In the first half of last year, the number of new vehicles sold in Europe with a diesel engine under the hood (or bonnet, depending on your port of call) fell below that of gasoline-powered vehicles.
Spurred on by various tax incentives aimed at boosting national fuel economy, diesel’s popularity hit a high water mark in 2011, with 55.7 percent of all passenger cars sold in Western Europe that year leaving the lot with a compression ignition powerplant. However, since Volkswagen’s debacle, automakers, governments, and consumers are having second thoughts about the fuel.
After seeing the diesel take rate fall 17 percent in 2017, Britain anticipates the overall market share for oil burners could hit 15 percent in 2025. Germany, birthplace of diesel fandom, saw sales sink 7 percent last year, now standing at 38.8 percent of new vehicles. The French take rate is now below 50 percent, as well.
Replacing the incentivized high-torque engines isn’t a job that can be handled by gasoline alone, not in that market, anyway, which is where hybrid vehicles come in. For Toyota, this as much a problem as an opportunity — one that could have an impact on North America.
As U.S. customers know, the automaker already offers a bevy of hybrid vehicles. It’s even a bigger game on the other side of the Atlantic, where Toyota also sells a gas-electric variant of the C-HR subcompact crossover, but very few diesel models. Toyota says it won’t touch the oil burner in the Land Cruiser, as it’s already compliant with the latest EU emissions standards. Besides, what else could it throw in there?
Speaking to Automotive News Europe, Toyota Europe CEO Johan van Zyl said hybrids already account for 40 percent of the company’s European volume. (Russia and Turkey count as part of the region.)
“Our target is to reach 50 percent hybrids in Europe by 2020,” said van Zyl. “Today, the share is close to 50 percent in Western Europe and rises to 60 percent in countries such as France.”
What’s needed to pull off the plan is hybrid powertrains with more power, able to propel larger or sportier vehicles. Despite Toyota’s sensible customer base — a group made up of “rational buyers who look for a favorable total cost of ownership” — there’s more than a few who demand spirited driving, van Zyl said.
So rapid is Europe’s diesel decline, Toyota decided to skip a diesel variant of its C-HR in that market altogether. Overall, Toyota’s Continental diesel share is 15 percent, down from 25 percent just two years ago. The hybrid C-HR represents 77 percent of C-HR sales in Europe. In France, the figure is 90 percent.
“We will decide model by model, but the chances of us launching a new diesel engine in a passenger car or [light commercial vehicle] are limited,” van Zyle said. It’s likely Toyota’s European hybrid push will see new technology, and perhaps new model variants, filter down to its North American lineup, but the automaker would need to carefully weight the market first.
Unlike other automakers, among them Audi and Fiat Chrysler, there’s no plan for 48-volt mild hybrids in Toyota’s portfolio. At least, not on that side of the ocean. Europe needs an electron-heavy approach, van Zyl claims.
Perhaps unfairly, Toyota is seen as a technological laggard for its lack of a fully electric vehicle, despite building the most recognizable hybrid in the world. Rivals like Honda, General Motors, Nissan, Hyundai, and others will gladly sell you an EV right now. Still, while Toyota claims there’s EVs on the way, those models aren’t likely to occupy the bottom rungs of the market. “It’s a matter of cost versus the possible selling price,” said van Zyl, noting that, “It is easier to launch an SUV or premium vehicle as an EV.”
[Image: Toyota]
I wonder what the power grid is like in European countries, including Turkey & Russia, compared to the U.S. In 2003, a guy in Ohio plugged in an old toaster and blew out the Northeast U.S. grid.
That would be funny if it was true.
Have you heard of any problems in Norway where a significant proportion of the cars are now ev’s? No.
I heard of someone who choked on a chicken bone, so does that mean eating is a bad idea?
I am all for performance hybrids. F1, Ferrari, Porsche, McLaren etc have all shown it’s very doable. Key will be cost and reliability.
Toyota is smart. They know that it is impossible to make a reasonably priced BEV and make a profit, or even make any money at all. Until the scale is there with the battery technology, they will continue to make hybrids. Hybrids sell a lot more than BEV’s do any way.
No, Toyota is follow GM’s lead to go EV rather than costly dual power source like hybrids.
