplight or city driving.  There was about 20 miles that was climbing from about sea level to 4,000 feet which would drag it down, but the vast majority of my driving was "normal."

Thing is....I'm not complaining.  I would expect just about any V6-powered midsize sedan to average low 20's in mixed, normal driving.

Sure....on a straight, 65-70mph, cruise-controlled freeway cruise the Grand Prix would probably have moved up around 26-28mpg....but more realistic driving is closer to 20mpg.

A Camry Hybrid averaging 32mpg in realistic driving, with the performance capabilities of the Camry Hybrid, is a pretty good deal and worth some praise.

I think it needs to be broken in. My 98 Grand Prix GTP( with reprogrammed computer, smaller pulley, and larger throttle body) averaged almost 25mpg in mixed driving. I'm not saying 32mpg is bad, but I get 25mpg with ~100 more hp. I could probably get 30mpg with just highway driving at about 70-75mph.

[Shantanu]

  I think it needs to be broken in. My 98 Grand Prix GTP( with reprogrammed computer, smaller pulley, and larger throttle body) averaged almost 25mpg in mixed driving. I'm not saying 32mpg is bad, but I get 25mpg with ~100 more hp. I could probably get 30mpg with just highway driving at about 70-75mph.

The O.C. takes any opportunity he gets to dump on GM cars, whether he has "facts" or not.

Edited June 22, 2006 by Shantanu

[scharmer05]

For kicks, my Avalanche got 20.5 mpg driving to Cleveland and back averaging 67-70 mph. It's rated at 17 hwy. It'd be closer to 23-24mpg if I set the cruise at 60mph.

i find that hard to believe

[regfootball]

You don't need to travel 10,000 miles to get an accurate test of mileage. 600 miles is sufficient, assuming they do two individual 600 mile runs, each with 100% city or freeway driving. And with the performane testing seperate.

It's up to the consumer to look at the city and freeway figures, and decide how much of each they will be doing, and how aggressive of a driver they are, to figure out what kind of mileage they'll be getting.

I think the main problem with reported mileage by these guys, is that they won't always truthfully report the kind of driving they did. And "aggressive" driving or "light" driving can mean two entirely different things between two reviewers. Then there's the problem that not all reviewers follow a strict procedure for getting accurate mileage ratings. Hell, some of the guys even go off of what the mileage guage says.

no its not. 600 miles is NOT sufficient. sorry.

[regfootball]

I just averaged (only) 21.5mpg in a Grand Prix 3800 V6 over 300 miles.  For comparison, the trip computer showed 22.1mpg. 

That was with very little lead-foot-driving....but not feathering the throttle either.  It was mostly two-lane highway driving in and around 50mph-70mph.  Next to no stoplight or city driving.  There was about 20 miles that was climbing from about sea level to 4,000 feet which would drag it down, but the vast majority of my driving was "normal."

Thing is....I'm not complaining.  I would expect just about any V6-powered midsize sedan to average low 20's in mixed, normal driving.

Sure....on a straight, 65-70mph, cruise-controlled freeway cruise the Grand Prix would probably have moved up around 26-28mpg....but more realistic driving is closer to 20mpg.

A Camry Hybrid averaging 32mpg in realistic driving, with the performance capabilities of the Camry Hybrid, is a pretty good deal and worth some praise.

and my father in law has gotten 35 on trips before with his 3800 Olds 88, and regualrly over 30 on trips. 32mpg in a camry hybrid is good, but not spectacular. especially when it still misses its EPA numbers by 20% AGAIN

Edited June 22, 2006 by regfootball

[regfootball]

Okay. How about this - its a good economy car wrapped in a disjointed, discolored wrapper with no trunk space? 

And I'm serious about the color. Toyota could not have chosen a worse 'exclusive' paint scheme for this car. It really reminds me of that "Metallic Pea" wagon from Vacation in person. I also don't understand why the infinitely more appealing Aloe Green and Sky Blue aren't even available on the hybrid, much less black. Its like you're rewarded with fuel economy, but cursed with a horribly bland selection of paint. What the heck?

have you seen the horrible baby blue on this car?

[regfootball]

C&D got a Malibu LT V6 sedan and (ironically the same time) a G6 GT at 7.9secs from 0-60 with the 3.5L engine.....so according to the "numbers" the Camry Hybrid would stay a bit ahead of either of these cars in a stoplight drag race....

fusion 7.4

Malibu SS 6.9 I thiink

G6 GTP manual 6.5

what was the camry's 5-60 time. that is a better indicator sometimes. roll on times too.

