I tend to disagree with you, which is unusual. I think hybrid regular engine (non-hybrid) is catching on to hybrid efficiency, and I believe that 2010 equinox is one of the example. Although, hybrid is still superior in technology, but regular engines technology is catching on indeed.

Now, Imagine if GM somehow smart enough to create equinox hybrid using current I4 engine as base. I think it would slaughter Toyota's current hybrid technology in mid-size SUV.

I am not butting heads against you, just my $0.02.

 

The only reason you get a V6 in an SUV is to be "fast"? Is that why that engine choice is offered? I have a friend who is seriously considering getting a new crossover or SUV, and one of her questions about the Equinox was indeed concerning engines, and whether or not she should get the V6 instead. You know? "Fast" or "not as slow" was never brought up nor insinuated.

Ok - I shall rephrase; Is "Not as slow" a reasonable metric to be looking at when comparing these two vehicles? Doesn't seem like that would be much of a consideration for ANYBODY in the market for a Highlander or an Equinox.

wow. that made a big difference.

 

Well, not that these two vehicles should be compared, but going on...

Some people don't want to have a 0-60 close to 10 seconds. Look at the Camry, Accord, Malibu etc... people by the V6... for what exactly? They don't want the car to be as slow. Same thing here.

I am not sure I would use it to compare the two vehicle though. If you are after fuel economy and costs, you would go with the 4cyl. If you want something faster, you go with the V6, on either vehicle I might add. If you want something faster and fuel efficient... and you have a lot of extra cash, you get the V6 hybrid.

 

You're completely incorrect. While it's certainly not the majority, there are definitely a group of people who will find the torqueless ~180hp 4-cyl in the nearly 4000 pound Equinox and the Highlander to be lethargic, and require the V6 to get the 'pep' (aka power, aka quickness, aka 'not as slow') that they're seeking. Evidence of that will be in the fact that both vehicles OFFER a V6 and will SELL their V6s to a double digit percentage of their buying group. What else are you going to tell me the majority of their motives are for getting the V6? Towing capacity? In that case I guess that's why Lexus includes the V6 standard in the RX350 and Cadillac includes the 400hp V8 in their Escalade standard, not because luxury SUV buyers will appreciate the added throttle response... but because they want to tow more.

 

I think we just found why the Nox does better.

 

You have other considerations such as towing a toy (which would probably require the 6). I'd agree that "many" SUV buyers aren't worried about how quickly the thing accelerates, but there are also people who would just prefer the V6 based on available power.

 

Well that's nice to know from someone that obviously knows. For a while there, I was worried that I was only partially incorrect. What a relief.

Sounds quite reasonable (though that should be tempored by the 'fact' that am typically completely incorrect).

 

If in the future you decide you'd like to stop being completely incorrect, you could begin by not making absolute statements like 'nobody buying this car is concerned about the lack of acceleration offered by the 4'.


Funny... he said nothing all that different from what I've been saying this entire time but it just now all makes sense to you. I think this only confirms my unspoken original suspicion that you only wanted to be stubborn with me because I was making a point you wanted to disagree with (about the V6+ hybrid highlander being an uneven comparison with the I4 non hybrid equinox) even though you didn't have much of a counterpoint to make, so you just played dumb.

 

Hmmm....I'm pretty sure I didn't say that. Could you please quote my quote?

Until then, I'm likely to continue my incorrectness. Sorry. You can continue to set me straight, if you like.

Oh....about those absolutes....."completely incorrect" ring a bell? Bueller?

Hmmm....pretty sure he didn't mention "fast" in his post - nor really imply it. You, however, said exactly that, which is what I was questioning.

So lets see...you used "fast" as a metric. He didn't.

You're right - nothing at all different.

I didn't "want" to disagree with anything you said - you might not "want" to give yourself so much credit, or take yourself that seriously. Rather, I simply did (and still do) disagree with your comment about "fast". And said as much.

And why would you keep a suspicion unspoken? I have no issues with speaking my mind. If you think there's something else I'm getting at, speak up! You'd still be wrong, but at least you'd feel better about it.

Dumb? Its not always playing. But regardless, I made what I thought was a rather minor point. Looks like you don't agree (ie..."completely incorrect"). Ok - I'm fine with that. I completely disagree with your complete disagreement.

Neener neener neener.

(dumb....er) Bob

 

i liked that statement

 

Which part exactly?

(A) That they compared the price of a 4 cylinder Equinox to a 6 cylinder/hybrid Highlander?

or

(B) That the person doing the review says the Highlander felt "fast" and "lifeless" in the same article?

Besides, the whole point of the article is to compare an efficient "conventional" powertrain to a "hybrid" powertrain, not to compare Equinox and Highlander. A "real" comparison between the models would've been 4 cylinder vs. 4 cylinder or 6 cylinder vs. 6 cylinder.

 

He actually said he liked those two quotes, which doesn't have to do anything with the comparison of powertrains. The first was the Toyota felt lifeless a vague on center. The second was that the Equinox beats the Highlander on price by thousands. Without looking at standard equipment, because basically I don't want to take that time, the Equinox starts today at 22,440 compared to 25,705. A difference of $3,265... or thousands.

I would have preferred a 4cyl to 4cyl, V6 to V6 comparison as well, but you can't get the 4cyl option in the Highlander on anything but the bottom trim. There is no equinox hybrid, so it would hard to compare the Toyota hybrid against the the equinox, although the Toyota Hybrid starts at $34,700. That is a steep upgrade.

 

OK.. apparently you feel compelled to keep playing your game of semantics while pretending you couldn't comprehend the words I used like 'fast', 'not as slow', 'peppy' and 'performance' in the context of powertrain comparisons... yet somehow when another poster used the words "available power" it all made sense to you and you completely agreed with the concept of buyers wanting more "available power" despite the fact that I was saying the exact same thing in different words.

So I'll just drop it because you're either too stubborn or too dense to get it and make a mental note to not try to reason with you in the future.

 

ROFLOL. When I grow up, I want to be just....like....you!

Ok, given that I am hopelessly outclassed from an intellectual (did I spell that right, Jake?) standpoint, I shall digress as well, and wish you, oh wisest one, a great evening.

Bob

PS....a wise man (not you) once said "those that believe they cannot be wrong are doomed to be wrong far more than those who know better". Think about it.

Or not.

 

Were you looking in the mirror when you said that? You should have been.