Hybrid engine

Absolutely zero desire for a hybrid with today's tech.

 

stun gun rules

 

some conversations & directives are govt & industry origins

takes years if not decades for change

some are looking at if not over the horizons

many think ' tech ' in of itself is the solution.....................short sighted

many here were NOT around when major changes took place with vehicles

some revolutionary..................others evolutionary

many distinct changes went unnoticed or at least uncriticized or debated

hold onto Ur depends

more to come

 

Increasing complexity is an immediate result of many or most of these changes. Vehicles now are already too complex in many regards leading to more repairs, even if minor. I don't even want electronic 4wd engagement that can be impossible to fix on a trail miles from cell signal. I don't want any of the newer "displacement on demand" type features that are expensive to fix and out of the reach of most home mechanics. I can't stand the "auto shutdown at stoplight" shit or the other nanny features coming out now. This is a truck, not a commuter car. I want something dependable but also repairable.

 

Sure but toyota would have sell a fraction of tacomas that they sell now if it was only targeted for being a truck. Vast majority of people who buy a Tacoma intent to use it like a regular car, rather than a truck. Toyota will make decisions that maximize the sales, and being more car-like or SUV-like is one of those.

 

They may. And it may move to unibody and full independent suspension. I'll buy something else next when that happens.

 

The new Bronco (and Gladiator) may actually help shake things up a bit. It appears to be a real off-road oriented option. It is obviously targeted towards Jeep as they are really the current leader there, but it will affect 4Runner too, and maybe even the Tacoma. The Gladiator can fit 35s off the lot, the Bronco will have 35s as a package option, and I have been reading about a factory option 2" lift and room for 37s. 95:1 crawl ratio with the 7 speed and dual lockers. That's huge. I was mildly interested at first, thinking I'd give it a year or so to shake the bugs out, but I ended up reserving a Bronco the night of the release to replace my 4Runner. I really like my Tacoma, but if it slides towards the Ridgeline (which is really what we are saying), I will buy a Gladiator (or Bronco truck) next. Either Toyota will keep up in real off road features, or it will lose that business. They could have a trim level with 35s, lower gearing, front locker, etc. and I would have bought it. I want a real off road capable vehicle, and others here do too. There is obviously a market for it. Maybe this will get them thinking.

 

I want to see an 8 speed transmission and a boosted engine as standard.

hydroelectric would be nice too, we need more water anyways.

 

Oh yes, put an electric motor in it. What a great way to ensure more people will be restoring older trucks that they can actually depend upon. No way would that hybrid toy get pissed when you put on a 4" lift and 35" tires. Could I please regear to get ultralow-range for crawling? Nope. No thanks. Hybrid is not even very good on fuel. We tried a hybrid Highlander for a few thousand miles trip as a family. Average MPG was 24.7. My wife's 2012 Escape averages 28MPG on similar trips. So it was more expensive on sticker, got worse mileage, and is risky for how long until I have a massive expense and not sure I trust batteries to work at -30F in winter.

 

Sounds like you have Jeep expectations out of a pick up truck.

 

Electric motors are far simpler and more reliable than combustion engines, so I'm not sure what you're going on about here.

 

Which part of "hybrid" don't you get? It has them BOTH, therefore more parts, more complexity, more likely to fail. Engine, transmission, go. Ditch all the nanny shit, too - I am quite able to decide if I am in my lane, want to have the engine keep reving while wheel is slipping, need to look in my mirror, slow down when a car is in front of me - it's called driving. All that shit does is break and increase TCO and prevent use offroad. Frigging crap shuts the engine down if it thinks wheels spin too much (IT"S SAND!) or hill is too steep. I'm the people, I will drive it my own damned self.

 

Do you have any citations for this (that hybrids are less reliable), or is it just a tale from your ass?

