Toyota announces new 2.7L four-cylinder for Highlander

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/08/highlander-08-sport.jpg

August 14, 2008 - Torrance, CA - Toyota Motor Sales (TMS), U.S.A., Inc., announced today that the 2009 Highlander mid-size sport utility vehicle (SUV) will offer an all-new, powerful yet fuel-efficient 2.7-liter four-cylinder engine. When it arrives at dealerships in mid-to-late January, the new Highlander powerplant will be among the best mid-size SUVs in the areas of performance, fuel economy and value.

The new 2.7-liter four-cylinder engine will generate an impressive 187 horsepower at 5,800 RPM and 186 lb.-ft. of torque at 4,100 RPM on regular 87 octane fuel. A dual exhaust manifold will help achieve exceptional low-end torque and maximize its power output. In addition to its performance output, the Highlander equipped with the new four-cylinder will be EPA-rated as an Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (ULEVII) and is expected to be among the leaders in fuel efficiency in the gas mid-size SUV segment. Official EPA fuel efficiency ratings will be announced closer to launch.

The new four-cylinder engine will be mated to an all-new six-speed electronically-controlled automatic overdrive transmission with intelligence (ECT-i). The new transmission will help deliver quiet and smooth performance on par with a V6 and acceleration that is surprisingly quick for a four-cylinder. When equipped with a tow package, the new powerplant will achieve a maximum towing capacity of 3,500 pounds.

The new engine will come standard on the Highlander grade two-wheel-drive model equipped with two rows of seats, contributing to its excellent value. A third row seat package will also be available for families requiring additional seating capacity. Other key optional equipment will include an eight-way power driver's seat, manual rear air conditioning, and an AM/FM/six-disc CD Changer with satellite radio capability, MP3/WMA capability and six speakers.

With the new four-cylinder engine, Highlander will be the only mid-size SUV in the current market to offer three powerplant choices. The 3.5-liter Highlander V6, available in two- and full-time four-wheel drive, is among the leaders in fuel efficiency among V6 gas engines in its segment. The full-time 4WD-i Highlander Hybrid, equipped with a V6 powerplant with front and rear electric motors, stands above all others for fuel efficiency among all mid-size SUVs.

Since it first launched in 2001, Highlander has been one of Toyota's most popular vehicles, setting the standard for car-based SUVs in innovation, comfort and sales. Driver and passenger comfort is accomplished with segment leading seating versatility through innovative flexible seating functions for up to seven people. Comfort is complemented with one of the highest levels of standard safety features in the small- and mid-size SUV market including a segment-leading total of seven airbags.

an inside source says
cccccttgtgtgtgtgtgtgtgtgtgtgtgtgfr721
1. 20/26 mpg
2. only available in base trim
3. mid-january at dealers

if 2 is correct that is a BIG Mistake;
now even people with money want gas mileage AND luxury

sorry about the above typo line my parrot jumped on the keyboard just as i hit the submit button - seriously ROTFL

That's funny.

With the weight of the Highlander, I'd expect this model to be for those not often in a hurry. Is 20/26 much better than the current model?

18/24mpg currently with v6

i wish they would post 0-60 number...i wont buy a slug just to get 2 more mpg - would save me 5 month wait if its slooooooow ;)

180 plus HP from the 2.7 isn't bad at all. Not sure what the Highlander weighs but I'd guess 3500 or more. For 2 mpg I'd go for the V6 and have some available power for emergencies or light towing.

Well the current V6 higlander 0-60 is rated for 8.0 seconds, which is pretty quick, and it has an EPA rating or 18/24. The thing weigs 4.490 lbs. The 4 cyl. will undoubtedly be a tick lighter, and it is claimed to put out 187hp/186 lb.ft., compared to the V6's 270 hp, and 248 lb. ft. So the 4cyl. you can expect to be slower, although they did say the transmission and other components have been improved. It'll probably be 0-60 in like what, 10-11 seconds? My guess is that 20/26 mpg is a little low, I bet people who do mixed driving will be able to squeeze 25 out. The question is, is 3 seconds slower to 60 worth another 3 or 4 mpg?

Edit: the Consumer reports website said it weighed 4,490, which must be a mistake. I believe it actually weight 3,900.

I'm betting that Toyota is going to sell the crap out of these, even if they don't end up being all they are cracked up to be.

I'm betting that Toyota is going to sell the crap out of these, even if they don't end up being all they are cracked up to be.

I bet you are 100% right. People will flock to the 4 cylinder version believing it to be much magically more fuel efficient...(which is probably how it will be marketed) Oh well. They will be getting a well made and very safe vehicle in the process. Not such a bad thing.

All of the other carmakers will be doing the same thing... marketing marginally more fuel efficient vehicles are "Improved MPG" models. Why not Toyota?

