A hybrid vehicle might be more fuel efficient than the non-hybrid version of the same car, but some hybrid vehicles can get as few as 19mpg. Check out this list of the least fuel efficient hybrid vehicles before you head out to the dealership.
11 Least Fuel Efficient Hybrid Vehicles
1-2) (tie) Chrysler Aspen Hybrid & Dodge Durango Hybrid 19 MPG
3-5) (tie) Chevy Tahoe Hybrid, Lexus LS 600h L, GMC Yukon Hybrid 21 MPG
6) Lexus GS 450h 23 MPG
7-8) (tie) Lexus RX 400h, Toyota Highlander Hybrid 26 MPG
9-11) (tie) Ford Escape Hybrid, Mercury Mariner Hybrid, Mazda Tribute Hybrid 32 MPG
Hybrid Cars [HybridCars]
More From Consumerist
-
New Jersey Drivers Relieved To Fill Up On Gas Until They Realize It’s Mixed With Diesel Fuel
-
Southwest Airlines' Fare Hike Will Probably Work Because The Other Carriers Are Sheep
-
AT&T Overnights New U-Verse Receiver To Us On Friday, Can’t Turn It On Until Tuesday Night
-
Fuel Costs Not Going Up That Fast But Airlines Like Tacking On Surcharges Anyway
-
NYC’s Bloomberg Announces Plan To Ration Gas Using Odd-Even License Plate Numbers
@TechnoDestructo: You’re correct in a lot of ways about 4WD, but not entirely. For the most part, mechanically speaking, the greatest benefit is indeed while accelerating, but it helps in turning and control as well. Take your standard 4WD vehicle nowadays; most have a limited slip rear, putting power to both wheels when one is slipping, and add 4WD to that. That means that in a slippery situation, you have 3 wheels all looking for grip, and when one finds purchase, the other 3 slow to the same speed, meaning that none of them are a detriment to you if one can be of use. In your standard front-wheel drive vehicle, you have one wheel that you depend on to provide power to control the vehicle, and if it starts losing its grip, it’s as good as an ice-skate, and now you can only hope that one wheel finds something to hang on to, or that you’re skilled enough to maneuver your vehicle. 4WD offers better control to the skilled driver, much like a manual transmission.
In practice, however, most 4WD vehicles are driven by soccer moms who have trouble controlling it when it’s 80 degrees, dry and sunny. So for them, 4WD can often offer more trouble when, in their overconfidence with 4WD, they try to speed past the slow snowplow in front of them, and all 3 of their powered wheels begin spinning and they lose control. All of the most dramatic snow related accidents I have seen have been the result of someone in a 4WD vehicle thinking the system is more than it is.
I personally find 4WD to be especially useful in the winter for not getting stuck in the snow, not having to worry about whether or not I can get going again at a slippery intersection after being fully stopped, and as I mentioned earlier, better control when individual wheels slip. Much like your comment, however, I also believe that it needs to be in the hands of a skilled driver to see any real benefit.
part of the reason why there are hybrid trucks and such is because some of them also have 110v outlets that the entire hybrid system makes a lot easier. i mean, hey, you’re burning gas for electricity anyways.
@fuzzymuffins: dude, if someone REALLY needs an SUV/truck to haul stuff around, then yes, an SUV/truck with a not as crappy MPG is better than an SUV/truck with a crappy MPG.
@Canino: 4×4 is NOT needed for towing a bassboat. My parents tow a professional style ski-boat. Close to 2x the weight of a bassboat. They tow it with a ’96 Chevy Impala SS. Big RWD sedans can tow your boat just fine, AND make it up a wet ramp. And old Crown Vic or Chevy Caprice or Buick Roadmaster would be a better car for around town driving AND be big/bad enough to tow your bassboat.
I live way the heck out in the middle of nowhere on a New England dirt road, and at the end of that I have a 700 foot upwardly sloping driveway that’s quite frequently covered with ice. I like having 4WD on my S-10, thank you very much. Yes, you can do a lot with FWD and studded snows, but there is a limit to traction…FWD with the two front wheels on glare ice doesn’t work..nothing like getting 2/3 of the way up the driveway, hitting ice, and then sliding backwards into the ditch and having to call a wrecker to haul you out of your own driveway. I also find that 4WD also considerably improves general stability in severe conditions when there’s 5″ of snow on the road on top of a layer of ice (not terribly uncommon where I live).
So yes, Virginia, there *ARE* people for whom 4WD is more than just a fashion statement. There are also people that need big vehicles…though I’m guessing that *maybe* that amounts to 10% or 15% of the population.
As to putting hybrid drivetrains in large vehicles…is it worth the extra $10,000 to get 18 MPG as opposed to 15 MPG? No, I don’t think so. The Ford Escape…well…that almost begins to look worthwhile…32 MPG for a small SUV isn’t bad and might be worth the effort…maybe.