 

Sure:
Hybrid - A drive system using both an internal combustion engine and the drivetrain thereof plus a parallel drive system utilizing a battery-based electric motor drive system. This setup uses the ICE to drive directly when needed (eg battery power is depleted) and uses the batteries for electric drive when feasible. This is different than a pure ICE or pure-electric vehicle in that not only does it have BOTH types of drive system but it requires additional components necessary to charge the batteries and switch between the two drive methods. So it has significantly more parts than either a ICE-only or electric-only model, and more parts 100% of the time means more things to go wrong and break.

 

I asked for proof that hybrids were less reliable - not how they worked. Toyota's been in the hybrid game for ages now, and I've not heard anything on a lack of reliability.

 

Our 2012 Prius V has 112k and has only had routine maintenance. Thing is a tank.

 

Toyota very specifically markets the Tacoma as an off road capable truck, and it is. I'm just hoping that the coming off road war trickles down to the Tacoma. I think the 4Runner has to answer. Currently, I would say that the 4Runner is the biggest competitor to the Wrangler in that market space. Gladiator and ZR2 entered the truck market and there are rumblings about a Bronco truck. If Toyota wants to continue to market these are off road trucks, the bar is being set. I have to think that those 3 (hopefully) trucks that are also marketed as off road, will take Tacoma sales from people that are after that if nothing changes or especially if they go the other direction like the new Blazer did.

 

If you're new to Toyota, you might want to temper those expectations. Toyota doesn't compete the Tacoma on having the latest and greatest features and accessories. They're very conservative and the Tacoma is a perfectly capable truck as it is.

 

Were discussing future changes for the Tacoma. I don't have a need for a new truck at this time. I'm probably years out barring an accident or just changing life needs. When I'm ready to buy, I'll buy what fits my needs, whether or not that's another Tacoma. I bought this truck because it was what I wanted (or as close as can be found in factory form), I hope that they can deliver that in the future. If not, someone else will.

 

Here's my rational take on the whole California screwing up the power grid.

1) You have to understand that power grids are a zero sum game. If you get too much power, shit blows up. Too little power, and you get backouts. Power companies would rather a blackout than blowing transformers across the state.

2) California is at PEAK SOLAR. That's a great accomplishment. That means they generate more electricity during the couple hours that the sun is high in the sky than the state can use. This is good, but it comes with challenges because of #1. They have to spin up the gas plants to fill the gap, but they have to GUESS how much to spin them up and how much to generate. Its literally reading the future from a crystal ball. Its anything but easy. Seriously, just think about how insane that challenge is and its a regular every day thing they do.

3) We have no EFFICIENT storage of electricity. No joke. Batteries? No way. The most efficient thing is called pumped hydro. It pumps water up a hill to go back through a generator turbine later on to get the power back. Its not all that efficient, but its the most reliable and consistent thing we have today. Yes, there are lots of new tech on the horizon from salt heat storage and giant cranes picking up huge concrete blocks, but honestly they aren't readily available today and will take decades to work out.

4) Renewable power is peaky and unreliable. You got clouds? Less power. Wind stops blowing as hard, less power. Wind blows super hard? MORE POWER! But they have to balance that spike out almost instantaneously because of #1. This takes some crazy algorithms and math and processing power. Electricity moves just as fast as data, so you don't have much time to react if any. Natural gas plants are the fastest thing we have in terms of output changes. You can spin up a natural gas turbine faster than you can just about anything else. (Scotland is very proud of its water turbines and there are some great documentations about digitizing the highlands water systems to be faster to react to demand changes.) Also, the move to natural gas over coal and oil is one of the big reasons the USA meets and exceeds all the metrics set forth by the Climate Summits, even if we didn't sign or ratify them.

I'm happy that California is screwing up all this stuff, but that's because they are learning how deal with these challenges. This is good for everyone that doesn't live in California. They are pushing green energy too hard and the grid is struggling to keep up.

We need more renewable energy for sure, free power from sunlight is a great thing. We need to be pragmatic about its implementation, and these teething issues should be expected when pushing for more green energy.