There's a lot of people who really could give a crap less about the performance of their car, but if the 4 cyl has a lower initial cost, and saves you a few bucks a month on gas, a lot of people will be down. :cool: Compared to my truck, this thing is going to be a Ferrari, so I'd be down too. :disappoin

why are you guys concerned about its 0-60 times

are you seriusly going to be at every light waiting to step on the gas to go fast super quick
they can give this thing 400hp and people wont even touch 20% of its power in safe sane driving

186ft/lbs of torque should be enough

its a familly suv
not an offroading monster truck

why are you guys concerned about its 0-60 times?


Merging on the freeway is safer if you can "pass" whoever is coming by and merge quickly. If you have to slow down or stop, you might hit a car parked in the shoulder after the end of the on ramp. I've seen many of these in my life: a car stopped 20 ft after on ramp for a blown tire or whatnot, eager to get hit.

why are you guys concerned about its 0-60 times

are you seriusly going to be at every light waiting to step on the gas to go fast super quick

So... you'd like to give up say... 75 horsepower in your car? (since you don't need it)

Acceleration is important for normal daily driving safety. An extremely slow vehicle has trouble merging into traffic or even turning across a couple of lanes without being hit. Stopping and waiting for traffic to"clear" is not always an option and increases the risk of being rear-ended. Nobody is saying it needs to be a Ferrari, but acceptable acceleration is a needed item.

So Toyota isn't doing too good with the Hybrid version of the Highlander or something, why do they have to make a 4 cylinder version? Or are they planning to make a 4 cylinder hybrid version like the Camry later on?

Money.

This version would be substantially cheaper than a Hybrid and somewhat less than the V6 versions (which have become quite expensive over the last few years). Many consumers have been wanting lesser expensive and more fuel efficient versions of the popular SUVs. You can bet they will get them if carmakers think there are sales there.

If you guys recall, the highlander used to be offered in the I4 and V6 trims. My family has an 05 v6 (before the current body design). Driving both the I4 and V6's, if you're just carrying people, and just driving around town, the I4 is totally the way to go. Even the old I4 was enough to lug the highlander around loaded. But it is the highway where the I4 lacked, and where the V6 really shines. I think with the extra weight of the new larger body, the extra HP to weight ratio remains fairly similar to the old highlander with the old I4. So if you're a city driver and go on highways infrequently, or rarely/never find yourself needing the (now excessive v6) extra power, then I think that 2.7L is excellent.

Its funny reading one of the posts about about giving up 75hp because I recently traded in my Camry for a Fit and i did give up about 80hp - although i also lost about 800 pounds - but I do miss that v6, and indeed short merges and passing on the highway is something i'm no longer super confident about. Is it a major safety issue? No i think not. It demands you to be a smarter driver who is more aware of his/her surroundings and to just plan ahead. Realizing this isnt always possible, i guess they made the Fit very agile and loaded with awesome brakes...ahha.

What would make me recommend the I4 highlander to my family and friends is if the fuel economy was 4+ more mpg improvement over the V6. If its less, then i would stick with the v6, since it does give you the extra power when needed -emergencies or just really heavy loads.

humm new motor? or just a re-design updated 3rz-fe 2.7 liter Tacoma motor?

So... you'd like to give up say... 75 horsepower in your car? (since you don't need it)

Acceleration is important for normal daily driving safety. An extremely slow vehicle has trouble merging into traffic or even turning across a couple of lanes without being hit. Stopping and waiting for traffic to"clear" is not always an option and increases the risk of being rear-ended. Nobody is saying it needs to be a Ferrari, but acceptable acceleration is a needed item.

Although you are kinda right, I think blacken is right to in that most people don't need a very powerful car. My truck is one of the slowest accelerators you'll drive in, and I'm doing ok. 186 lb/ft. is plently to drive safely, you just can't be stupid and try to shoot every tiny gap. For people who are on a little tighter budget and do most of their driving in the city, 4 bangers are usually the way to go. Cuz like I said, most people who wouldn't know the difference between a radiator and a wet paper bag aren't going to give a crap.

Yeah, I'll concede that most people are total idiots anyway... We sure don't want them having powerful cars too! :D Like I said, All you Reilly need is acceptable acceleration.

humm new motor? or just a re-design updated 3rz-fe 2.7 liter Tacoma motor?I believe it's an all new motor. It is going to be in the Venza and the 2010 refresh of the Camry.