When you get down to the Yukon, Durango, and Lexus, it really seems like a marketing sham. The words “hybrid” and “hemi” don’t belong on the same nameplate. Maybe having “hybrid” on the nameplate makes some people feel better about buying an inefficient vehicle that’s three times as big as they really need (to commute to work by themselves), but if you really want to do some good, buy a reasonably efficient vehicle to begin with.
Please GM…no Hummer hybrids..okay?
Oh, and just for the record, I drive a normal 25 MPG car for commuting purposes….4WD is reserved for snow, ice, and hauling lumber or hay.
Hybrid shmybrid, why not go full electric?
or Hydrogen?
@godlyfrog:
Yeah, that’s why I mentioned Subaru. That kind of AWD (and Subaru has pretty much the best, outside of high-end sports cars…and I’m not sure how well those would do on snow) can help you corner.
Offroad-oriented 4WD as found in many trucks and large SUVs doesn’t. In fact it’s more likely to hurt cornering. (A point lost on the poor misguided morons whose trucks litter the ditches every October in Alaska).
Oh, and the rear wheels finding grip (at least, grip that isn’t controlled by an electronic stability program), particularly if the front wheels have lost it, isn’t going to help most people to steer. In fact, for the sort of person who would actually REQUIRE any help, it’s only going to hurt.
@Grrrrrrrrr:
I learned to drive in winter in interior Alaska in a 1977 Nova with bald tires. FWD, hell. You can get through just about anything with enough momentum, a light touch on everything, and nerves of steel.
@dumanue:
Quick, give me directions to the nearest hydrogen filling station.
@pallendo: A Crown Vic is rated for 1,500 lbs tow capacity. To put that into perspective, a Hyundai Elantra is rated for about 3,000 lbs. A light-duty truck with tow packages can hit 10,000 lbs.
wow. i would have purchased a hybrid highlander a few weeks ago when my previous car’s repair estimate exceeded the value of the vehicle by 3x. but in my city [raleigh, nc] there’s apparently an 8 month waiting list for the hybrid version. so i got a regular, used, 2007 highlander. i’m still getting 25mpg highway and 21mpg average.
considering the age and engine problems with my old mazda, it’s actually about the same as what i was getting before.
yes, i need a bigger car. my 80 dog could barely squeeze into my old compact car, and once in it, couldn’t turn around.
Maybe it would be worth the lower emissions, but the impact from battery disposal might offset that. I’m no chemist though.
@starbreiz: People even drive like idiots in Philly when it rains. It’s freaking PA, we have a real EVERY YEAR.
Too many people think that 4wd is the cure-all for bad weather. As someone mentioned before, it does nothing for you under braking, and as most 4wd vehicles are heavier, is actually a burden. I’ll take my light, easy to maneuver Corolla over anything larger than a first-gen CRV in inclement weather any day.
I just want to clarify some things about hybrids. If I’m incorrect in my assumptions, please weigh-in.
There is a difference between a car getting good mileage, saving money and being “green.” From my understanding, hybrid vehicles are terrible for the environment.
• You only see a mileage benefit if you spend the majority of the time in slow stop-and-go traffic. If you see the full EPA estimate, the best case scenario is that it will take 2-11 years to break even with most hybrids.
• The resources necessary to develop two separate mechanical systems in a vehicle creates a huge “carbon footprint,” more harmful than any full sized SUV. To mine for the minerals (nickel) has had terrible ecological effects on the Canadian town where the quarry is located and the manufacturing process of the components is very involved.
• From North America, the nickel is shipped to China, where it is turned into a putty material. A toxic process with significant waste. Then it is again shipped to Japan where the material is turned into cells, shipped to the manufacturer, installed in the vehicles. Then the vehicles are shipped all over the world. All of this is a soot spewing, fuel propelled process, outside the scope of US environmental standards.
• Then after the lifecycle of the vehicle has ended, the batteries have to be disposed of. They aren’t recycled because the recovery amount is too low to warrant it. I haven’t heard anything negative about the proper disposal methods of hybrid vehicle batteries. But with such materials, I don’t know how it could possibly be a green process.
I don’t mean to be anti-hybrid. I think they’re a great stop-gap idea. But they don’t appear to be green at all. Because they require so much to manufacture, they don’t save fuel or reduce our dependence on foreign oil. It even appears that it further increases our dependence on Chinese components.
For taxis that can quickly accumulate 300,000 miles in urban traffic, a hybrid makes a lot of sense. But for a family vehicle to really be green, it appears that it needs to be an efficient all-gas drivetrain, or an all electric drivetrain. But not both.
@sleze69: …and yet somehow these vehicles are granted access to HOV lanes when my 40 MPG TDI Passat (or the 50-60 MPG golfs/jettas) is told to suck it.
