Blending Drivability and Efficiency: Part 2

So I bought a Lexus CT 200h, a veritable Prius on steroids. It came closest to meeting the objectives I set for my next car: It was as enjoyable to drive as my BMW 335i and almost as frugal as my wife’s 2010 Prius. It provided a comfortable ride with low NVH (noise, vibration, and harshness) levels.

Fit and finish are top notch inside and out and everyone who has commented on the its design—from twenty-somethings it was designed to attract to baby boomers and an 87-year-old World War II bomber pilot—expressed enthusiastic approval. But, as a designer always on the lookout for designs that push the envelope in significant ways, I was disappointed to find the exterior and interior quite ordinary and uninteresting. The exterior lacked the refreshing flair of the Ford Focus at one extreme and the Teutonic elegance of the Audi A3 and VW Golf at the other.

Whereas designers of the CT hit the target with a timely design in keeping with today’s automotive fashions, I would have preferred a more lasting timeless design like that of the CT’s groundbreaking cousin, the iconic 2004 Prius. Its strange shape wasn’t merely novel, it was an instance of epochal innovation, which is to say it filled a practical need not yet fully met—aerodynamic efficiency—in a markedly better way than its competitors. It was epochal because it established a new standard, which will increasingly compel competitors to emulate in order to keep up. As a result, the Prius earned Toyota a reputation for leadership in consumers’ minds rather than followship.

Alternative conceptThe CT amounts to a Super Prius beneath its skin where engineers improved its performance and handling. The shape of the skin itself, which had the greatest potential for improving aerodynamic efficiency—the next Big Thing in automotive technology—doesn’t live up to the improvements underneath. With a CD (coefficient of aerodynamic drag) of 0.29 it falls far short of the Prius’ standard-setting 0.25. With the clean sheet of paper that came with a new model designation, the CT’s planners should have given designers the mandate to sculpt a shape worthy of a Super Prius. I believe Lexus would have attracted more new customers by going after early adopters with a young design than going after young designers with an old design. Just think of the possibilities: A svelte, luxurious Super Prius.

So the CT’s design didn’t push my buttons. What it lacked in visual aesthetics, however, it made up for in outstanding kinesthetics— from kin- (to move) and esthetic (feeling), which pertain to sensations of movement and effort originating from nerves in muscles, tendons, and joints that result from physical activities including driving. Good “in-the-zone” kinesthetics is as crucial to driving as it is to any other sport. The way a car feels is, after all, more important than the way it looks.

Indeed, the better it feels in hand the better it begins to look. As the philosopher George Santayana contended: Anything that provides pleasure, for whatever reason, is beautiful. A couple of fast laps around the Mazda Raceway at Laguna Seca, where the CT demonstrated outstanding drivability, was all I needed to appreciate where the CT’s beauty really lay.

I enjoy driving it as much as any car I’ve driven or owned, including my A3 and BMW. The seat and wheel are comfortable. Instruments and controls are well placed. It responds and behaves as if it were a natural extension of mind and body, seamlessly connecting my intentions to the roadway. I love it more every time I drive it. Like other cars I have loved, I look for excuses to drive it.

Think of the CT as a sporty hatchback, not a family sedan, because it’s a bit smaller than the Prius. It is lower and rides on a wheelbase four inches shorter. These changes contribute to its outstanding dynamics by giving it a lower center of gravity than the Prius and better weight distribution. But it squeezes rear legroom. Adults can sit back there but it’s better suited to preteens. It’s also five inches shorter in overall length, which contributes to its perky look, but also shrinks the trunk. Folding the 60-40-split rear seat helps, of course.

Improved handling and ride are due chiefly to more sophisticated double-wishbone rear suspension, which replaces the torsion beam arrangement of the Prius. A hydraulic damper/strut connecting the spring towers of its McPherson-strut front suspension stiffens the body for enhanced handling and absorbs shocks and vibrations enhance ride and muffle road noise. Computer-controlled electrically boosted steering feels neither too light nor too heavy. It is crisp and tracks beautifully in all situations.

With a combined EPA city/highway estimate of 42 mpg, the CT easily beat the other contenders on my list: 31 mpg for the Focus and 34 mpg for the A3 and Golf diesels (offset by the fact that diesel fuel now sells for more than premium gas).

