Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Don't Expect A Turbo or Hybrid C-HR For U.S.

      But there is the possibility of a faster C-HR

    To say we were slightly disappointed to find out that the U.S.-Spec Toyota C-HR would only come with a 2.0L four-cylinder producing 144 horsepower would be an understatement. The European-spec C-HR has the choice of either a turbocharged 1.2L four or a hybrid, but neither of these powertrains will be showing up in the U.S.

    Car and Driver spoke with the C-HR's chief engineer, Hiroyuki Koba to find out why. Koba didn't say why the turbocharged 1.2L would not come to the U.S., but we're guessing Toyota didn't want to put the effort in getting this engine certified for the U.S. Also, performance numbers between the 2.0L and turbo 1.2L are similar (11 seconds for the 2.0 to hit 60 mph, 11.1 seconds for the 1.2).

    As for the hybrid, Koba said the decision comes down to the market, not engineering. At the moment, Toyota doesn't see the demand for this model in the U.S.

    Koba did admit there is a possibility for a more powerful version of the C-HR, but quickly added there aren't plans for this at the moment.

    Source: Car and Driver

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Dud on arrival.

    No AWD, No Turbo, No Hybrid.

    Quote

    At the moment, Toyota doesn't see the demand for this model in the U.S.

    I don't see the demand for the entire model... not just the hybrid version.

    It's a slightly lifted Matrix without the utility, space, AWD.... or heck... even the speed.... and the Matrix was no barn burner. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    17 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Dud on arrival.

    No AWD, No Turbo, No Hybrid.

    I don't see the demand for the entire model... not just the hybrid version.

    It's a slightly lifted Matrix without the utility, space, AWD.... or heck... even the speed.... and the Matrix was no barn burner. 

    Toyota is too conservative in their corporate culture.  The Supra, which was supposed to be a uniquely styled super car, is looking like it will look like a late 1990's prelude. The Flagship LS 400 is bland for a car at that price point....almost to the point of absurdity.

    The Camry is riding on a 2002 platform IIRC.

    Limited options with the 86, the one interesting vehicle they build....and limited additional development.

    Corolla is decent but outclassed by the Mazda 3 and several other cars in its segment...and no additional development money from Toyota. 

    Prius sells well in other markets but the current car has serious limitations in this market.

    Tundra is outclassed by domestics with eleventy billion more packages and options...

    Tacoma is nice for what it is but really pricey...

    They are not convincing me that they want to move forward with this latest offering.

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Toyota is too conservative in their corporate culture.  The Supra, which was supposed to be a uniquely styled super car, is looking like it will look like a late 1990's prelude. The Flagship LS 400 is bland for a car at that price point....almost to the point of absurdity.

    The Camry is riding on a 2002 platform IIRC.

    Limited options with the 86, the one interesting vehicle they build....and limited additional development.

    Corolla is decent but outclassed by the Mazda 3 and several other cars in its segment...and no additional development money from Toyota. 

    Prius sells well in other markets but the current car has serious limitations in this market.

    Tundra is outclassed by domestics with eleventy billion more packages and options...

    Tacoma is nice for what it is but really pricey...

    They are not convincing me that they want to move forward with this latest offering.

     

    Remember, this was a car that was supposed to be for Scion.  It makes me wonder if Toyota North America even wanted it, but it was already developed so they had to take it and now they don't know what to do with it. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just now, Drew Dowdell said:

    Remember, this was a car that was supposed to be for Scion.  It makes me wonder if Toyota North America even wanted it, but it was already developed so they had to take it and now they don't know what to do with it. 

    Existentially Toyota is not sure of itself or where it is going...it is not just this car....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    It would be nice if VW brought out a product in this amrket segment, ti would be a much ncier car than this...

     

    Word from those in the know is that something like this is being considered. With the Tiguan growing in size, there is certainly room for such an offering.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    GOOD, no crappy hybrid.  Very telling that the hybrid won't appear in a car that is supposed to sell to "hip young millenials"' don't you think?  ESPECIALLY from Toyota?  And DOUBLE ESPECIALLY since it already exists elsewhere?  ;)

    Still needs the option of AWD, and a stick though.

    Edited by ocnblu
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)

    Posted (edited)

    I expect minimal demographic interest, but visually it is a sharp product.  Comes down to price.  Few people put 'turbo' on their small CUV purchase wish list.  Scratch that, nobody puts it on their list.  People want cute and dynamic and value and efficient and roomy.  And duh, most cars sold today by far, do not include a hybrid option.  I do expect some lost sales from no AWD however.

     

    I like it.  

    Edited by Wings4Life
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, Wings4Life said:

    I expect minimal demographic interest, but visually it is a sharp product.  Comes down to price.  Few people put 'turbo' on their small CUV purchase wish list.  Scratch that, nobody puts it on their list.  People want cute and dynamic and value and efficient and roomy.  And duh, most cars sold today by far, do not include a hybrid option.  I do expect some lost sales from no AWD however.

     

    I like it.  

    Having sat in it already, I'm going to disagree with you here.  The interior is cramped and most politely described as austere. The cargo area is very small.  A naturally aspirated 2.0 with 144 hp is going to feel sluggish compared to a Turbo-DI of the same net output... and I say that because the old Matrix with 158 hp felt sluggish and overworked in normal traffic. 

