2005 GM/Opel diesel-hybrid — 59 mpg — never produced!

A research alliance consisting of General Motors Corp., BMW AG and DaimlerChrysler AG plans to invest over $1 billion in the development of a new hybrid transmission and related systems that backers say will leapfrog the market-leading technology now offered by Toyota Motor Corp.

The three automakers have about 500 engineers who have been working for the past 18 months on the joint development of the next-generation hybrid engine technology, which combines a battery-powered electric motor with a conventional gasoline combustion engine, company representatives said on Friday on the sidelines of an industry trade meeting.

The hybrid engine will be made available in two rear-wheel drive configurations or a front-wheel drive system, said representatives of the joint development project based in the Detroit suburb of Troy, Michigan.

You really have to click through to the next page to see what they plan. They’re almost up to the Edsel.

“We believe that our two-mode hybrid is the best of the hybrid systems,” Truckenbrodt said. “I think all three of us can say it’s truly amazing what you can get out of if you bring wild, dedicated engineers together.”

Did they hire Steve Martin?

I’m skipping right past the $300 million they’re going to waste on transmission research. Constant velocity transmissions and even well-done 5 and 6-speed automatics work just fine.

DaimlerChrysler plans to use the new hybrid system in its 2008 Dodge Durango sport utility vehicle.

GM will use the hybrid in versions of the Tahoe and Yukon SUVs it plans to make available at the end of 2007.

BMW has not committed to a timetable for using the new engine system, but has said that it will make vehicles available with the upcoming hybrid engine system over the next three to five years.

Let’s say these Dodo birds take their SUV’s that get 14-20 mpg and increase economy 50%. That’s 21-30 mpg.

With gasoline at a floor of $3/gallon and climbing daily, people want better design all-round. Families with bills and budgets want gasoline-hybrids, diesels and diesel-hybrids [now that diesels are cleaner and quieter] and not in vehicles weighing 2 or 3 tons. Especially when weight savings turn into gasoline savings faster than anything else.



  1. moss says:

    GM showed this version of the production Astra a year-and-a-half ago. I figured they just didn’t want to look too bad next to Toyota — though they sell the platform with a standard diesel in Europe — 30-40 mpg.

    It’s about the same size as a Camry or a Saab station wagon.

  2. Anon says:

    I heard these things are like a perpetual motion machine. Then again, the same people told me there’s no evidence for global warming.

  3. Dave M. says:

    Eideard, do you now remember your previous post:
    http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=4017

    Ford has had a Hybrid SUV for quite a while now. I’m not saying I don’t agree with your sentiment (Hybrid SUV’s. Cripes!), just that it’s not a new thing.

    Personally, I’m waiting for the hybrid Hummer. That’s the ultimate Phat SUV. What a country we live in…

  4. rlj_151 says:

    I am waiting for the BMW diesels to be brought over here from Europe. Now THOSE get great mileage. Also waiting for DaimlerChrysler to bring over some of MB’s diesels.

  5. Carlos says:

    I honestly think the CVT transmissions are a waste of time, the gain in fuel economy would be minimal. As for car preferences I guess it depends where you live. In south Texas people don’t really seem to car what size their truck is. I think that if people can a afford a 40 some thousand dollar Ford F-150 King Ranch edition, they won’t be worried about the cost of fuel, and the same goes for most other large SUV’s that cost a fortune like the hundreds of new Escalades I see running around town. Personally I couldn’t care less that my ZR2 S-10 gets only 11 mpg in the city and 17 mpg on the highway. I love the truck and the cost of gas is a small price to pay to allow me to drive what I want. Just my two cents.

  6. Eideard says:

    Carlos — most automotive engineers rate up to 20% increase in economy using CVT’s. Which is why most of their development took place in commercial vehicles and trucks — much larger than your bowtie.

    The funniest thing is that even Japanese engineers think Americans are too parochial and unimaginative to understand the “feel” of a true CVT — and often put in imaginary shift points — even though it gives back some of that mileage increase.

    Dave M — the Escape is also a “smaller” SUV than the cast iron GM and Dodge are talking about.  GM did a custom hybrid Hummer for Ahnold!

