EPA posts fuel-economy ratings for GMC Yukon and Chevy Tahoe hybrids

The more I hear about these GM 'hybrids'... The less I care.

What we should be doing is moving away from these behemoths and buying more sensibly sized transportation.

Oh well, at least it's some kind of effort, if a very expensive one.

— DaHarder (View Profile)

Posted on 12/12/2007 4:09:54 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 8   

Really? 20 mpg is garbage in 6000+ lbs vehicle? And their system integrated into the auto trans is quite impressive. Hoepfully we will see diesel hybrids from them soon, considering this is built into the trans itself, and if the trans could hold the tourque of the diesel motor. Besides, even if this isn't that impressive to you, its gotta start somewhere and can only get better from here.

— mitchelm (View Profile)

Posted on 12/12/2007 7:08:03 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

"Really? 20 mpg is garbage in 6000+ lbs vehicle?"

Well, this vehicle DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SIX THOUSAND POUNDS. True engineering genius would be apparent if they used weight-saving technologies and it got good mileage without the use of a mild hybrid system. There's no excuse for a car this heavy.

— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 12/12/2007 10:06:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4   

And you drive an s4 cabrio? So that gets what mileage? 14 mpg city and 21 highway with the manual? Thats also pretty crappy. And besides, the vehicle in question here is a truck. And for a truck, this is great mileage, especially when using the revised EPA estimates. Your car propbably isn't using the revised EPA estimates which means your true gas mileage is even worse. I drive an Audi A4 1.8T, so dont get me wrong, I get great gas mileage and dont want a truck either. But these truck can also carpool more people and therefore take place of two or three cars that would otherwise be on the road.

— mitchelm (View Profile)

Posted on 12/13/2007 4:18:42 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

mitchelm - the truck COULD carpool, but I doubt many do.
For anybody who says they 'need' a full size SUV, I present to you the Renault Grand Espace.
A large minivan with just a 2.0 diesel engine, pumping out 170 hp and 266 lb-ft of torque, 0-60 in 9.5 seconds, and over 30 US combined, with over 36 capable on the highway. This is a full 7 seater too, not an occasional 7 seater. And with 5 seats taken out, can hold 2860 litres of stuff.

— Rupert (View Profile)

Posted on 12/13/2007 6:41:17 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

"And you drive an s4 cabrio? So that gets what mileage? 14 mpg city and 21 highway with the manual? Thats also pretty crappy."

But when did I say it was efficient? We're not talking about my car here. That was clever, but I'm not pretending. You... are. BTW, my S4 has Tiptronic. It gets about 2MPG better than the manual, if not on paper, then in real driving.

"And besides, the vehicle in question here is a truck."

Yes, exactly, thank you, not my car.

"And for a truck, this is great mileage"

No, it's not. It is very possible to get something much better. This is a lazy effort from GM. I love many of their new products... but the hybrids are a joke. All of them. For a six thousand pound vehicle, this is fine, yes. But like I said, neither does it have to weigh this much, nor does it have to suck this much gas. If they made special vehicles for towing and deleted it from their bread and butter trucks, that would save about 1,000lbs and give them significantly better mileage in the process.

"Your car propbably isn't using the revised EPA estimates which means your true gas mileage is even worse. I drive an Audi A4 1.8T, so dont get me wrong, I get great gas mileage and dont want a truck either."

My true gas mileage is 16 in the city and 20something on the highway.

My other car is an A3 2.0T DSG. It gets about 28MPG on the highway and hovers around 20 in the city.

"But these truck can also carpool more people and therefore take place of two or three cars that would otherwise be on the road."

Let's think about it this way. Say, instead of getting a huge Tahoe hybrid that gets an incredible 19MPG, two people got their own Priuses instead. I don't think the Prius is effective, but this is just for comparison's sake. Okay, so both Priuses get about 50MPG on the romp to work every day. That's 250% better than what the Tahoe gets, for $10,000 less, and they fit a combined 10 people which is more than what any Tahoe can do. So no, your reasoning is not logical. This would even work with a Corolla or Civic, Camry hybrid, upcoming Jetta diesel, etc.

— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 12/14/2007 1:12:27 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

I'm sure MB's GL320's 21mpg is just superb right? ( considering it's a V6 diesel). An absolute technological breakthrough if you just ignore the emissions.

Heck, the ML350 only gets 19mpg and its half the size of the Tahoe/Yukon.
http://www.canadiandriver.com/testdrives/06ml350.htm

If only GM found a way to put a German name on their car.

