How to fight climate change... for reals.

[Ashful]

5.5 seconds 0 to 60 is not that shabby for a normally aspirated car.

Yeah, it's not. I was just having some fun with you.

My naturally-aspirated full-size sedan has you beat by 20% on 0 - 60, but likely gets worse than half the mileage.

 

[semipro]

My Rav 4 Prime has a CVT and is the second fastest Toyota they sell in the US. I think total HP Gas and electric is 325 total.

...and damned hard to find at a dealer. We looked. Some used 2021s are becoming available but at new 2022 prices.

 

[woodgeek]

5.5 seconds 0 to 60 is not that shabby for a normally aspirated car.

I feel better about my Bolt now, which everyone seems to think is a joke. With good tires, it can do 0-60 in 6.3 seconds. Its probably faster 0-30 and 0-40 than the Rav4 Prime.

 

[JRHAWK9]

My '21 Crosstrek is a CVT. Gets way better fuel economy than the manual 6 speed does.

 

[EbS-P]

lol... not far from citing the second hairiest bald guy, or second darkest albino.

Toyota has made some nice cars over the years (GR Supra, GT86, 2000GT), but the fact that a RAV4 is their current second fastest is perfect evidence of how far they've strayed from that goal.

Now Toyota can’t even keep wheels on!

 

[peakbagger]

the BEZ is a rebadged Subaru Solterra so this one is on Subaru

 

[Ashful]

I feel better about my Bolt now, which everyone seems to think is a joke. With good tires, it can do 0-60 in 6.3 seconds. Its probably faster 0-30 and 0-40 than the Rav4 Prime.

The ultra-torquey 0-30 mph range makes EV's more fun than go-carts, for the hours and hours of around-town driving so many of us do. I'm still amazed every time I hop into a Tesla, even the "lowly" Model 3 (dual motor AWD), at how snappy they are at in-town speeds.

 

[semipro]

I feel better about my Bolt now, which everyone seems to think is a joke. With good tires, it can do 0-60 in 6.3 seconds. Its probably faster 0-30 and 0-40 than the Rav4 Prime.

I don't know about 0-30 or 0-40 but the Prime does 0-60 in 5.4 sec. -- one of the reasons I want one.

Tested: 2021 Toyota RAV4 Prime Is Quicker Than Supra 2.0

Toyota's plug-in RAV4 has 302 hp, can tow 2500 pounds, and will beat a four-cylinder Supra in a few acceleration tests.

www.caranddriver.com

 

[stoveliker]

And here we go, we have a fair solution to personal transport, but we still find ways to waste the (smaller) amount of fossil fuel resources (see grid mix) it still requires, by racing with unnecessary acceleration.

 

[SpaceBus]

The Rav4 Prime is decidedly a capable vehicle. I could see ourselves owning one some day, but both of our vehicles probably have at least another decade of life left in them. Especially my truck if I keep up on the rust.

 

[Ashful]

And here we go, we have a fair solution to personal transport, but we still find ways to waste the (smaller) amount of fossil fuel resources (see grid mix) it still requires, by racing with unnecessary acceleration.

I think I made that point back in post #98! Even those pretending to be green, still choose a car with quicker acceleration and poorer fuel economy, over the same vehicle body with the lesser but more economic engine.

I’ll take woodgeeks original premise one step farther. It’s not just that technology will save us, but that we need technology to save us, from ourselves!

 

[peakbagger]

Having owned the blatantly overpowered GMC Syclone for a few years until the northern roads and GMCs crappy corrosion design started to win out, I can state that except for rare conditions the Prime has far more immediate power on tap. It does have traction control tuned pretty tight so no major smoke shows but put it in Sport mode (shock, steering and throttle response tightened up) and Hybrid mode (ICE running) and it has instant power, no turbo lag and far less derate due to ambient temps. Even the ECO EV mode still has power but there is a bit of lag until the ICE starts up. Turbos especially ones grafted to an existing engine tend to have turbo lag due to length of the intake track. The Syclone actually had an water cooler intracoooler versus an intercooler so the tract was a bit shorter but it still was noticeable and had to be planned for on passes. The Prime has instant power, go for a pass and the power is there right now and lots of it. Passing is rarely an issue.

That is the nice thing about modern electric powertrains is that they can be tuned for both economy and acceleration (obviously not at the same time). With a hybrid if someone gets a bit enthusiastic, the just have to buy it bit more gas with full electric they just have to be aware of shorter range.