Average miles per gallon after 3,383 milesIn fact, my CT is the first car I have owned that actually beats the EPA numbers. For most of the 5,000-plus miles I have owned it, it has averaged 45 mpg. After a high-speed roundtrip to Los Angeles on I-5 (ask any Californian what that entails), which included passing over the mountainous Grapevine twice, it had dropped to 44.5 by the time I pulled into my garage but had already recovered to 44.7 the next day. 

That efficiency does come at a cost in performance: Its 0-60 time is no better than the lingering 9.8 seconds of the Prius. The A3 and Golf diesels are less than a second faster, at 8.9 seconds and the Focus does only a mite better than that at 8.7 seconds. Automotive journalists and enthusiasts make a big deal out of those fractional seconds and wouldn’t qualify any of these cars as “performance” cars.

If I were a typical automotive journalist I would give the CT short shrift simply because it is a hybrid. I would much prefer the adrenalin rush associated with reviewing Ferraris, Lamborghinis, and other potent exotica that 99 percent of readers will never see, 99.9 percent will never ride in—much less drive—and 99.99 percent, including me, can only dream of owning.

What’s so important about shaving three or four seconds from the 0-60 time, anyway? It’s worth recalling that a 1955 Porsche Speedster consumed 15.3 seconds getting to 60. As recently as 1997 auto journalists gushed over the Golf GTI’s 0-60 time of 10.5 seconds. And yet, all those cars were considered brisk enough and fun to drive.

The CT can accelerate briskly enough to safely enter a freeway and has enough oomph to pass quickly enough over a reasonable distance at freeway speeds. Having reached 60 mph in 10 seconds, I can break the speed limit in another two seconds or so. Three more and I’ll be pacing the ticket-attracting BMWs. I had no problem keeping up with limit-breaking traffic heading for L.A. on I-5.

So what’s it all about, Alfie? It’s about sex and power. In one of the most interesting chapters of psychological history, Sigmund Freud shunned one of his star pupils, Alfred Adler, who took issue with Freud’s notion that sex was the most basic driver of human behavior. Adler, known today for his concept of the inferiority complex, contended that power, and its attendant control over things, was more important than sex. There’s plenty of evidence that both sex and power are very important, not only in human affairs but also in our affairs with cars; impotent cars aren’t sexy. It’s no coincidence that ads for Viagra and Cialis appear on the back pages of most car magazines.

The CT’s lackluster acceleration is understandable since it shares the Prius’ power sources: a 1.8-liter gas engine rated at 73-kilowatts (98 horsepower) and 60-kilowatt (80 hp) electric motor. Those numbers add up to a respectable 178 hp but the total power stated by Lexus is only the same134 hp as the Prius. “Why the discrepancy?” you might ask.

The answer is mostly conjecture on my part. To date, I haven’t been able to talk directly with technical experts at Lexus. I believe the discrepancy stems from the fact that the motor normally sees no more than 500 volts capable of producing 36 hp (98 hp + 36 hp = 134 hp). As I noted in the Green Meanie article, however, an electric motor can be coaxed into producing more than its normal power by simply feeding it more than its normal diet of amps and/or volts—but only briefly— only for as long as the overload doesn’t overheat either the motor or battery to the point of damaging either. The computers in the latest Prius and CT, which differ, occasionally send each motor as much as 650 volts (noted as the “maximum voltage” in official specifications). That’s enough extra juice to more than double the motor’s regular output from 36 hp to 80 hp, which could technically boost the combined power of engine and motor to 178 hp—more than the 140 hp of the diesel of the A3 and Golf or the 155 hp of the Focus.

With such a power advantage, why can’t the CT beat the A3, Golf, and Focus—or even the Prius? The answer lies in the computer that controls the mix and match of engine and motor speeds. The CT’s driver can dial in one of three different blends of power and efficiency by turning a knob that controls the computer’s energy management system to one of three settings: ECONOMY, NORMAL, or SPORT. A separate button puts the system into EV (electric only) mode for a mile or so of low-speed driving on battery power alone. The SPORT mode also changes the feel of the electrically boosted steering and inhibits the traction and stability controls enough to allow a skilled driver to push things closer to the car’s dynamic limits while enjoying a twisty road. The instrument cluster, which normally monitors efficiency, changes to a tachometer. Adding drama, instrument lighting goes from blue to red. (Thankfully, no vines or shrubs grow within the instrument display in ECO mode.)