I believe it's an all new motor. It is going to be in the Venza and the 2010 refresh of the Camry.
Edit: Toyota mentions that an all new 2.7 4cyl will be coming for the Venza.
http://blog.toyota.com/2008/01/now-showing-200.html

So... you'd like to give up say... 75 horsepower in your car? (since you don't need it)

Acceleration is important for normal daily driving safety. An extremely slow vehicle has trouble merging into traffic or even turning across a couple of lanes without being hit. Stopping and waiting for traffic to"clear" is not always an option and increases the risk of being rear-ended. Nobody is saying it needs to be a Ferrari, but acceptable acceleration is a needed item.

there is a difference from going 30 to 40 to pass someone up
and when you get on the freeway your not going on the ramp from a dead stop.

but your right ACCEPTABLE acceleration is required.

but good acceleration is not always a good thing

ill give a little example
in the poorer hoods around town XD here in houston
people with slower/not fast cars drive smarter :thumbsup:

in the richer hoods people drive more drasticly :ugh3:

its why i ask why yall got absessed with the acceleration
kinda reminds me of these dumb rich boy :lol: who reved their big cuv going vroom vroom
pealing off laughing :disappoin

only to stop at a light like a few yards in front of us :disappoin
i rolled up in my rolly polly rolla and laughed :lol:

ok let me stop before i get off topic i didnt take my ADD medication today

yes i agree with you good sir
slow car not always good
acceptable is recomeneded
eccesive leads to people doing stupid things <= not everyone is a safe driver i know some people got strong cars and use them conservitevely and at teh right time
some just downright abuse it

nothing like a bmw darting through lanes haphazerdly becouse someone isnt going 20 miles over the speed limet and they zip throught the lanes

^^I agree, generally a person with "low" power will drive more safely. But also consider if car A has x amount of power and car B has less. Its possible car B can either out run or keep up with car A? Another factor is weight. That's a big one. I know its not an SUV or CUV but my car just makes over 100bhp. Sure its light but I still have to calculate and know my cars limits and what not, especially that its an auto. But its not as bad as it sounds. Its peppy and has good low end torque, I know that sounds funny in an economy car but you'd be surprised.

Most cars out there go from 0-60 in about the same time as my car. Why? Cause of weight. Sure they have more top end power and more passing power but just an interesting fact.

I think once you know your car, you can be smart about merging. There are going to instances you have to floor it for "safety" reasons. In order to catch up or match hwy speed which most people don't where I live. It pisses me off. They slow down. I'm like yeah its called an on ramp to match speed, not slow down to 40mph and kill everyone on the hwy and me behind them.

End of rant:headbang::lol::lol::lol:

I think they will sell more. Widening the engine lineup may create room for other/additional buyers. Relative Fuel efficiency + avoiding the hybrid premium.

^^ I think you are right. Especially if they price the 4 cylinder version well below other models.

there is a difference from going 30 to 40 to pass someone up
and when you get on the freeway your not going on the ramp from a dead stop.

but your right ACCEPTABLE acceleration is required.

but good acceleration is not always a good thing

ill give a little example
in the poorer hoods around town XD here in houston
people with slower/not fast cars drive smarter :thumbsup:

in the richer hoods people drive more drasticly :ugh3:

its why i ask why yall got absessed with the acceleration
kinda reminds me of these dumb rich boy :lol: who reved their big cuv going vroom vroom
pealing off laughing :disappoin

only to stop at a light like a few yards in front of us :disappoin
i rolled up in my rolly polly rolla and laughed :lol:

ok let me stop before i get off topic i didnt take my ADD medication today

yes i agree with you good sir
slow car not always good
acceptable is recomeneded
eccesive leads to people doing stupid things <= not everyone is a safe driver i know some people got strong cars and use them conservitevely and at teh right time
some just downright abuse it

nothing like a bmw darting through lanes haphazerdly becouse someone isnt going 20 miles over the speed limet and they zip throught the lanes

This is Pulitzer Prize material right here people...:ugh3:

Remember back in the late 80's and early 90's, mustang gts and eagle talon tsi were considered as quick sport cars with about 226 and 200hp. My dad had a new yorker with a something like 140hp and we thought it was fast! Now, family cars like camrys have 270+ hp. I think that lately, technology helped to make faster cars instead of more fuel efficient cars and now we are asking ourself if 180hp is enough in a highlander. The answer is yes until you are towing a lot. It will still quick ass to any family cars or suvs sold 15 years back and offer a more affordable price than the v6 and hybrid version. I hope toyota will put is hybrid system on the four system instead of the six. I like the idea behind the camry hybrid cause it makes for a good alternative to the v6 with similar price, nearly as good acceleration than the v6 but better mpgs than the four cylinder.

This is Pulitzer Prize material right here people...:ugh3:

:lol: now dont yah be making funs of meh gramurz

HY,

I LIKE UR SITE CONTENT

-James


Virginia Drug Addiction (http://www.drugaddiction.net/virginia)

I don't know where ya'll people live but here in Texas, it gets really really hot. I can't see myself driving around in a 4cylinder Highlander with every single windows rolled down and my whole family sweating like pigs. And I believe people who drives slower than other people are the one that gets into more accidents, a traffic officer told me that.