Edited June 22, 2006 by regfootball

[ponchoman49]

Another underwhelming Toyota. I don't need to go 60 mph steady on a highway trip to get my 30 mpg rating in my 02 Intrigue. I know several people with Impalas who are easily obtaining 32 or more on the open road with the 3400 and 3500 V6's and they paid thousands less than this Mazda rip off with fat bloated styling and no trunk space. This car is indeed better than the Prius but thats not saying much.

[siegen]

no its not.  600 miles is NOT sufficient.  sorry.

Care to elaborate?

600 miles is almost two full tanks on the average car. As long as it is recorded correctly, it is a completely acceptable way to measure a car's MPG.

When you start to get into 10k or 40k lifetime measurements for the car, the mileage becomes very dependant on the person's (or team of reviewer's) personal driving habits. It is better for a reviewer to use a more scientific method for determining city mileage and freeway mileage (one that doesn't take a year), and use that as a guideline. Most people aren't going to drive their own car, that they bought with their hard earned money, as hard as a magazine reviewer would for daily to-and-from work purposes.

If i worked at a car magazine, and they gave me a car to drive to and from work every day for a year. Do you really think I would baby it like my own car? Would anybody?

[FAPTurbo]

As much as I dislike Toyota and Hybrid's in general, this car deserves credit where credit is due.

It's a reasonably priced family sedan that offers space that will allow mom and dad to get the kids from soccer practice to a hockey game, or let them get around the city with relative ease. Isn't that what most people want and need these days?

Plus, they may end up saving some cash at the pumps and enjoy the feeling that they are helping to do their part for the environment.

Now I'd never buy one, and I'd rather have a fire breathing V8, but GM should be offering a vehicle similar to this. Yes they have the Vue... but a possible hybrid Malibu?... that makes sugar-free iced milk look like a day (or night!) in Cabo...

[Snate]

It's a reasonably priced family sedan

Define "reasonably". The thing costs almost 26K base...I don't really consider that reasonable.

[regfootball]

Care to elaborate?

600 miles is almost two full tanks on the average car. As long as it is recorded correctly, it is a completely acceptable way to measure a car's MPG.

When you start to get into 10k or 40k lifetime measurements for the car, the mileage becomes very dependant on the person's (or team of reviewer's) personal driving habits. It is better for a reviewer to use a more scientific method for determining city mileage and freeway mileage (one that doesn't take a year), and use that as a guideline. Most people aren't going to drive their own car, that they bought with their hard earned money, as hard as a magazine reviewer would for daily to-and-from work purposes.

If i worked at a car magazine, and they gave me a car to drive to and from work every day for a year. Do you really think I would baby it like my own car? Would anybody?

plain and simple, your mileage varies from tank to tank. you need sevaral tanks before you get a trustworthy number of an average.

so they may test it with one tank and it gets 37.

well, its likely that over 5 tanks the average could end up to be 32, 35 or 40. One tank is not enough. two tanks, no. ten tanks, maybe.

[regfootball]

As much as I dislike Toyota and Hybrid's in general, this car deserves credit where credit is due.

It's a reasonably priced family sedan that offers space that will allow mom and dad to get the kids from soccer practice to a hockey game, or let them get around the city with relative ease. Isn't that what most people want and need these days?

Plus, they may end up saving some cash at the pumps and enjoy the feeling that they are helping to do their part for the environment.

Now I'd never buy one, and I'd rather have a fire breathing V8, but GM should be offering a vehicle similar to this. Yes they have the Vue... but a possible hybrid Malibu?... that makes sugar-free iced milk look like a day (or night!) in Cabo... 

except the trunk isn't big enough for soccer balls because of the damn battery.

[regfootball]

Define "reasonably".  The thing costs almost 26K base...I don't really consider that reasonable.

i suppose the yuppie set thinks 26k is a bargain for a four cylinder sedan.

[pow]

Cue MPG stories.

Oops...too late.

Yeah.....

We've seen them so often that it's almost accepted as fact that GM cars get MPG magically higher than EPA ratings.

[ImpalaPete]

i find that hard to believe

156326[/snapback]

Believe it. My '05 5.3L Silverado extended cab always averages 20mpg in semi-urban driving (no highway). I make no attempt to feather the gas.

[Bizz]

Yeah..... 

We've seen them so often that it's almost accepted as fact that GM cars get MPG magically higher than EPA ratings.

157361[/snapback]

why would it be magic?