  7. Shaky says:

    Funny ain’t it? You cannot go to a new car dealer and find a Honda Civic (gas OR hybrid), Honda Fit, Toyota Prius Hybrid, or Toyota Yaris in stock. They’re all pre-ordered.

    The market is saying something, loud and clear. And it’s not “Gives us more SUVs”.

    Thanks GM & Chrysler — idiots.

  8. RTaylor says:

    My wife bought a Ford Freestyle with a CRT trans. I call it a SUV shaped vehicle, since the engine size and body weight doesn’t even allow a towing option. It does get about 25 mpg in town, and you can’t feel the shifting. That’s a large vehicle for 25 mpg.

  9. ECA says:

    9,
    I have a 20 year old Oldsmobile that gets 30-35 on the freeway, at 70+ mph…
    so, WHY do SMALL cars get LESS?? Its STUPID..
    Even the Old VW’s did MUCh better then whats around in the last 10..

  10. Mike says:

    I find it slightly humorous that Chrysler’s new advertising campaign is doing everything it can to emphasize that the cars are designed by Germans. So I guess even most Americans have come to believe that American designed cars are shit.

  11. god says:

    ECA — get your speedo calibrated.

    RT — didn’t realize the Freestyle had a CVT. That’s a big vehicle, too. I don’t quite comprehend the mindset that thinks CVT’s are only for small cars — if you’ve ever seen a really BIG DAF truck rock along a Euro freeway.

  12. Anon says:

    #11, yeah I found those ads pretty odd. They give out a pretty clear message though.

  13. Ryan says:

    The problem with diesel (at least where I live) is that there is no where to get them worked on. Maintence is 2-3 times more than a gas vehicle. Diesel is hard to find in a lot of gas stations. I had a 2002 VW Beetle TDI that got 35-40 MPG. Oil changes were $75 every 5k and at 75k the timing belt change was over $1500. Now I have a gas Honda Civic. Oil changes are $30 every 5k. Timing belt will be less than $500. Keep in mind that these are the dealership prices. As for my beetle, I searched locally for a mechanic that would do the timing belt and no one would do it. I think that is partially because it is hard to find a good diesel mechanic in the US unless they are working on Big Rigs and they do not want to deal with the cramped spaces of a small car.

  14. Bruce IV says:

    Ryan (14) can’t say anything about service, but where I live in Canada you can get diesel at pretty much any gas station (of course, I’m in a pretty rural area, where most places are just off the highway, and have diesel for trucks doing shipping and truck stuff …)

  15. Hans Friedman says:

    Our ’05 Jetta TDI gets 50mpg on the highway and oil changes every 10k miles (per manufacture recommendation). Other than oil and the timing belt there is very little maintenance. No spark plugs, wires, distributor, cap, rotor, coil to go bad. Hybrid milage without lugging batteries or complex drivetrain. Its a no brainer until diesel hybrids make there appearance.

  16. Len Sherman says:

    I think John has it backwards. Hybrid SUVs save more gas than sedans if you think of it as gallons per mile, rather than MPG. If you assume that 15k/yr gets driven by both an SUV and a Prius. Hybridizing an SUV to go from 17MPG (882 gal at 15k/yr) to 24 mpg (625 gal) saves 257 Gal. Hybridizing a sedan to go fron 30mpg (500 Gal) to 45mpg (333 Gal) saves only 167 Gal. I agree that GM *ARE* idiots, but the the decision to improve big vehicle mileage seems uncharacteristically sound……for them anyway.

    Some people really need the bigger car, though I admit you do see a lot of solo drivers in Suburbans.

  17. One more thing that escapes between the lines… In every review of the proposed Chrysler/Dodge hybrid SUVs manufacturer seem to indicate that they aim for the similar mpg numbers but more performance. So, I don’t expect even a few percent mpg improvement when these arrive…
    This have also been done with Jeep Liberty Diesel, released in USA last year. I was already contemplating purchasing it (EU version had published 35 mpg) when I found their small print… For USA release they have “improved” it by simply enlarging the engine, gaining 20hp and losing 11mpg,…

  18. ChrisMac says:

    is it still cheaper than milk and bottled water?