And I believe people who drives slower than other people are the one that gets into more accidents, a traffic officer told me that.
thats because everyone now a days doesnt drive the speed limit anymore:D other than grandma and grandpa, with everyone going fast the slow people are gunna get hit

I wish they would make this engine available on the Toyota Tacoma PreRunner Double Cab truck.

I don't think that people how drive slow go into trouble because to save the one how drive fast and dose not have controle on his car he get into troubles.I don't say to drive slow but have confidence and drive save.I think once you know your car, you can be smart about merging. There are going to instances you have to floor it for "safety" reasons. In order to catch up or match hwy speed which most people don't where I live. It pisses me off. They slow down. I'm like yeah its called an on ramp to match speed, not slow down to 40mph and kill everyone on the hwy and me behind them.
__________________________________________________ ___________________
sarah

car auctions (http://cars.gov-auctions.org)

if they have to beat the crap out of the 4cyl just to get an equivalent (or adequate) acceleration of a v6, then they wouldn't be saving much fuel (if any) at all. any stated mpg gain I guess should be taken with a grain of salt as it does not take into account driving styles

yeah but people will think theyre saving alot more just because its a 4 cyl. end of story, thats most likely why theyll sell over the V6, 187 hp isnt slow, the old 22RE 4Runners and Tacomas were, 105hp-112 depending on the year, and the turbo version was 135hp, which in those trucks is SSLOWWWWW even the 3vz-e wasnt nothing too fast, but it was a step upand now that theres a 4cyl that makes more power than the old V6's used to they should sell no problem

When did acceleration become such a safety issue? Unless you find yourself in a situation where someone could instantly broadside you, it doesn't make much sense to me. Besides, in my uneducated opinion, a lot of the advertised horsepower (in many makes and models) is lost in improperly geared transmissions and the rest is locked up in the really high RPM ranges that no one ever uses unless they are preparing to do a burnout. A correctly geared, low hp engine would probably do just fine.

Speaking of which, does the base trim on this new Highlander mean that it will not have AWD? I can't imagine that it could possibly come in stick shift...

1. Its not about peak hp its about broad flat power band. My TSX makes 205hp, yet acceleration down low in the rpm is utter crap.

2. You want acceleration look at torque numbers instead of hp. Low end torque will drastically help acceleration.

We need a dyno graph for this new engine!

Well the current V6 higlander 0-60 is rated for 8.0 seconds, which is pretty quick, and it has an EPA rating or 18/24. The thing weigs 4.490 lbs. The 4 cyl. will undoubtedly be a tick lighter, and it is claimed to put out 187hp/186 lb.ft., compared to the V6's 270 hp, and 248 lb. ft. So the 4cyl. you can expect to be slower, although they did say the transmission and other components have been improved. It'll probably be 0-60 in like what, 10-11 seconds? My guess is that 20/26 mpg is a little low, I bet people who do mixed driving will be able to squeeze 25 out. The question is, is 3 seconds slower to 60 worth another 3 or 4 mpg?
kn,

Where did you get your 8.0 sec number? Look at this link:

http://www.autos.com/autos/sport%20utility/midsize/2009/toyota/highlander/sport_style8.

The base model gets 6.3 sec 0-60 and 6.4 for the model up. So I assume the 2.7L-I4 may be around 8 secs, I hope?

I have a 4-cyl highlander (2004) that has less HP than the 2009 will have, but it has NO problem with acceleration. When I found that the 2008 models were V6-only, I was disappointed and told the dealer that I probably would never buy another highlander because of that. I'm glad they made the decision to offer a 4-cylinder again. It's really all most people need. If you plan to tow, you would be better off with the V6. But the 4-cyl is not underpowered. I love horsepower, but I don't like spending more than I need to. My highlander gets 30 mpg on the highway if I keep it to 65 MPH. But it will run 80 MPH all day with no sweat.

But I also agree with the previous comment that the 4-cyl 2009 should not be limited to just the base trim level. That would be a big mistake. If I could have bought a Limited-trim version with the 4-cylinder engine, that's what I would have. As it is, mine has a number of options - nice wheels, electric seats, sunroof... It was hard to find a 4-cyl with a sunroof!

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/08/highlander-08-sport.jpg


August 14, 2008 - Torrance, CA - Toyota Motor Sales (TMS), U.S.A., Inc., announced today that the 2009 Highlander mid-size sport utility vehicle (SUV) will offer an all-new, powerful yet fuel-efficient 2.7-liter four-cylinder engine. When it arrives at dealerships in mid-to-late January, the new Highlander powerplant will be among the best mid-size SUVs in the areas of performance, fuel economy and value.