Really? Where? I know in California, they won’t, since the basic rule is that it must be a hybrid or alternate fuel getting at least 45 MPG. (See details here [[www.arb.ca.gov]].)
@Taed: I’m too lazy to read the rules, but diesel isn’t really an “alternative fuel” — it’s been around spanning two millennia!
@sleze69: It’s okay, the HOV lanes are clogged by hybrids driving 5 below the speed limit.
Honestly, I think this should be judged as a percentage of the increase of fuel efficiency in comparison to other vehicles of the same class, not just total MPG.
@ne1butu: You only see a mileage benefit if you spend the majority of the time in slow stop-and-go traffic. If you see the full EPA estimate, the best case scenario is that it will take 2-11 years to break even with most hybrids.
I beg to differ on the 2-11 year break even point. The difference between a fully loaded Ford Escape Limited with leather/Nav and a FE Hybrid with premimum/Nav (leather) is only about 4200 bucks. Subtract the 3000 for a federal tax rebate and I only need to make up 1200 dollars. In my state there is no state tax, therefore no state tax credit, but some states will make up the difference rigth there.
In the FEH my oil changes are 1/2 as frequent and I get 38 MPG (vs say 22 in the FE). If I drive just 10K miles in a year I put in about 260 gallons in the FEH versus 454. Difference is 200 gallons or $800. I’ll make up that 1200 difference pretty quick.
That said, if the vehichle doesn’t have a Tax Credit then I can see it taking much longer, but with the 3K tax rebate the 08 FEH/MMH had it makes it a no brainer.
On Friday, CarMax launched vehicle searches by MPG on [www.carmax.com.] Also, there are “quick links” that allow you to shop all the cars rated above 30mpg as well as all cars under 12K.
@orielbean:
The batteries are fully recyclable. They’re actually one of those things where they’ll pay to get them back. Check out ‘core charge’ if you’re buying one to replace your old one.
The only real reason they don’t do this for portable equipment batteries(AAA-D cells) is that they’re too small to be normally worth the hassle. When you get up to a car battery, even the lead-acid in normal cars, it’s worth it.
The way I look at it, the best thing to do is to offer hybrids in ALL vehicle lines – don’t let the cloud of smug blind you. Increasing the mileage of SUVs and trucks can save a heck of a lot of gas/oil. An extra 10mpg for a SUV will eclipse the savings an extra 10mpg for a small/mid sized sedan would.
By the way, the NYC Crown Vic taxis are NOT former police vehicles – they’re actually custom models, even LONGER than normal vics. When the taxi authority decided to allow the escape hybrid to be used there were fears of not enough legroom(not borne out thus far, but the tall leggy types might simply be selecting vics).
Hybrids make sense in some situations – like city taxi. Enough in city use to slaughter the non-hybrid alternatives in gas savings, enough usage in a short period of time to make the capital cost worth it.
Also, I figure the technology scales up well – a hybrid system for a vehicle of twice the weight and half the gas mileage won’t cost twice as much. So it becomes easier to justy to those that like spreadsheets. Look at locomotives – they’ve been diesel-electric for a long time now.
As for why not electric – electric is currently too expensive with not enough range for the average user. If some mad scientist came up with a battery/electricity storage method that stored twice the electricity for half the price, then we’d be talking. There’s some potentials – I hear EEStor a lot, but as there have been no independant laboratory tests, I currently consider them vaporware.
@pallendo: Not where I take it. Not all ramps are paved and not all give you nice flat ground clearance. Plus, I didn’t mention, driving out on South/North Padre Island (not with a boat, but with kayaks). I’m not going to take a Crown Vic 20 miles up the beach from the nearest paved road, but feel free to do that with your rear wheel drive sedan. Maybe I’ll stop and pull you out if you offer me beer. Lots and lots of beer.
Besides, when towing it isn’t a good idea to max out the vehicle’s towing capacity. I don’t want to get into any jams because I’m at the limit of what I can tow.
If I want 4WD I will get a Wrangler. I don’t like 4WD SUV’s. My wife has a 2006 Durango 4.7 V8 and we get about 20mph on the highway. My next vehicle will be a Toyota Tundra 5.7. I am willing to sacrifice mph for total usefulness. As far as the statements made about Crown Vic’s, I drove one as a cop for several years in Hot Springs, AR, which is a far cry from flat land. I never had a problem with traction, even on ice.
I never realized that diesel engines would be more fuel efficient than hybrids. This may change my next buy.
It’s the percent change that makes the most difference. My Tundra with a V8 gets 14 mpg; if I get 7 more mpg, I’m getting 35% better mpg. If I get 7 more mpg in my old beater Tercel that gets 40 mpg, that’s only about 20% better. A 4×4 SUV that gets 25+ mpg is pretty impressive by anyone’s standards.