All that and I see 40MPG on gas at a GPS recorded 70 MPH (Speedo is bit optimistic and reads 73). Knock on wood after 12 years with econoboxes, the Prime would be hard to beat for my use. I need AWD as I still have 4 months of winter and even though I have the "stripper" SE version it has still got all the goodies I want and some I could live without like a sunroof. (SE Primes without sunroofs are very very rare, but are about $2K less ). My guess is anyone with an ICE SUV could switch to a Prime and with the exception of plugging it in would not know the difference. Since I have excess PV generation and net metering the first 50 miles (in summer) is "free" In the deep of winter its more like 28 miles. Sad to say, IMO, Toyota sold the Prime as a loss leader and I have no doubt they lose money on everyone, theyare built on a low volume line in Japan and shipped to US. I do not know if they will shift production to North America to reduce costs and increase production. I could see it being retooled with the new solid state battery once its goes commercial but the claim is they will use them in hybrids first, most likely the new Tacoma.

 

[stoveliker]

I think I made that point back in post #98! Even those pretending to be green, still choose a car with quicker acceleration and poorer fuel economy, over the same vehicle body with the lesser but more economic engine.

I’ll take woodgeeks original premise one step farther. It’s not just that technology will save us, but that we need technology to save us, from ourselves!

Not me. I drive 40-41 mpg in a small stick shift ICE car that's now 10 yrs old. And yes, I've gotten doors etc. from the orange club in that thing. Creativity goes a long way to preventing hauling needless steel.

I do understand the AWD needs of some.

But, are you advocating for speed limiters ("technology to save us from ourselves")?? 18 wheelers have them in NL. And I'm not sure it's a really good idea. Acceleration limiters would even be more unsafe imo.

 

[sneefy]

the BEZ is a rebadged Subaru Solterra so this one is on Subaru

It's the other way around. The Solterra is a rebadged bZ4x. It was a co-developed venture, but the bulk of the engineering was done by Toyota.

 

[sneefy]

I feel better about my Bolt now, which everyone seems to think is a joke.

Having been a passenger in the rear seat of a Bolt, it certainly felt like one. It was less comfortable than a wooden pew and had about as much cushioning.

That and the fact that GM was forced to tell some owners to park 50 feet away from, well, anything due to spontaneous fires didn't exactly help people take the car seriously.

But, hey, you can say it's just like a Ferrari!

 

[woodgeek]

Having been a passenger in the rear seat of a Bolt, it certainly felt like one. It was less comfortable than a wooden pew and had about as much cushioning.

That and the fact that GM was forced to tell some owners to park 50 feet away from, well, anything due to spontaneous fires didn't exactly help people take the car seriously.

But, hey, you can say it's just like a Ferrari!

The '17-'20 MY Bolts did have sucky seats. I know, I owned one, tore down the seats and added more foam.
And I totaled that one before it could spontaneously combust, a win!

The folks with the recalls had to live with 80% of stated range for 12-18 mos, and then got a brand new battery for their trouble, along with a roughy $6k jump in their car's resale. Or so they tell me.

I'll keep going vroom-vroom in my '22 Bolt with the roomy back seats. You can do you.

 

[Ashful]

But, are you advocating for speed limiters ("technology to save us from ourselves")?? 18 wheelers have them in NL. And I'm not sure it's a really good idea. Acceleration limiters would even be more unsafe imo.

Oh heavens no... are you new here? I'm simply pointing out that telling people to drive slower is going to be almost as successful as our failed experiment in Prohibition.

If you want to reduce the impact of personal transportation, the path to success would appear to be through better technology, whether that be in the form of BEV's, PHEV's, or any other solution allowing one to approximate their current driving expectations at lesser impact.

 

[stoveliker]

I was just trolling you.

 

[EbS-P]

The '17-'20 MY Bolts did have sucky seats. I know, I owned one, tore down the seats and added more foam.
And I totaled that one before it could spontaneously combust, a win!

The folks with the recalls had to live with 80% of stated range for 12-18 mos, and then got a brand new battery for their trouble, along with a roughy $6k jump in their car's resale. Or so they tell me.

I'll keep going vroom-vroom in my '22 Bolt with the roomy back seats. You can do you.

It’s kinda a shame that’s it’s going away soon. It’s priced very well. Like GM is probably loosing money well. I still don’t get that decision.

It’s definitely at the top of my NOT a Tesla and less than 6 seats list. (Which really is the list I would actually be buying from).

 

[woodgeek]

It’s kinda a shame that’s it’s going away soon. It’s priced very well. Like GM is probably loosing money well. I still don’t get that decision.

It’s definitely at the top of my NOT a Tesla and less than 6 seats list. (Which really is the list I would actually be buying from).

GM did recently ink a new deal with LG Chem for more new battery than its previous purchases to date (which is >150,000 Bolts). AFAIK they have not set a date for ending Bolt production, and the Ultium Equinox will take a couple years to get up to production.