The new 2.7-liter four-cylinder engine will generate an impressive 187 horsepower at 5,800 RPM and 186 lb.-ft. of torque at 4,100 RPM on regular 87 octane fuel. A dual exhaust manifold will help achieve exceptional low-end torque and maximize its power output. In addition to its performance output, the Highlander equipped with the new four-cylinder will be EPA-rated as an Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (ULEVII) and is expected to be among the leaders in fuel efficiency in the gas mid-size SUV segment. Official EPA fuel efficiency ratings will be announced closer to launch.

The new four-cylinder engine will be mated to an all-new six-speed electronically-controlled automatic overdrive transmission with intelligence (ECT-i). The new transmission will help deliver quiet and smooth performance on par with a V6 and acceleration that is surprisingly quick for a four-cylinder. When equipped with a tow package, the new powerplant will achieve a maximum towing capacity of 3,500 pounds.

The new engine will come standard on the Highlander grade two-wheel-drive model equipped with two rows of seats, contributing to its excellent value. A third row seat package will also be available for families requiring additional seating capacity. Other key optional equipment will include an eight-way power driver's seat, manual rear air conditioning, and an AM/FM/six-disc CD Changer with satellite radio capability, MP3/WMA capability and six speakers.

With the new four-cylinder engine, Highlander will be the only mid-size SUV in the current market to offer three powerplant choices. The 3.5-liter Highlander V6, available in two- and full-time four-wheel drive, is among the leaders in fuel efficiency among V6 gas engines in its segment. The full-time 4WD-i Highlander Hybrid, equipped with a V6 powerplant with front and rear electric motors, stands above all others for fuel efficiency among all mid-size SUVs.

Since it first launched in 2001, Highlander has been one of Toyota's most popular vehicles, setting the standard for car-based SUVs in innovation, comfort and sales. Driver and passenger comfort is accomplished with segment leading seating versatility through innovative flexible seating functions for up to seven people. Comfort is complemented with one of the highest levels of standard safety features in the small- and mid-size SUV market including a segment-leading total of seven airbags.


Cool wish I could of had Auto in my 2007 Tacoma 4x4 2.7L.

Wish I couldv'e got that in my 08 Rav4. I almost got the V6, but it honestly felt like too much power in that wagon. 187 hp seems like it wold be just right - for a Rav4.

The should make a 2.7L common rail TDI that makes 240bhp and 300-340 ft. lbs. of torque and gets 30MPG with the AWD model.

The should make a 2.7L common rail TDI that makes 240bhp and 300-340 ft. lbs. of torque and gets 30MPG with the AWD model.

that much hp in a torque in a SUV with that much MPG is wishfull thinking :lol: at least with current technology
eventually thoe eventually

For Pinks is on the right track, in my opinion.

The 2.7L 4-cyl should be turbo-charged, or at least have a turbo-charged option. It may be priced $500-600 over the cost of a non-turbo version, but Toyota could probably get 250hp with a 2.7L turbo-charged gasoline engine.

Second issue, if Toyota is going to put the 2.7L into the Highlander, it should switch the hybrid version from the 3.3L V-6 to the 2.7L I-4. The hybrid buyer wants fuel efficiency, and the V-6 is not really needed.

I have no real idea, but could a Highlander hybrid with a I-4 get mpg of 30/26?

Could you imagine 30mpg running around town with 6 or 7 in the car instead of 16-18 in a V-6?

I am new to the site. I have had a 97 4Runner Ltd 4WD fully loaded since new and 225,000 miles. A great car to say the least.

I have been ready for a new car for 1-1/2 yrs. I was going to buy a new VW Tiguan until they decided not to bring out the clean burn diesel (est mpg 39). Haven't found anything yet.

The problems with the Highlander Hybrid (and Camry too) is they don't improve on gas mileage enough to satisfy that group of people who will pay the extra. A friend sold her Lexus RH400 hybrid for that reason (avg 22 mpg) and bought a new Prius (and now averages 43 mpg). By the way the Prius has an incredible amount of room in the hatch back area.

My dilema has been I want a small SUV with luxury (not crazy luxury) including leather, navigation, sound system, etc. and great gas milage. 2 mpg more isn't going to get me excited. I haven't found a car (in America) yet that fits that description. I can find small luxury SUVs and I can find great gas milage small SUVs but not together. I will sacrifice some power to have this.

the thing with that is that suv's are heavy and if Toyota doesnt hit us up with a diesel that gas mileage wont be great like the Prius because it weighs alot less and its a 1.5, they can make the Highlander with better mileage than the previous model, but it wont keep up with a little Prius

I understand what you're saying. I didn't expect the Tiguan with the diesel to have the same gas milage as a Prius. But VW was estimating 35mpg average for the diesel Tiguan. That's good enough and is 40% higher than the base model gas engine Tiguan. I know there are tradeoffs with body weight and the added luxuries I want versus the gas milage. The weight of the Tiguan is about 50% higher than the Prius but the gas milage is only about 20% less than the Prius.