    I see the target demographic as young single Asian women in non-snowbelt cities who have few friends because they just moved to town.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Having sat in it already, I'm going to disagree with you here.  The interior is cramped and most politely described as austere. The cargo area is very small.  A naturally aspirated 2.0 with 144 hp is going to feel sluggish compared to a Turbo-DI of the same net output... and I say that because the old Matrix with 158 hp felt sluggish and overworked in normal traffic. 

    I see the target demographic as young single Asian women in non-snowbelt cities who have few friends because they just moved to town.

    I don't think anyone's expectations for a $20K base MSRP CUV should be too high.  Everything seems proportional to price.  Styling is spot on for the demographic. Quality should be excellent. I see little to dislike.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just now, Wings4Life said:

    I don't think anyone's expectations for a $20K base MSRP CUV should be too high.  Everything seems proportional to price.  Styling is spot on for the demographic. Quality should be excellent. I see little to dislike.

    The Ford EcoSport is better, the Chevrolet Trax is better, the Nissan Juke is better, the Jeep Renegade is better, the Honda HR-V is better, the Mazda CX3 is better.  They all start at $20k.  They all have AWD available. Most have the same or better horsepower.... or a turbo-4 that has sufficient low end grunt. All except the Juke have more room. All have nicer looking interiors.

    The Subaru Crosstrek is only $1,500 more.

    It's not like the C-HR is a particularly attractive or "cute" vehicle like a MiniCooper.

    Just about the only thing that will sell this vehicle to people is the Toyota badge.  This is something you get your teenage daughter if you live in Plano Texas and are negotiating a deal on a Tundra for yourself.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)

    Posted

    Only disadvantage I see is no AWD.  Probably not a huge deal at this price point, as customers will view it more as a tallish hatch than they will a weekend warrior.

    And styling looks great, inside and out.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 2016-12-03 at 0:25 PM, Drew Dowdell said:

    Having sat in it already, I'm going to disagree with you here.  The interior is cramped and most politely described as austere. The cargo area is very small.

    Having also sat in one, my perception was quite different : room enough to adjust driving position and ample rear leg room to "sit behind me". Rather claustrophobic than cramped. With all those different colors, materials, textures, creases, accent lines and driver-oriented "in your face semi-floating screen" the interior could be anything but austere. I agree the boot is on the small side for the size of that thing, but not CX-3 small (let's not forget that the CH-R is bigger than HR-V, CX-3 or Renegade in the first place).

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Interesting times for sure with Idiot47 getting his way, EV credits end September 30th along with Emission credits and with that, the Auto Industry will no longer have to buy clean emission credits to offset ICE emissions.  End result, Tesla will not have the $10 billion plus sales of emission credits to keep Tesla in the black. I suspect that Q3 will also be continued shrinkage of Tesla market share and loss of sales. This is going to push Tesla into the red as a money losing company. Interesting times for sure for Tesla. The robotaxi service just had their first accident, sales are tanking, and no robots are going to be sold for personal use. A Tesla robotaxi inexplicably drove into a parked car
    • My son and his wife love their 2024 Telluride, bought 4 weeks before my EV9 purchase and already with almost the same amount of miles with the higher gas prices here, they are already thinking of replacing Karina's Honda Fit with an EV for Alex to use to commute into the city for his Amazon job. He does drive the Honda Fit, but coming up on 250,000 miles and lots starting to require repairs. So Alex is looking at their EV options.
    • A good example of how much cheaper charging at home is versus gasoline: I've since driven my Navigator 4801 miles, averaging 16.6mpg and have spent a total of $927.59 (averaging $3.20gal).  ~1/4 of the miles and 124% of the cost.  I know these aren't the same "class" or size of vehicle, but that's a very significant amount of savings. By the time I drive 19,204 miles (for simple math's sake I just multiplied 4801 by 4), I will spend roughly $3710 to your $757. That's 4.9 times more expensive for me than you.  This also goes to show how quickly one can recoup money when buying an EV and the installation cost alone is paid for in one year.  Just for fun I want to compare your EV9 to a Telluride AWD at 20mpg (the rated combined MPG). At 20mpg and $3.20/gal and 19,000 miles of driving, that's $3040. That's still a very significant amount of money in one year.  Granted, for somebody like myself who isn't driving nearly 20k miles a year, the savings wouldn't pile on nearly as quick but, we all still get the point across. Also, my electricity rates are a little higher at 11-13c/Kw.   
    • Very cool that Hyundai is nailing it for playing in the dirt. A decent competitor to the Mache Ralley edition. Hyundai IONIQ 5 XRT Named Best U.S.-Built Sports Vehicle of the Year by American Cars And Racing - Hyundai Newsroom
    • I think it has more to do with the vendor and their software improvements. Tesla used to have huge variance between what they estimated miles of a battery pack was and what you actually got and as they improved the software and had more real-world driving data, they tweaked the software to be far more accurate. Kia has had their quarterly updates since we got the EV9 and it was pretty consistent on the old numbers. Just had a major quarterly update and this time it clearly stated that the software that manages the battery pack and predicts the range on a charge was getting more accurate due to miles driven by owners. As such, I think one of two things has happened, either A) they improved the estimation of range based on driving style or B) like Tesla and others, they are allowing less reserve battery pack and more actual driving from the battery pack based on efficiency of the whole EV in regard to how one uses the heat pump, electrics, etc. I think like anything, the first few years will not see any degradation and afterwards there will be some based on charging style DC versus slower home AC charging, driving style and feature/functions that are used.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search