Since refreshes usually come every 5-6 years at Chevy, they could make them to 21+5 = 2026.

The IRA may hasten its demise... since it will not get a rebate with its LG battery, and the US battery plants all make Ultium I think.

 

[Poindexter]

American vehicles is a hard thing. When my 2004 GTO was new it was a beast, and I wanted a beast, gosh almost 20 years ago. It was so good I had less than 200 miles on it when I decided to sell off ALL of my first gen Small Block Chevy parts; blocks, heads, cranks, all of it. I could (in west Texas) set the cruise on that thing in the second overdrive and observe 28 mpg while the mile markers were flipping by at 120 (+) mph.

I have slowed down rather considerable in the intervening decades. What I want now is a vehicle that will last and last and last, and meet my needs while doing it. Just because a Tacoma works for me doesn't mean it is the best vehicle for anyone else. The Tundra is easily a better all around truck. On the other hand not everyone needs Otto cycle with some cubic inches and associated torque to pull a boat off a muddy riverbank multiple times per year. I like that on Nokian Hakkapeliitta my truck can more or less climb ice encrusted tree trunks, but that doesn't matter to anyone in Florida or Hawaii.

At the end of the day, for Americans, torque is fun. Coming off the line from a standing start, the Prius was making more or less infinite toque at rest, but by the time that car and mine finished crossing the intersection with the traffic light I could walk that thing like an Amish cart with an old horse in front of the Toyota emblem.

I am struggling to think of an unmodified factory original car that could beat my goat off the line in 05 or 06. The Corvette, Ferrari and Lamborghini of course, Aston Martin; but none of mustangs, BMW and Lexus and etcetera rated even turning my traction control off.

On the one hand I kinda miss handing out abject humiliation to all and sundry, but on the other hand I have moved on and have higher priorities now. As my older daughter is inclined to say, "Nice truck, sorry about your Richard."

 

[Brian26]

My '21 Crosstrek is a CVT. Gets way better fuel economy than the manual 6 speed does.

My wife has a 2019 Impreza that has the same exact engine and CVT as the Crosstrek. I am always amazed with its awd it can still deliver 38 mpg.

This is a dyno test from a stock 2019 crosstrek. The poster said the torque curve basically peaks and is flat at 2600 rpms all the way to redline.

The torque is the top blue chart and red is hp. Notice its basically delivering its max torque through almost its entire normal driving rpm engine range . No doubt the CVT is playing a huge part in that.

 

[semipro]

WRT GHG reduction:
Anyone have thoughts, or better yet, data, on whether it's better to shop locally or buy online and have stuff delivered? I wonder this every time I hear the UPS truck making its daily rounds through our area.
It seems obvious that buying locally produced things should result in less GHG production. I'm really thinking about those things that aren't produced locally. E.g., what we've bought lately, mower parts, kayaking accessories, kitchen gadgets, clothing, etc.
We typically run into town at least once a week from our somewhat rural location to shop and I keep thinking that we should buck up, have some discipline, plan ahead, and have stuff delivered.

 

[stoveliker]

If you go to town anyway, it's better to get the stuff you need then, there, than have it delivered - according to what I read someplace. I think this was in the first Covid lockdown that these discussions came up as deliveries of all kinds were way up.

Yes, you make a bit more stops in town, but your vehicle is better for GHG than the UPS truck that makes a lot of stops.

If you drive to town for that one thing, I think delivery would have been better - depending on how far away from town you live...

Meaning that I plan my shopping trips - the more things are combined into one trip, the better it is for GHG. Regardless of the debate, this is the best thing to do imo.
(And it's also better for my sanity; I don't live out in the country, sadly, but stores and all their hustle just are not my thing.)

 

[JRHAWK9]

My wife has a 2019 Impreza that has the same exact engine and CVT as the Crosstrek. I am always amazed with its awd it can still deliver 38 mpg.

This is a dyno test from a stock 2019 crosstrek. The poster said the torque curve basically peaks and is flat at 2600 rpms all the way to redline.

The torque is the top blue chart and red is hp. Notice its basically delivering its max torque through almost its entire normal driving rpm engine range . No doubt the CVT is playing a huge part in that.

View attachment 298014

I have the 2.5L though. '21 was the first year they offered it in the Limited and Sport trims in the Crosstreks. I have the Limited.

Yeah, CVT's definitely have their advantages. Like you pointed out, keeping the rpm's in the sweet spot is a HUGE advantage for both power and fuel economy.

This is the first auto I have bought in a long time. My HS car is an auto (which I still have), but all my cars since 1997 have been manuals. If the manual version of the Crosstrek would have been rated for better mileage than the CVT, I would have bought a manual. I could not ignore the huge discrepancy in fuel mileage between the two though.