But I wonder if they see the light in that batteries are bad.
“Tesla car battery production releases as much CO2 as 8 years of gasoline driving”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/20/tesla-car-battery-production-releases-as-much-co2-as-8-years-of-gasoline-driving/
Because comparing a factory’s emissions to a car is completely logical.
“Tesla car battery production releases as much CO2 as 8 years of gasoline driving”
The study that purports to prove this is on the website of an organization that appears to be a climate change denial site. As such, deception is a certainty. This study is like the one that proved a Prius has a greater lifetime impact than a Hummer. Even under casual scrutiny that study was exposed as trash.
This study simply omits the recycling potential of ev batteries. It conveniently overlooks that gas cars need a means of locomotion and does not consider the impact of building and maintaining gas engines. Trash.
“…an organization that appears to be a climate change denial site. As such, deception is a certainty.”
Because sites that embrace any given ideology that you disagree with are inherently deceptive, while sites that embrace any given ideology that you agree with are wholesome, pure, and absolutely nothing but 100% truthful, up front, and honest on absolutely everything.
At no time does the site you agree with stretch or twist things, or ignore facts that don’t promote their way. That would never happen.
Yes, you’re a very stable genius, MR Trump
Do make some effort to address the issues.
“Climate change denial” is not a political ideology; it is a refusal to accept incontrovertible scientific evidence. I used to work as a contractor to the National Weather Service and knew hundreds of meteorologists, a field that does not skew to any particular pole on the political spectrum. If anything, there were more who leaned rightward. Every one of them considered climate change to be an inarguable fact, one that can easily be discerned by tracking average temperatures over the years.
Science does two important things. Science always considers that it might be wrong, and it follows the evidence.
Climate deniers cherry pick the evidence to confirm conclusions they are absolutely certain of. And they seize on any hint of a shred of uncertainty to completely dismiss certainty. So the very things that make science high quality, the deniers use to contradict it.
Um, Toyota realized that they are “late to the party” – which is why they have a rash of EVs coming to market in the next 4-5 years.
What this article fails to understand is that the majority of Europeans who buy and drive diesels do so because these engines are efficient for sustained long distance driving at variable highway (or road) speeds over any gasoline engine currently on the market.
I do not know what the situation is elsewhere in Europe, but owning a diesel car in Germany has always been more expensive than owning a comparable gasoline vehicle. The diesel vehicle is more expensive to purchase first of all and is penalized with higher taxation. Servicing a diesel car is more expensive. Diesel fuel is cheaper than gasoline, so for those who will cover long distances on a daily basis and accumulate at least over 15,000 km a year (on average), a diesel car can make financial sense. You pay higher taxes on the diesel cars, but the huge savings at the fuel station make it worth your while.
Due to the nature of my work I drive roughly 40,000 km a year. Most of my time is spent on the Autobahn cruising between 140-160 km/h, sometimes I go faster if I am in a hurry. My cars have always been diesel powered because of the fuel efficiency (even at those speeds) and because diesel fuel is cheaper in Germany. The longer range is also a benefit. I save money in this situation. But if I owned a gasoline car or a gasoline-hybrid vehicle, I would not be saving money as these cars require more fuel over the same distance, especially if I drive faster.
I fail to see how a gasoline-hybrid, which has to lug around heavy components like batteries and electric motors, will provide me with the same fuel mileage over a comparable diesel motor on highways.
The only advantage of a hybrid would be in the city where the electric motor will help keep the fuel consumption low. But on a highway (such as the Autobahn as we have here in Germany) I do not see any advantages for a hybrid. In fact I only see disadvantages, namely a higher fuel consumption because of the extra weight which the vehicle is permanently burdened with..
It is my personal belief that many of these hybrid vehicles are gimmicks which are also incorrectly marketed, especially in regards to saving fuel on a highway. For Europeans who do most of their driving in the city with occasional ventures on a highway a hybrid can make sense, but not for Europeans such as me who drive huge distances daily. Sorry, my English is a little rusty.
This is largely due to Germany’s draconian taxation laws. I rent cars whenever I go to Europe and have found that on a $/mile basis costs are the same…. but the European cars have to burn 50% less gas to reach that cost parity. If German gas prices were in line with the US I’m sure folks would abandon diesel en masse, largely for the reasons you listed.