According to information I received indirectly from a Lexus spokesperson, the difference between CT and Prius performance depends on when they get the full 650 volts. Both do when their pedals are pressed to the metal. But he noted that both produce only 155 hp, not 178. I’m guessing that the computer never lets the engine and motor max out at the same time. At any rate, their equal power outputs would explain why they turn in the same 0-60 time.

Presumably, the CT is programmed to feel like a Prius in ECONOMY or EV modes. They behave differently otherwise. Favoring fuel economy the Prius never sees 650 volts unless the driver presses the pedal all the way to the floor in POWER mode. But the CT driver can tap the full 650 volts at any time while in SPORT or NORMAL modes. Consequently, the CT feels more eager and robust than the Prius much of the time—but with a corresponding drop in efficiency. 

Blending Drivability and Efficiency: Part 1

I enjoy cars that press me into the seatback when I press the accelerator. But I also have such a passion for practicality and efficiency that most of my cars have been station wagons or hatchbacks. And, with the exception of my first car—a supercharged 1941 Graham Hollywood that could blow off Oldsmobile Rocket 88s at the Pomona drag strip—I have never owned a car that delivered fewer than 20 miles from a gallon of gas. Even my ’92 Twin Turbo Nissan 300ZX, with 300 horsepower, could do it. So could my two most recent cars, an Audi A3, with its eager 2.0-liter turbo and marvelous dual shaft transmission, and a twin-turbo BMW 335i Convertible with the entertaining folding metal roof. Some, like my 1951 Renault 4CV did a lot better.

I’ve also owned all three Prii (Toyota's official term for more than one Prius, pronounced pre-eye): 2001, 2004, and 2010 (actually, my wife, a Prius enthusiast of the first order, has claimed each as her own). They have been the fuel economy champs in our garage, of course. The classic 2004 model with a shape that lent it record-breaking aerodynamic efficiency (with a CD of just 0.26) was the most innovative and the most beautiful (yes, beautiful). The 2010 model does even better (with a CD of 0.25) and is the most mechanically and ergonomically refined Prius.

But Toyota never has seen fit to offer a truly nimble Prius on steroids—more like the hypothetical “Green Meanie” Prius I described in the February 2004 issue of Motor Trend.

Audi A5 CoupeWhen I recently found myself in the market for a new car I considered the gorgeous Audi A5 coupe as a worthy successor to my BMW. But I felt a need to satisfy my pragmatic spirit more fully by seeking something that delivered better than the 24 mpg overall I had been getting with the BMW. I was willing to accept less spirited acceleration. But I was not willing to sacrifice handling, which is far more important to me than acceleration for overall satisfaction and safety. Ideally, my new car would represent an ideal blend of attributes: it would be as enjoyable to drive as my BMW but as frugal as my wife’s Prius.

Audi A3VW Golf GTI (TDI design similar)Ford Focus HatchbackFond memories of my Audi A3 put the turbo-diesel-powered TDI version high on my list of prospects, as well as its less expensive cousin, the VW Golf TDI with the same engine and dual-clutch transmission. The new 2012 Ford Focus hatchback also went on the list in large part because I like its design so much. All three of these practical hatchbacks are fuel misers. The published 0-60 mph acceleration time of both the Audi and VW is 8.9 seconds; the Focus does it in a comparable 8.7 seconds. The Focus has an EPA estimate city/highway average of 31 mpg. The A3 and Golf TDIs were a bit better with an average of 34 mpg—which was offset by the cost of diesel fuel, which sells for more than premium gas. I enjoyed driving all three and would have gladly owned any of them. 

Lexus CT 200hBut I delayed my decision until I had a chance to see and drive another sporty hatchback, the newest, smallest, and least expensive Lexus, the CT 200h, which introduces the second-generation hybrid technology from Lexus. It is essentially a more vigorous, luxurious and as you might expect, more expensive Prius. Stay tuned.

2004 Prius: Potential Green Meanie

[A slightly abridged version of this article appeared in the February 2004 issue of Motor Trend Magazine] 

Photo enhancement: Misha Young

Practical, environmentally minded car buyers have a lot to like in Motor Trend's 2004 Car of the Year, the Toyota Prius: a roomy but compact five-door hatchback packed with high-tech goodies. Its sophisticated gas-electric hybrid powerplant qualifies it as a Super Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle. Aided by an aerodynamic shape with a standard-setting CD of 0.26, it delivers a combined EPA estimated city-highway fuel economy of 55 mpg. 

