Hybrid fuel economy number spilled..

People forget how remarkable the Hoover dam is! Big hydroelectric projects of another era.

 

It would be very hard to implement. I don’t think Toyota has an eCVT transmission that will work with a longitudinal setup like you would find in a RWD setup. They would need to design and build one.

 

That’s pretty disappointing honestly. I got the KDMax tune a couple years back in an otherwise stock 2019 auto and regularly get between 20 and 25, average about 22.

A brand new hybrid power train and all they can eek out is a 20% efficiency win?

What’s funny is they know how to do it right, I get 65 mpg easily in their Hybrid Corolla.

I wonder where the efficiency gap is…
weight? aerodynamics? tires? CVT? 4WD?

 

The hybrid is a power adder. Not for big efficiency gains. It allows you to get a big power jump without sacrificing mpg. At least that's how it is in the tundra.

 

A 20% mpg increase, or even 10% which is more likely, along with a large increase in power is a massive improvement in efficiency. This is a brick shaped vehicle that weighs 50% more than a Corolla.

You guys that want 30mpg would not like the shape, size, nor power output of the vehicle it would take to get that. The customers told Toyota we wanted more power. They gave it to us without sacrificing MPGs. I don’t see the problem. The unicorn truck some of you want can’t be built yet.

 

Both of these are spot on....

 

I don’t know… this thing is basically a modernized 2nd gen Tundra at this point.

Take a look at the Ford Maverick. It gets up to 40mpg. Where’s the Toyota version of that truck?

 

https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads...urn-of-the-toyota-stout.806462/#post-28938333

 

If toyota built a mpg-focused hybrid unibody Tacoma, this forum would lose their collective minds. Rabble rabble not a real truck etc


Which is weird because my first gen is a “real” truck but has less payload and towing capability than the maverick

 

Just some rambling here..

_ Vehicles take surprisingly little power to do steady-state (constant speed) highway cruising, save for high speeds where aerodynamics become unsurmountable. This is worse in aerodynamically-poor vehicles like trucks, but when not doing 80+ MPH the electric motor might just have been able to push the truck along. Why do I say might have? Because there is a problem, and that is the small battery pack. So I'm not sure if they even bothered to work on making use of it for the highway given the tiny battery (from the perspective of highway use).

_ 27 MPG or higher highway seems very good for a large vehicle (yes it's a medium truck, but it's still a large vehicle still largely shaped like a brick). But not unheard of, and I mean this in a good way — Toyota needs to be competitive here to a certain extent, so I am inclined to believe the MPG won't be far off from this, if not exactly this. There have been advancements in competing non-electric technologies in the form of diesel. I've been doing research into this as this will be my first truck (also researching what I call the "closed version" in the form of the new 4Runner, whenever it comes out) and looked at competitors, not in class but in utility (this will be used for my foray into offroading and also family roadtripping), GM has the new Duramax 3.0L LZ0 diesel which is already in the Silverado/Sierra (different class, but for this discussion it's okay because it's an even larger vehicle and it helps my point by comparing up), which should make it to the Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon[XL] for the 2024 model year (hopefully in Z71/AT4 trims too, which are currently incompatible with the current, old 3.0L LM2 diesel still found in the T/S/Y). Why do I bring this up? Because there have been reports of people getting 27-30 MPG highway in the Silverado/Sierra with the new diesel! And the T/S/Y with the old diesel also get impressive real-world MPG, pretty much every review I saw had people be super impressed at the MPG for such gigantic vehicles. The point is, it can be done in some manner, and on even larger vehicles, so I wouldn't be surprised to get mid+ 20s on the new truck, it is 2023 after all.

_ While I'm a huge fan of electric motors (been EV-only for 5+ years), for such an application I do wonder if developing an absolutely kickass, world-class diesel that could be packaged in the Taco and up wouldn't have made more sense, at least for the offroad-oriented trims. I know it's a huge cost, and doesn't have the sexyness of being electrified. Although.. you could hybridize a diesel too to further boost & better modulate the already-high low-RPM torque of the diesel. That high low-RPM torque which also give diesels fantastic highway MPG. A pipe dream, for sure..

_ Let's not forget tires. The TRD Pro and other offroad-oriented trims will have lower numbers, no way around it. Wonder if it makes sense to have two sets of wheels/tires. Although let's be real, those buying the TRD Pro are getting it for its image too, and if you take the wheels/tires away the look is compromised. Like me! This will be my first truck and/or highly off-road capable SUV (4R)! You betcha I want it to look the part!

_ Huge benefit for me being a hybrid is elimination/minimization of exhaust fumes in/around my garage. Had asthma as a child and am still sensitive to air quality, as is one of my kids. From this perspective alone, I prefer the Hybrid over anything else short of a pure BEV.

 

Could care less if it is BOF or Unibody, problem with the Maverick or Ridgeline they are marketed to families. Make a regular or extra cab with a 6’ or longer bed. They’ll never do that though, market segment is too small to make a financial case for it.

Easier solution is to bring the HiLux here or toss a diesel in the 4G, with all the cab configurations to appease most buyers. There is a hybrid diesel going in the new Land Cruisers, seems that would cover a lot of bases for people’s needs and wants.

 

You said it: they build for the market segment that makes money. Most people don’t have a 6’ bed as an immovable requirement.

 

I could make it work, but would annoyed with it. There are times my 6’ isn’t enough. Why I am looking at 8’ bed Tundras.

However DCSBs sell like hotcakes, so that is who they cater to.

 

So now when you go look at the land cruiser on Toyota website there is no mention of mpg numbers...

 

Im replacing a Ford F350 crew with an 8 foot bed. Best case scenario yields 14 on the hwy at 75 mph. It has decent numbers towing. The replacement choice is down to the Ford f150 hybrid or the Tacoma hybrid. Both would have to have the 6 foot bed. I'm heavily favoring the Taco , reliability concerns on the fords. The Ford hybrid should do 22ish mpg. I'm hoping 25ish with the Taco. The Taco is smaller , I'm tired of maneuvering an aircraft carrier in parking lots. We just got back into the Toyota family with a Camry hybrid which we are loving. If the dealers don't start playing the markup game I think we'll have another Toyota hybrid in our futures.

 

In my opinion, Toyota designed the hybrid engine option as a way to get more HP and torque, not so much as a way to increase MPG. Just the aerodynamics of their trucks alone means they will never get great mileage. I'll never understand why the truck manufacturers haven't follow the trend in increased aerodynamics that the semi truck market has implemented of many years now. For some reason Toyota think buyers want a truck with a giant, flat front end that gets horrible gas mileage. My guess is that a little work on the areodynamics, would probably gain as much of a MPG increase as Toyota is getting with the hybrid option.

 

Agreed. But look at the criticism of anything even slightly sleek in the truck space, and you’ll see that masculinity and machismo drive buying decisions as much as anything else. We need to tow 27,000lbs or we are not even real men.

 

Personally, I'd love to see a front end like this on modern pickups. Looks pretty macho to me!

 

It won’t look tough when scaled down. The nose of the pre-facelift ranger often got criticized for being pinched inward and feminine

 

2016 Tacoma was a $24k Truck start and 21mpg average.