Audio System and Rear Seat Belts

[Phill111]

Currently I drive a Prius+ as a company car. As the lease is shortly up I am looking at a Rav4 Hybrid in Excel trim. Just a couple of things I wanted to ask. First is the audio. On the Prius+ I have a JBL system, but on the RAV4 there is no such equivalent in the UK. Is the 6 speaker system installed any good sound wise?

Next are the rear seat belts. They seem a little odd in they seem to cross over each other for the middle and nearside passengers. Does this work out OK or does it just cause confusion and discomfort? 

[xzirri]

Can't really speak as for the rear seat belts but you're not missing out when it comes to the JBL package from what I've heard. My ol' man has the standard audio package and the sound is somewhat unbalanced from front to rear. He has set the settings a few steps towards the rear and decrease the treble to rectify this. This issue is even more prevalent with the JBL package from what I've read in a few other forums.

With all that said, it still packs a decent punch and the average Joe wouldn't be feeling like adding a subwoofer or upgrading the Speakers. I'd say on an overall level, the Speakers are pretty good as far as factory Speakers go.

[Phill111]

Certainly sounds promising. Being a company car driver I often have hire cars and some of the audio systems in other brands were shockingly poor. The Kadjar was a prime example. I drove models both with and without their BOSE pack and without is sounded dreadful. I also test drove a CX5 which sounded great but at the expense of a spare wheel, as that is replaced with a sub. To me that was a price I was not willing to pay, no amount of tyre goo will seal a kerbed tyre which has been the most common damage for me. Rear legroom on the CX5 was poor compared to the RAV4 which is one of the reasons I prefer the Toyota. I also find the Toyota infotainment far superior overall, with no silly fee for traffic, ability to tether data via bluetooth, voice control that doesn't make you want to scream and speed of operation. On the CX5 for instance it took 50seconds before music started to play via USB, just madness by today's standards. The main reason though is not wanting to drive a diesel and add to the ever growing particulate issues.

I think I will need to visit a dealer and investigate the rear seat belt thing as I often carry a full car load. Going from 7 seats to 5 I can cope with as long as the rear passengers are comfortable over distances.

[xzirri]

Are you considering the hybrid? We have been getting about 40-50 mpg with it, depending on how much city driving we do. I don't know about the non-hybrids but there's plenty of legroom in the rear and the floor is nearly flat for the middle seat as well. We've done a few long trips in it, fully loaded with 5 people and no complaints. The back tilting for the rear seats is also a plus. Dad's pretty pleased with it, and so am I.

[alan333]

12 hours ago, Phill111 said:

I also test drove a CX5 which sounded great but at the expense of a spare wheel, as that is replaced with a sub.

I also find the Toyota infotainment far superior overall, with no silly fee for traffic, ability to tether data via Bluetooth, voice control that doesn't make you want to scream and speed of operation. On the CX5 for instance it took 50seconds before music started to play via USB

On my 2014 CX-5 the factory Bose amp isn't fitted in the boot so a spare can be fitted. Not sure about the 2015-2017 model or the new one tho.  I'm sure I read about spares being fitted around the amp, but that was maybe the Mazda 6, can't remember.

Mine had a long wait before playing USB but was cured by a new bluetooth controller being fitted under warranty (apparently it also controls the USB).  Our 2015 Mazda 3 has no serious delay.  The voice control on mine is pretty rubbish, but it works fine on the 3 (mine has the old stereo with the buttons on the front, the 3 has the newer infotainment screen).  The commander control knocks the socks off my 2012 Avensis touch screen tho.

[Phill111]

The new CX5 the whole spare wheel area is filled with the sub so no possibility of fitting one. I know it is not often that a tyre gets punctured, but to not have a spare is a real pain especially late in the evening when it last happened to me.

I did own a 2015 CX5 for a few months but it went back after the third replacement of the bluetooth module which melted the USB stick, the socket and some of the cabling. The nav module got replaced twice too as that kept locking up needing the garage to reset it each time. I was hoping the new model was better as it has the new infotainment system but compared to the Toyota I found it frustrating in small ways. Like you say though, the commander is superb.

After having a hybrid for the last couple of years, and for a couple of years before the CX5 I also find the stop start a bit industrial on the diesel.

The main reason for going to the RAV4 is the fact it is available in a hybrid. Our company really have got the anti diesel bug so any diesel eats into my allowance a lot more each month. As such, the RAV4 is substantially cheaper for me, in fact I get money back which helps with the tax element. I fully understand why they take this stance too, we have been lied to for a very long time about the supposed cleanliness of diesel.