Love how the German fans are so envious of hybrids.

— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 12/12/2007 7:29:50 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

Funny story. I was at the New England auto show a few weeks back and I happened to be walking through the Chevy section (don't ask me why).

All of a sudden, I hear this creaking sound coming from one of the spinning podiums as if it was about to fall through the floor.

Lo and behold, there was the new Chevy Tahoe Hybrid 4WD weighing in at 5,835 pounds. I know what your thinking, thats nearly the weight of a Asian Elephant.

They need to get it through their heads that all the technology in the world won't overcome physics.

More mass=more energy

— henbmw (View Profile)

Posted on 12/13/2007 6:01:52 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Holly Crap! Is there anybody on the site that does any real hauling, camping hunting or fishing? Most of you sound like you all live in the city. That’s great for you but I would go nuts. I don’t agree with these soccer moms buying these big SUV’s to go pick up there kids but if you do a lot of outdoor things including hauling a boat then you need a bigger SUV. Not only do you need the horsepower but you also need the weight to help balance out the load other wise that boat or trailer will push you down a hill with no stopping or shove you around a corner. As far as leg room. Has anybody here sat in the new Tahoe? It does not sound like it. They have a ton of leg room and comparing a Navigator to a Tahoe is just sad. When you people get out of the city and go drive some real trucks and SUV’s then I will listen to you're opinion otherwise you're just regurgitating crap.
I think its a great thing GM is doing with these big SUV's.

— SteveL (View Profile)

Posted on 12/14/2007 3:16:48 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

henbmw,
Tell that to the Germans, who are crying to the EU to base emissions on weight, not capability (or willingness to invest in new technology).

The LS600hL is a prime example that weight is irrelevant to emissions. 5000lbs SULEV sedan with 20mpg. Try that with a diesel (the V6 E320Bluetec can barely get Tier2bin5).

Chewy,
You conveniently forgot that the Yukon is 2x the size of an ML and its chassis can actually handle 400lbs of torque, unlike the ML's. For something similiar to an ML, compare it to an RX400h.

2008 EPA ratings (the ones that were supposed to destroy hybrids but instead show that diesels perform even worse)
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/2008selemakef.jsp?year=2008
RX400h 26/24/25mpg (cty/hwy/combined)
ML320CDI 18/24/21mpg

foxy,
Europeans are envious because whatever they do, N.Americans do better. The envy is evident in every aspect of society.

SteveL,
Yeah, the extended Yukon has enough storage space in the back to fit half of Europe in it. Hello, hello, hello...
A 20mpg elephant makes those diesels look stupid.

— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 12/15/2007 2:46:44 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

the lambdas, honestly, are a much better alternative imo. I don't see why a family of four or so would need something like this over the outlook/acadia.

— Htay7500 (View Profile)

Posted on 12/15/2007 9:29:08 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

As this article shows, it is not efficiency that is holding us back from less foreign oil dependency or less greenhouse emissions. Rather, it is our obsession with huge mammoth vehicles; speed; and high acceleration. A large SUV satisfies no purpose that had not already been created by the auto industry. We already had full-size vans; minivans; and full-size pickups. Large SUVs--in any circumstance--provide less utility for any possible application than one of the previously-mentioned vehicles had already been designed to provide. In other words, large SUVs have no purpose other than to satisfy those who think they are entitled to more of their share of a vital natural resource. While single Moms continue to struggle to afford gas to commute from work and back, there are those on this site that believe they should be entitled to purchase all the gas they can afford, regardless to how that affects the ability of others to stay mobile in our society.

Hybrid technologies are great. It gives our society great potential to move towards better average fuel economy. The same can be said for diesel technologies, but look what our manufacturers are doing with these promising technologies. They are applying hybrid technologies with large V-8 engines, which greatly diminishes the potential of this technology. Diesel powertrains will mostly be V-6s as alternatives to standard, gas V-6s with a 30% fuel economy gain, but three and four cylinder diesels can give us fuel economy upwards of 70 mpg. Other technologies, like direct-injection gas-engine technologies can likewise save us lots of fuel, but not when engine displacement is not lowered to take full potential of this promising technology.

Our problem is the application of engine efficiencies, not technologies, and as long as we continue to use advances to make our vehicles faster and heavier, we will continue to be at risk of total economic collapse through our dependence on foreign oil.

— gregsfc (View Profile)

Posted on 12/16/2007 3:22:08 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1