That all said I would rather have a Toyota. But they haven't brought anything radical to market regarding mpg other than the Prius.

I understand what you're saying. I didn't expect the Tiguan with the diesel to have the same gas milage as a Prius. But VW was estimating 35mpg average for the diesel Tiguan. That's good enough and is 40% higher than the base model gas engine Tiguan. I know there are tradeoffs with body weight and the added luxuries I want versus the gas milage. The weight of the Tiguan is about 50% higher than the Prius but the gas milage is only about 20% less than the Prius.

That all said I would rather have a Toyota. But they haven't brought anything radical to market regarding mpg other than the Prius.

eljohn46,

Why is it there are some people who still believe in "Smelly"diesels? The problem with Diesels is it still burns fossil fuels? I guess Drill-Baby-Drill is still championed by the Diesel crowd.

Hybrids are the bridge to the all electric vehicle future. Once the Battery technologies mature to where gasoline engines are today, the hybrids will be running on batteries only.

I for one will not purchase any Smelly Diesel, no matter what technology they use for in the end they still have to scrub the particulates( with Uric Acid) out of the burnt fossil fuel. Diesel technology in a green world is a dinosaur.

:lol:

Smelley diesels is the old technology. I am referring to the new clean burn diesel engines which beat even the hybrids as far as emmissions per gallon. I don't favor any one technology. Just what leaves the smallest carbon footprint (but does the job). Oil is only one small part of the Green Equation. All of those extra parts (electric motors, batteries, etc.) in a hybrid have a carbon cost in their manufacturing and later disposal. I am a fan of anything that leads us out of the age of dependence on more oil. This can be done by driving a car with double the gas mileage, a hybrid car, etc. Right now hydrogen fuel cell technology isn't there. It takes as much carbon emitting energy to produce the hydrogen as a normal car would use.

Smelley diesels is the old technology. I am referring to the new clean burn diesel engines which beat even the hybrids as far as emmissions per gallon. I don't favor any one technology. Just what leaves the smallest carbon footprint (but does the job). Oil is only one small part of the Green Equation. All of those extra parts (electric motors, batteries, etc.) in a hybrid have a carbon cost in their manufacturing and later disposal. I am a fan of anything that leads us out of the age of dependence on more oil. This can be done by driving a car with double the gas mileage, a hybrid car, etc. Right now hydrogen fuel cell technology isn't there. It takes as much carbon emitting energy to produce the hydrogen as a normal car would use.

eljohn46,

The Clean Burn Diesel Technology you refer to requires a scrubber that uses Urea to negate the Carcinogen(Cancer Causing) component of Diesel Combustion. Clean Diesel like clean coal is a pipe dream. Filtering is one problem, but trying to find that clean diesel fuel is another? How long do you think those scrubbers will last when you burn that old Diesel fuel which is expensive and abundant as compared to gasoline?

Hydrogen Fuel Technology isn't what its cracked up to be. They burn Hydrogen to spin electric generators that provide electricity to electric motors. Conversion losses are excessive as compared to a Battery-Electric Motor system.

As the Battery technology matures, the Prius Hybrid you refer to will have less to zero emissions as the electric motor use is scaled up. The PHEV is the future.

Diesels Suck!

:lol:

Smelley diesels is the old technology. I am referring to the new clean burn diesel engines which beat even the hybrids as far as emmissions per gallon. I don't favor any one technology. Just what leaves the smallest carbon footprint (but does the job). Oil is only one small part of the Green Equation. All of those extra parts (electric motors, batteries, etc.) in a hybrid have a carbon cost in their manufacturing and later disposal. I am a fan of anything that leads us out of the age of dependence on more oil. This can be done by driving a car with double the gas mileage, a hybrid car, etc. Right now hydrogen fuel cell technology isn't there. It takes as much carbon emitting energy to produce the hydrogen as a normal car would use.
emissions per gallon? The cleanest diesels are Tier 2 Bin 5 rated. That's ULEV-II which is what 95%? of gasoline cars achieve. The Prius is Tier 2 Bin3 and the Civic Hybrid is Tier 2 Bin 2. They both do not have evaporative emissions (gasoline vapour emissions). Diesel is more energy dense than gasoline that's why you can use less to go further.

Keep in mind that the reason why diesels get such great torque is because they're turbocharged. Turbocharged gas engines get good torque and low rpm too.


Despite that, there are still advantages of diesel of course, the biggest being the compression ignition and the fact that they're are durable as heck. Me, I'm still a petrol person.... just trying to use as little as I can.

To Reliability and Tideland Prius
Let me fist say I’m not an automotive engineer / expert and don’t want to try to impress anyone with my vast knowledge because it’s not that vast. These are just the opinions of a regular person. As far as the emissions per gallon comment, I saw that in a comparison but can’t find it again so I can’t defend it.