That said, the diesel Focus wagon I rented in France was a lot more quiet and refined at triple digit speeds than the gasoline Civic 1.8 I owned at the time. But that is probably more a matter of design than fuel type. A small gas engine could be tuned very similarly.
@Sportyaccord
I would not say that most people would abandon diesels if gas prices were cheaper. We have diesel enthusiasts here who value the benefits of this internal combustion engine. I would count myself as one of them.
I recently bought a high mileage diesel car (2007 Mercedes GL320 CDI 4Matic) and I could not imagine owning the same car with a gasoline engine because of the heavy fuel consumption. The V6 diesel engine in my car provides me with great performance while consuming relatively little fuel.
ThomasSchiffer, The argument in your first paragraph makes the case why in the US 18-wheelers and diesel-electric locomotives use diesel fuel to traverse the great distances.
But passenger cars in the US tend to favor gasoline-fed engines, possibly due to the fact that dino-oil is so plentiful in the US, and will be for at least 200 years into the future. Even more so today with fracking and steam-injection regenerating old wells.
Plentiful oil is an understatement. Making money is another matter.
If the US put as much taxpayer money into oil drilling as it does into solar and wind generation, America truly would be energy self-sufficient with plenty left over for export. America’s oil export would impact OPEC, Venezuela and Russia.
Maybe President Trump will seize this initiative to gen-up America’s oil production even more. I hope so.
America needs to reverse its “government-mandated artificially-manipulated dependence” on foreign oil of the past 45 years.
Gasoline and diesel refueling stations are plentiful, but electrical charging stations not so much. And then there is the time involved in recharging an EV/PEV. Wasted time!
If a person chooses to go EV, they’d be infinitely better off with a Hybrid like a Prius or Volt. At least with those they can keep on motoring without range anxiety.
Nothing beats good old-fashioned gasoline for the past, the presence and the foreseeable future.
@highdesertcat “Nothing beats good old-fashioned gasoline for the past, the presence and the foreseeable future.”
The foreseeable future being when the gulf comes through your front door.
brandloyalty, we live on a planet that has been in geologic and climate-change turmoil for >4.5Billion years.
Geology even tells us that every 11K years or so we enter an ice-age cycle, and then the glaciers recede, ad infinitum.
So, my objective is to live my life to the fullest and not worry about the crap that is going to happen with or without my input.
And that includes the gulf coming though my front door.
If it happens, it happens. Natural disasters will happen with or without us.
You know, if people choose to live in low-lying areas right on the beach, bad things can happen.
Which of the following do you check off:
Flat earther, chemtrail believer, 9/11 inside job, Trump supporter?
You forgot to call him an [insert slur] too instead of presenting a rational response.
“The foreseeable future being when the gulf comes through your front door.”
Exactly. I’ll keep using fuel until a boiling tidal wave kills me.
Happy to see you’re still on ttac.
I don’t recognize many of the screen names. Must be newbies.
You’re the reason we have to have nanny laws, Miss Raynd
@highdessertcat
Thank you for that explanation. My knowledge about the American car market is limited , but I know that diesel cars have never been popular there.
Regarding electric cars, I am not opposed to them. For city use I have long been considering a Renault Zoe, which is an electric car offered in Europe. If memory serves me right it is the most popular electric car in Europa. Aside from my diesel Mercedes GL320 CDI, I also own a beater 1995 Renault Twingo with 355,000 km that had six previous owners. It is good on fuel, but in a city environment I think an electric car makes sense for me. However, I am not quite willing to invest in one just yet.
If electric cars had a range of over 1000 km and could be fully ‘refueled’ (charged) within 5 minutes, just like most current diesel/gasoline cars, then I would even consider one for my long distance drives. As of now, all electric cars give me range anxiety.
@Thomas – Obviously “hybrids” making sense depend wholly on the individual driving scenario, but you said so yourself a diesel only makes sense when diesel fuel is much cheaper, offsetting all the diesels related “hardships”, although covering great distances helps.
The “deadweight” related to hybrids isn’t so much an issue, as wind resistance is a bigger enemy of fuel economy. Ask the aluminum F-150. No surprise fuel economy is maximized at static speeds, overdrive, no diesel necessary.