[Heidfirst]

2 hours ago, Phill111 said:

we have been lied to for a very long time about the supposed cleanliness of diesel.

Euro 6 diesels are vey good but obviously the emissions equpt & maintenance/cost (adblue etc.) may become an issue in itself if the vehicle is not used in the right type of driving to allow it to work. Direct injection petrols are likely to gain similar emissions equpt. in the near future.

Electrics/hybrids are not particulate free either as apparently e.g. rubber from wearing tyres are a significant source. & of course the environmental damage done by mining/refining etc. rare earth minerals for batteries/electrics is considerable - we need a Battery technology revolution.

Bottom line is that there is no whole-life clean automotive technology.

[Phill111]

I am fully aware that hybrid is not perfect and nor is EV. The tyre wear and brake wear stuff is made up, there should in all cases be less with EV and indeed hybrid as braking is regenerative rather than friction based to a far greater extent. In fact, the report that came out regarding that was by a student at Edinburgh university who was paid to write the report by the motor industry.  It was debunked by the university but repeated many times by the trash press as truth. 

Batteries and hybrid are far from perfect, they are however miles better than diesel. The public were lied to for the last 15-20 years. We always knew the waste product that was diesel was poor until the lies began in the mostly European motor industry and governments. The shear number of health problems as a result is proof enough. What can be seen is that eastern motor companies such as Toyota obviously realised this a long time ago and put development into hybrid and EV.

[Heidfirst]

2 hours ago, Phill111 said:

The tyre wear and brake wear stuff is made up, there should in all cases be less with EV

abraded tyre particles are not made up a - e.g. a study by Moscow University found that they were over 60% of the particulates there.

& why should it be less (note that I did not say that it is more, although there is an argument that if electric/hybrid vehicles are heavier than equivalent pure ICE that tyre wear may be higher) with hybrid/EV than with diesel/petrol?

There are still usage patterns where diesels are better suited than EV/hybrid & vice versa.

[Phill111]

I was more on about overall particulates. Brake dust for instance is considerably less on full EV compared to a standard ICE car as a high percentage of braking is done through regenerative braking.

I would love to know a case where Diesel cars are better than a hybrid for NOX for instance, or particulates from the exhaust. Size for size, CO2 isuaually lower for a hybrid but not by much although there are some shining examples.

So compare the two models mentioned in this thread. The CX5 2.2 Auto Sport Nav at 175hp produces 152 g/km of CO2. Over 10000 miles 7.87KG of NOX. The RAV4 2.5 Hybrid Excel at 194Hp produces 118 g/km of CO2. Over 10000 miles 3.37KG of NOX, so less than half.  That is not the full story though, calculating the NOX is part of the vehicles production and part of the production of the fuel used. That element can be controlled and dealt with in the plants. From the exhaust Hybrid trounces Diesel. The CX5 over 10000 miles slates out 4.6kg of NOX, the RAV4 just 0.11KG. This is the element that cannot be easily controlled and the one filling our crowded towns causing health issues.

It may seem a little anal me researching all this, and it probably is. However I feel we should all if possible do what we can to reduce our impact on the planet.

[Heidfirst]

13 hours ago, Phill111 said:

I would love to know a case where Diesel cars are better than a hybrid for NOX for instance, or particulates from the exhaust. Size for size, CO2 isuaually lower for a hybrid but not by much although there are some shining examples.

So compare the two models mentioned in this thread. The CX5 2.2 Auto Sport Nav at 175hp produces 152 g/km of CO2. Over 10000 miles 7.87KG of NOX. The RAV4 2.5 Hybrid Excel at 194Hp produces 118 g/km of CO2. Over 10000 miles 3.37KG of NOX, so less than half.  That is not the full story though, calculating the NOX is part of the vehicles production and part of the production of the fuel used. That element can be controlled and dealt with in the plants. From the exhaust Hybrid trounces Diesel. The CX5 over 10000 miles slates out 4.6kg of NOX, the RAV4 just 0.11KG. This is the element that cannot be easily controlled and the one filling our crowded towns causing health issues..

Long distance, high speed work e.g. autobahn/motorways where the Hybrid has to invoke the ICE. The RAV4 hybrid's 2.5 is a fairly old engine with thermal efficiency in the low 30s (i.e.~33%) compared to the latest generation Prius 1.8 which is ~40% & a latest gen diesel of ~44/45% - they really need to update that engine*. Yes, the diesel is going to produce more NOX in the current NEDC test (it's going to be interesting to see how things change with the new test although the authorities admit that the new test still won't truly reflect real world driving for most but the error will be less than with NEDC ) but out in the open like a motorway I don't think that is really going to be a problem compared to a confined urban environment. 