I’m not sold on any one technology. I am referring to cars that meet “all” of “my” needs, which would be different from anyone else’s. My Criteria: great fuel economy, luxury, small SUV or something with a cargo area that works (I’m a home builder). It is the last 2 that are difficult to find in combo with the “great gas mileage”. If it wasn’t for the space requirements I wouldn’t look past a Prius. But all the great gas mileage doesn’t mean anything if I can’t do what I need to do. I have never owned a diesel before.

I am going with the new 2009 Jetta Sportswagen. The latest news on this car includes:
1. Clean burn diesel. It is not the old technology that Reliabilty is referring to. One of the reasons fossil fuel cars pollute is they are inefficient and burn only a small percentage of the fuel during combustion. This new engine atomizes and combusts completely and no Urea injection is needed in the catalytic reduction system. As far as the particulate filter referred to, I have to go with “only time will tell”. That willingness to test it out is no different from all of those who were willing to give the hybrids a shot with their vast new gear of electric motors, charging systems, and batteries. I can’t wait until the mythical “Perfect solution” comes out to buy a new car.
2. Current fuel rating is 31 City / 41 Highway. The actual from owners has been 38/44 with as high as 40/60.
3. November 20, 2008, the 2009 Jetta TDI clean diesel won the 2009 Green Car of the Year. Green Car Journal chose the 2009 Jetta TDI clean diesel from the top 5 green cars as the best-of-the-best and awarded it their 2009 Green Car of the Year.
4. The Jetta TDI was also awarded the highest safety rating available.
5. The IRS has approved the Jetta TDI for a $1300 Federal Income Tax Credit (Advanced Lean Burn Technology Motor Vehicle).
6. Most important of all, it is a cool looking car with nice luxury. This of course proves you guys are arguing with a shallow, insensitive moron incapable of making an intelligent decision.

See post to Tideland Prius

To Reliability and Tideland Prius
Let me fist say I’m not an automotive engineer / expert and don’t want to try to impress anyone with my vast knowledge because it’s not that vast. These are just the opinions of a regular person. As far as the emissions per gallon comment, I saw that in a comparison but can’t find it again so I can’t defend it.

I’m not sold on any one technology. I am referring to cars that meet “all” of “my” needs, which would be different from anyone else’s. My Criteria: great fuel economy, luxury, small SUV or something with a cargo area that works (I’m a home builder). It is the last 2 that are difficult to find in combo with the “great gas mileage”. If it wasn’t for the space requirements I wouldn’t look past a Prius. But all the great gas mileage doesn’t mean anything if I can’t do what I need to do. I have never owned a diesel before.

I am going with the new 2009 Jetta Sportswagen. The latest news on this car includes:
1. Clean burn diesel. It is not the old technology that Reliabilty is referring to. One of the reasons fossil fuel cars pollute is they are inefficient and burn only a small percentage of the fuel during combustion. This new engine atomizes and combusts completely and no Urea injection is needed in the catalytic reduction system. As far as the particulate filter referred to, I have to go with “only time will tell”. That willingness to test it out is no different from all of those who were willing to give the hybrids a shot with their vast new gear of electric motors, charging systems, and batteries. I can’t wait until the mythical “Perfect solution” comes out to buy a new car.
2. Current fuel rating is 31 City / 41 Highway. The actual from owners has been 38/44 with as high as 40/60.
3. November 20, 2008, the 2009 Jetta TDI clean diesel won the 2009 Green Car of the Year. Green Car Journal chose the 2009 Jetta TDI clean diesel from the top 5 green cars as the best-of-the-best and awarded it their 2009 Green Car of the Year.
4. The Jetta TDI was also awarded the highest safety rating available.
5. The IRS has approved the Jetta TDI for a $1300 Federal Income Tax Credit (Advanced Lean Burn Technology Motor Vehicle).
6. Most important of all, it is a cool looking car with nice luxury. This of course proves you guys are arguing with a shallow, insensitive moron incapable of making an intelligent decision.

eljohn46,

Attached is the link FYI: http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/Index.do

No Diesel has achieved an elite status by the EPA from any maker. The Prius abd the Civic Hybrid are close to perfect according to the EPA with a combined score of 19.5 (9.5-Air Pollution Score, 10 -Green House Gas Score, 10 is highest). No smelly Diesels on that list. It will get even better when the 2010 Prius comes out with more advanced Synergy Drive and higher capacity NiMh or Lithium batteries. The EPA will have to rate the all Toyota Hybrids like an EV, which means no air pollution or greenhouse gases emitted!