@ThomasShiffer
The extra weight in a hybrid makes about zero difference. For highway driving it takes extra energy to get the extra weight up to speed, but after that there is no effect until you slow down. If that slowing requires braking, extra energy is recaptured from the extra momentum. Simple physics.
Unless you are driving with your foot to the floor, you are not making use of the engine’s full power. Hybrids have smaller engines, running the Atkinson cycle. These provide efficiency gains when less than maximun power is adequate. The electrical system provides a boost when needed. Hybrids typically have cvt’s which keep engine rpm’s in the sweet spot. Which saves fuel.
So hybrids make perfect sense for high speed highway driving. Check out the hybrids Porsche makes.
^^^ All basically true for most driving, but
Regenerative braking, and putting that stored electricity back into a motor for acceleration, aren’t 100% efficient, so a lot of start/stop and driving in hills makes some waste from dragging the battery pack around. But it still comes out better because of the smaller and more optimized internal combustion engine.
Very few people realize the hit in efficiency that a gas engine gets from running at part throttle- which is practically all the time in a non-hybrid car, in any gear. The most efficient way to run a gas engine is at wide open throttle, with the air:fuel mixture and the ignition timing optimized for efficiency. Most engines aren’t run that way, since they are programmed to make best power at wide open throttle. Drive-by-wire cars can be optimized to run this way (optimized for efficiency until the driver pushes the pedal down far enough, then optimize for power), but they need a CVT or a multispeed transmission (the kind with a dozen gears) to really take advantage of the efficiency possible from wide open throttle- to keep the engine running in the sweet spot as you put it. Except most drivers don’t like the “throttle” response when they mash the go-faster pedal and the transmission has to downshift (or CVT change ratios) before the car accelerates. Car buyers hate that. Good luck selling cars that drive that way!
Anyhoo…
Also, any extra weight in a hybrid has less impact on a hybrid’s mileage than an equivalent non-hybrid. Accelerating and then braking extra weight with an ICE car is a complete energy loss. Accelerating extra weight with a hybrid takes extra energy also, but most of that extra energy is recaptured while braking that extra weight. This is a point that has been overlooked in the hybrid mythology.
@brandloyalty,
I should have been more clear. Yes, for cruising I don’t doubt that a modern gasoline-hybrid can provide efficient fuel consumption values. But a comparable diesel in the same vehicle will still provide better numbers.
However, my driving consists of a mixture of cruising AND speeding. The allure of the Autobahn to an enthusiast like myself is that when the speed limits are cancelled I get to drive fast. In such driving conditions a diesel provides me with better fuel economy than any gasoline engine.
For example with my last car, an Audi A4 2.0 TDI Avant, I could speed from Munich to Bremen on a tank of diesel without having to refuel. I can leave Munich on a full tank of diesel and would arrive in Bremen with the tank 1/4 full. This is impressive fuel economy because I would essentially be driving at sustained speeds of over 200 km/h when possible. With a gasoline powered Audi A4 you would have to refuel once, perhaps even twice. A heavier hybrid would possibly get worse fuel economy in such a situation.
Sorry, my English is not so good when attempting to describe these details. Apologies.
You really don’t have to hypothesize. The vehicles that get the best highway MPG in the USA are hybrids.
This is quite simply because you would not tolerate a gas car with an engine the size of the one in the Prius. It would be like driving a late 1980s Geo Metro. People simply won’t put up with a 15 seconds to 60 mph acceleration figure these days.
The battery is what allows you to get away with a very small gas engine, pure and simple. And so, yes, it DOES help with highway fuel economy.
Thomas,
I agree with your comment.
I do know of a person who bought a Prius, he also owned a Camry.
His Camry was used to travel between two cities daily with a round trip of approximately 300km.
His Camry was in the shop for quite some time so he had to use the Prius for his daily commute. His wife used public transport.
The Prius was using a third more fuel than the Camry. Around town the Prius was good for short hauls at low speeds.
As for diesel, here in Australia diesel dominate vehicles that weigh two tonnes plus. The reason is FE and torque to move the vehicle.
The vehicles that are also fitted with petrol alternatives use a third more fuel. So, it doesn’t take much to make diesel the choice in larger vehicles.