  19. bb says:

    Chrysler was working on a hybrid Durango a couple years back and abandoned it as they could only get a 10% mileage increase. (that’s about a real world 15 mpg to only 17!) It was interesting technically, a “through the road transmission” which was mechanically much simpler than present hybrids. Gas engine on front wheels, electric motors on back wheels with no mechanical connection between them. The main technical problem: regeneration, i.e., an electric motor when run as a generator just doesn’t charge batteries with any efficiency. This is still a big problem, converting kinetic energy back into potential energy and being able to store it in some fashion.

  20. Miguel Correia says:

    #6, Carlos,

    Don’t you care about pollution? It shouldn’t be only about economy, but also about pollution. Cars with poor milleage are big polluters.

    Know what? Though it does hurt me when I stop at the gas station (and here in Portugal it hurts even more than in most countries), there is a big part of me that is really glad that gas prices are soaring as we will only look for cleaner vehicles when forced to.

  21. Joao says:

    SUV are a completely lack of taste. They are the 90’s and 2000’s version of the road hog.
    Here in my neck of the woods thay are mostly driven by upper middle class housewife bimbos, who like the sheer “upper class” visual impact and also the elevated point-of-view of these metal wasters.
    It reminds me of that 80’s movie, Robocop, where there were a parody of a TV commercial about the “SUX9000 – Big is Back”… Looks like the irony became prophecy.

    PS. (Miguel, tamos na onda.)

  22. ECA says:

    What IF,
    You could build a car that gets 3mpg, BUT.
    RE-uses the fuel in a cycle..

  23. JohnMo says:

    “Families with bills and budgets want gasoline-hybrids, diesels and diesel-hybrids [now that diesels are cleaner and quieter] and not in vehicles weighing 2 or 3 tons.”

    Speak for your own family, bud. I like my Suburban just fine. I’d love to have it in a diesel or a diesel-hybrid, but regardless of the powertrain configuration, I’ll still want the space because our family no longer fits in a rinky-dink minivan.

  24. ECA says:

    24,
    YOU NEED the weight…

    I can see you now, flying(REALLY) down the road in a Light car, and a 40mph wind HITS you in the side….And when you land, you are greated by the Olympic committee as being the World record SHOT PUT…
    You AINT seen what the wind can BLOW off the road HAVE YOU??

  25. Carlos says:

    I read in some article how much the average wieight of cars has gone up in the last 20 years, which then in turn has required more powerful engines that use more fuel. Some reasons for weight increases I can justify like safer/stronger frames in cases of crashes. But to ME, it almost seems like automakers are spoonfeeding features to customers that they may not even really ask for. All these supposed “features” just add weight. What happened to the old days when Fiero 4 cyl, got 42 mpg with throttle body injection. That’s awesome for a 2900 pound car running on 80’s technology. Even a lot of mid sized sedans from GM in the 80’s were in the low 3000 pound range, by comparison now, same sized cars weigh much more, use more fuel.

    As far as CVT’s go, the idea is cool and if it does save X amount of fuel… woo hoo for whoever cares. There’s just something about running trough the gears of a manual transmission that will never compare. Or even feeling the kick of a firm shifting automatic. I think most “car guys” would agree, but it’s a personal preference that for most of us car guys is seperate from how much fuel it saves. To each their own that’s what I say.

  26. Carlos says:

    Oh, BTW, what happens if you own a hybrid and the batteries that cost several thousand dollars have not gone out yet (as per some magazine article), and you try and sell the car. The buyer is going to fear being stuck with the duty of spending several K just to buy the hybrid. The eventual cost of battery replacment would, to me be make no sense. If you calculate in how much worse your fuel economy would be without a hybrid car and how much you’d pay in fuel as a difference, it would probably take many years to make up for the fact you had to replace your crappy batteries after X amount of years.

    It’s like me saying I’m going to put in an 800 dollar Borla exhaust on my car because it’s going to sound better and give me better fuel economy. It might give you better economy, but the breakeven point would probably be many many years down the road before the 800 dollars ever paid for itself. All these fuel saving aftermarket things, are great for performance but it makes me mad when they advertise to peoples feeble minds into making them justify to buy it because it will better their fuel economy. Marketers are just so bad. 🙂

  27. ECA says:

    Its not several K, its about $600-800…


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 4390 access attempts in the last 7 days.