Tideland Prius is correct, the TDI/Blutec Diesels still can't come close to even their Gasoline engined brothers. The scrubber they use are really similar to a Catalytic Converter and in order to acheive their EPA rating they have to use Clean Diesel Fuel. Last I check, Clean Diesel Fuel is scarce and expensive, while Dirty Diesel Fuel is abundant but more expensive than gasoline negates any advantage diesel has over gasoline.

Diesels are so Fred Flintstone and only the Europeans pushing it. Anything that depends on combustion is going to pollute!

Diesels Suck!!!

:o:

eljohn46,

Diesels Suck!!!

:o:

meh i like diesels, theyre loud and say what you want about them, but 40mpg in the city sounds good to me, at a fraction of the cost of a hybrid, a nice 2002 Jetta would be cool with me

Diesel doesnt smell that bad

meh i like diesels, theyre loud and say what you want about them, but 40mpg in the city sounds good to me, at a fraction of the cost of a hybrid, a nice 2002 Jetta would be cool with me

Diesel doesnt smell that bad

4agetercel,

Yeah, like cigarette smoke, it doesn't smell bad! Diesel Soot and Cigarette Smoke have one thing in common, Lung Cancer!

Diesels Suck!:lol:

4agetercel,

Yeah, like cigarette smoke, it doesn't smell bad! Diesel Soot and Cigarette Smoke have one thing in common, Lung Cancer!

Diesels Suck!:lol:

Quit smokeing then;), Diesel smoke trails behind you when youre driving, not shooting up into the cabin, and if it does get the exaust leak fixed, you gotta die some day i guess, just because theyre not the cleanest burning things out there, the amount of things that pollute the air out there and youre rippin on the diesel engine,

The only thing i dont like about them is their slow, but thats a sacrafice i can live with, like a daily driver has to be fast.....

Clean Diesel Fuel is scarce and expensive, while Dirty Diesel Fuel is abundant but more expensive than gasoline negates any advantage diesel has over gasoline.ULSD has been required by law for all on-road applications for a couple years now. Refineries produce three times more 15ppm and sulfur and under distillate than the 15-500ppm and 500ppm distillate combined. It was scarce back when CA was the only state the required it, but it's common now.

ULSD has been required by law for all on-road applications for a couple years now. Refineries produce three times more 15ppm and sulfur and under distillate than the 15-500ppm and 500ppm distillate combined. It was scarce back when CA was the only state the required it, but it's common now.

thaharlequin,

I live in California and it still isn't that common. If you listen to whats coming out of the Detroit Auto show, it sure isn't about diesels(Clean or dirty)? Clean Diesels should be reserved for trucks,Tractors, and Heavy Equipment and I think that's where the future is for Diesels. EVs, PHEVs, and Hybrids are the future and thats what the Big 3 are retooling for to stay competitive.

:lol:

thaharlequin,

I live in California and it still isn't that common. If you listen to whats coming out of the Detroit Auto show, it sure isn't about diesels(Clean or dirty)? Clean Diesels should be reserved for trucks,Tractors, and Heavy Equipment and I think that's where the future is for Diesels. EVs, PHEVs, and Hybrids are the future and thats what the Big 3 are retooling for to stay competitive.

:lol:I live CA too and every station I've been to from Ojai to Sand Diego sells ULSD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-low_sulfur_diesel#United_States).
Ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) (also spelled “sulphur”) is a term used to describe a standard for defining diesel fuel with substantially lowered sulfur contents. As of 2006, almost all of the petroleum-based diesel fuel available in Europe and North America is of a ULSD type.
Furthermore, as you can see (http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/twip/twip_distillate.html#production), ULSD production is 3.341mbpd, about six times more than 15-500ppm diesel and 500+ppm diesel. Given that it at best distillates beside ULSD only make up 20% of production, and most of that is used for off-road use, it's rare to see anything besides ULSD.
On June 1, 2006, U.S. refiners were required to produce 80% of their annual output as ULSD (15 ppm), and petroleum marketers and retailers were required to label[7] diesel fuel, diesel fuel additives and kerosone pumps with EPA-authorized language disclosing fuel type and sulfur content. Other requirements effective June 1, 2006, including EPA-authorized language on Product Transfer Documents and sulfur-content testing standards, are designed to prevent misfueling, contamination by higher-sulfur fuels and liability issues. The EPA deadline for industry compliance to a 15 ppm sulfur content was originally set for July 15, 2006 for distribution terminals, and by September 1, 2006 for retail. But on November 8, 2005, the deadline was extended by 45 days to September 1, 2006 for terminals and October 15, 2006 for retail. In California, the extension was not granted and followed the original schedule. As of December, 2006, the ULSD standard has been in effect according to the amended schedule, and compliance at retail locations was reported to be in place.

The big 3 were just pathetic, but that's another subject for another day. :thumbsup:

Hi,
The price announced by the car is really an appreciating one. Everyone can afford this much.


Joe