But what about its appeal to increasing number of car enthusiasts who expect their family-haulers to accelerate briskly, handle crisply, and deliver the substantial quotient of fun they’d find in a sport sedan?

Thanks to a weight below 3,000 pounds and more power than its predecessor had—from its gas engine, electric motor, and battery—it does get to 60 mph in about the same 10 seconds as a four-cylinder Camry. But I wonder: Could a tuner’s deft hands, fertile mind, and horsepower-driven desire turn this green machine into a meaner shade of green? Might the Prius spawn a new breed of tuners, the green meanies? I think it could.

Today, an enterprising owner could upgrade the Prius’s handling with some European-spec suspension parts and plus-one 16-inch wheels with grippier lower profile tires. I say “enterprising” because you can’t buy them through U.S. dealers. More aggressive suspension tweaks would drop it by an inch or so. 

The accompanying illustration shows more extreme modifications that would alter the car’s appearance more noticeably for the better. Slightly larger wheel openings would lower the car a bit more visually, while emphasizing even larger 18-inch wheels with correspondingly lower-profile tires. Removing the grille bar and enlarging the scoop below would increase airflow to the presumably warmer competition-tuned powerplant, while giving it a sportier look. Spoilers, wings, and other add-ons are unnecessary; the Euro-cool body-by-the-book aerodynamic shape already induces virtually no lift at either front or rear.

As discussed in our “Car of the Year” story last month, the stock propulsion system consists of a 76-horsepower, 1.5-liter engine and a 67-horsepower electric motor, coupled through a planetary gear set that constitutes an elegantly simple continuously variable transmission devoid of belts, pulleys, or clutches. The system takes advantage of the electric motor’s superior low-speed power for acceleration from a standstill (it develops maximum torque from zero to 1200 rpm) and the engine’s higher optimal speed for cruising (maximum torque comes at 4200rpm). Excess engine power spins a high-output generator that keeps the battery topped off. The motor draws on that stored energy when the engine needs help for passing or climbing, as a supercharger would.

Both halves of this impressive system offer tuning potential. Any supercharger made for Echo and Scion models, which shared the Prius block, might be adapted. A nitrous-oxide bottle could be installed for dragstrip bursts. 

But the most exciting possibilities lie on the electric side: The mix-and-match nature of Toyota’s hybrid system constitutes the very essence of tunability. The Prius controller and its computer chips were programmed to meet an operational profile that favors efficiency—with just enough Camry-like performance. Engineers could’ve tuned the system for even greater efficiency—or better performance—than the current mix.

Able to vary the mix from the dashboard, a Prius owner could have his cake and eat it, too: After a day of racing, he could turn a knob from “MEAN” to “GREEN”—or anywhere in between—for the drive home. The translucent knob, lit from within by red and green LEDs, would glow red at the MEAN setting, when only the red LED glowed. Turning the knob toward the other extreme, the red LED would progressively dim while the green LED came on and brightened. The knob would consequently glow red at the MEAN extreme and green at the other. It would glow yellow at the NORMAL midpoint of the knob's travel because equal parts of red and green light yield yellow.   

At the MEAN setting, the computer might push the motor past its rated power for brief periods—even doubling it—by feeding it more watts than normal. Motors and batteries are able to withstand brief periods of overload without damage due to overheating. Having the Prius’s zero-to-60 times to five seconds would require just a five-second burst of juice. 

Toyota isn’t the only one in the game: Honda has already shown high-performance concepts conceived around hybrid power. Toyota has put a considerable roadblock in the way of tuners, of course, by designing and burning its computer chips in-house, using nonstandard programming code. Still, I won’t be surprised if some laptop-wielding green meanie in Silicon Valley builds a black box that does the trick. Wouldn’t it be nice if Toyota Racing Development just saved us all he trouble by offering a tunable controller of its own?

Hybrid power shouldn’t be viewed as an engineering solution aimed only at saving gas and the ozone layer. As noted, electric motors make their maximum torque just above zero rpm, so it could be the future way to power-oversteer of car out of a corner or heat the skins prior to a quarter-mile assault. The potential exists to have cars that deliver scintillating performance, econocar fuel mileage, and squeaky-clean tailpipe emissions.

In other words, bring on the cake.