agesilaus wrote:
brulaz wrote:
agesilaus wrote:
"You assume a lot for someone to be so wrong. "
OK let's have some facts and data to show why I'm wrong. I haven't heard any factual claims from your side yet.
3.0Charlie replied to your 3 points above one by one.
He actually drives one of these trucks and has the facts. You don't.
True but he is comparing AWD, which I believe means all four wheels engaged at all times. Is that right? And a 4WD which is driven in 2WD almost all the time for most people. He would have to compare the hybrid mileage in 4WD against the AWD vehicles. And the highway mileage is only marginally better.
This article lists as a disadvantage for AWD: gets poorer fuel economy and for 4WD lists as an advantage: can be driven in 2WD to get better fuel economy. It also explains the mechanical difference.
4WD vs AWD
I'm perfectly willing to concede that stop and go driving should get better mileage on a hybrid because of the regenerative braking.
Err... I showed the 5.3 4WD vs, the 6.2 AWD vs. the Hybrid 4WD - because of the 6.2 AWD? Ok then, here are the numbers of 2WD vs. Hybrid 2WD... Jeez.
Fuel consumption 5.3 2WD
City: 14.5 L/100 km (19 mpg Imp)
Hwy: 10.1 L/100 km (28 mpg Imp)
Fuel consumption Hybrid 2WD
City: 9.8 L/100 km (29 mpg Imp)
Hwy: 9.2 L/100 km (31 mpg Imp)
Since I tow 8-10 times a year, and I mostly use the truck in a 'City' environment in 2WD (only 4-5 snow storms a year to warrant 4WD use), then the Hybrid in 2WD is still clearly the winner - even with a increased 0.7L displacement over the 5.3L.
Anything else?
John