Diesel offers superior torque vs FE, even against these boosted gas engines. The real life percentage improvement of the diesel F-150 vs the V6 2.7 will surprise many. I would guess 1/3 by what we are seeing here with our vehicles.
Can you point me to any mileage comparison website that shows a Camry gets better highway mileage than a Prius?
brandloyalty,
Driving on a freeway 150km each direction is not the best way to use a Prius.
Too many people must realise the limitations of using different technologies.
I dont’t ever envisage EVs being good for long hauls, unless some kind of battery swapping business starts. Then imagine the cost of EVs, with an additional battery or two required for each vehicle produced?
The Prius is grossly under powered on gasoline alone, moving alot of weight.
You are changing your position. You said hybrids get poor highway mileage. Now you say highway driving is not the best use of hybrids. I’ll buy your latter point. But hybrids still get better highway mileage than equivalent non-hybrids. So maybe the payoff is longer or non-existent. But how many cars are used for highway use only? And any gas saved is a pollution reduction.
Hybrids may have small engines set up to optimize mileage over power. But they can still draw on the electric system when more power is needed.
On very rare occasions this boost is unavailable and my hybrid does indeed become a pig. For instance after ascending a long steep hill at highway speed, the boost from the hybrid battery can be depleted. If I need to floor it at the top of the hill, there is no boost available. The engine revs like crazy and not much happens in terms of gaining speed. This has happened to me about three times in 5 years. Not a big deal. My hybrid won’t win many stoplight drag races, but power is satisfactory otherwise.
And the hybrid management system takes the first opportunity to charge the battery to 50% so that boost is available again almost immediately.
Just curious, have you driven a hybrid?
Herr Schiffer,
Your English is far better than my German.
I don’t think I could compose a post as long as yours without numerous grammatical errors.
Like you, I believe diesel is best for long distance travel, but our governments are trying to dissuade all of us from that option. In my life a battery powered or hybrid would work, but these days I drive far less than I used to.
Hybrids have a math problem. Most of the gas savings come with city stop and go driving. In the highway they burn close to the same amount of gas. You also have to do enough driving to justify the higher price.
Nope. Myth alert! My hybrid gets its best mileage on 90kph secondary roads in Alberta. Highway efficiency benefits from smaller gas engines running on the Atkinson Cycle, output through the ideal gear ratio in a cvt. The price differential for hybrids is getting pretty minor. Buy a used one to avoid it entirely.
My Toyota RAV4 hybrid was only $700 more. I live in an urban area and manage to get 35 mpg. My MIL had the original Honda Insight for almost 16 years before donating it. The batteries were guaranteed for 80,000 miles and she was at about 150,000 miles with no problems. Why are the German manufacturers looking at hybrids? Performance or fuel economy? Maybe both.
Is that US or Canadian mileage? Observers should bear in mind that whichever it is, all Rav4 Hybrids are AWD.
35 mpg US mileage. The hybrid RAV4 iAWD is interesting as there is no drive shaft to the rear wheels, just an electric motor. My ICE 2006 AWD Outback never achieved more that 22 mpg under the same conditions.
That’s pretty good. It’s the same as 42mpg Imperial or about 6.8L/100km.
For comparison my Escape Hybrid with a mechanical awd setup gets 31mpg US, 37mpg Imperial, 7.3L/100km in winter with winter gas, snow tires and lower tire pressure. Last summer it maintained its best mileage ever, which was the same you reported for the Rav4. Hard to say how our driving habits compare though.
I would imagine you share my satisfaction at having a versatile car with awd and light off-road capability that also gets such great mileage. Have you had any experience with how well the electric rear awd works? And compared to the Subaru?
And some here maintain hybrids do not get superior highway mileage. That is not at all what I observe and doesn’t make logical sense to me anyway. What is your experience compared to the Subaru?
I live next to DC, so heavy traffic. Yes the mileage drops on the highway, but I still get 11 mpg more than my Subaru did. It was fine in the snow, but we hardly get any. Look at Car Questions You Tube video, the RAV4 hybrid struggled on the diagonal test in the snow. When we did get 6+ inches of snow, the Subaru was unstoppable.