As for exhaust particulates (PM10) again if we take the CX-5 2.2 (or a BMW, Merc. etc.). they are 0 (http://www.nextgreencar.com/emissions/make-model/mazda/mazda+cx-5/).

As you probably know Mazda believe that their ICE vehicles can compete with electric/hybrid on a "whole life" basis "Mazda said they'll produce lower carbon dioxide emissions than electric powertrains from a 'well-to-wheel' perspective - which accounts for the whole life cycle of a vehicle and the fuel needed to power it."

Btw, most people that know me would consider me to be very "green".

*in which case I would strongly have considered a RAV-4 hybrid to replace my Avensis TS even though it would have been significantly dearer - it's a big shame that they never made a hybrid Avensis.

[Phill111]

A couple of problems there.  The first is you are comparing the 150ps version of the Mazda which is a bit off compared to the 194 of the RAV4. PM10 you will find is also a big con. Most modern diesels test as 0 PM10, this is because they burn them off in a specific way which I am sure you are aware of. As such, during testing none will show but in the real world that will not be the case.

Don't get me wrong, I am a big fan of what Mazda are doing to reduce pollutants, they were the first company to meet E6 and are well ahead of the curve. Diesel is however a waste product, only partly refined and containing a lot of crap we really do not want in the environment.. We will never get past that fact. Even Mazda admit that despite all the advances, EV or Hydrogen EV is going to be the next step. They do have to be applauded for what they are doing. For Mazda to state their supposedly lower CO2 emissions on a wheel to wheel basis they have to make a lot of assumptions based on how fuel is produced. It is very easy to look at electricity production in the USA which still has a heavy coal based element.

I still do not think that even on motorways Diesel is cleaner than Hybrid as a result. That particulate burn will still happen. My Prius+ is also running on EV a lot of the time on my average motorway journey home, such as when descending or in traffic. As I live in Hertfordshire and travel into London most days the hybrid seems a more sensible option.

P.S. I am not criticising your level of greenness here. We all try and do what we can in most cases.

[Heidfirst]

5 hours ago, Phill111 said:

A couple of problems there.  The first is you are comparing the 150ps version of the Mazda which is a bit off compared to the 194 of the RAV4. PM10 you will find is also a big con. Most modern diesels test as 0 PM10, this is because they burn them off in a specific way which I am sure you are aware of. As such, during testing none will show but in the real world that will not be the case.

I can only go on what figures are easily available but that link also includes the 165bhp version of the Mazda 2.2 (they don't fit higher output in the CX-5). The RAV is only 194 because of the additional electric drive, the 2.5l engine is rated at 150.

 Diesel is however a waste product, only partly refined and containing a lot of crap we really do not want in the environment.. We will never get past that fact.

I don't agree that diesel is a waste product, it (& heating oil, but mostly diesel) is ~20+% of a barrel of oil & the second largest fraction. You can also refine out a lot of stuff if you want -  e.g. there is a vast difference in emissions from running on European automotive diesel & that allowed for marine use.

For Mazda to state their supposedly lower CO2 emissions on a wheel to wheel basis they have to make a lot of assumptions based on how fuel is produced. It is very easy to look at electricity production in the USA which still has a heavy coal based element.

Everybody is making a lot of assumptions. I don't believe that Mazda were talking about it specifically re. US electricity generation though.

I still do not think that even on motorways Diesel is cleaner than Hybrid as a result. That particulate burn will still happen. My Prius+ is also running on EV a lot of the time on my average motorway journey home, such as when descending or in traffic. As I live in Hertfordshire and travel into London most days the hybrid seems a more sensible option.

It may well be the more sensible option for you but it equally may not be the sensible option for others.

 

[Phill111]

Mazda do a 175ps version of the CX5, which is the only one that is 4WD, and the only one that they will allow dynamic cruise control on for some odd reason. Yes, the RAV4 utilised an electric motor for the extra hp but isn't that part of the point? 

I would argue your points on Diesel but it is clear we will never agree. One thing is certain, most manufacturers are dropping diesel cars since the scandals over emissions rigging. We are also seeing government intervention world wide limiting their usage. It will I am sure only be a matter of time before cities begin banning or heavily charging for diesel usage. We are in 10 years going to see a huge change in what we drive towards EV and away from fossil fuel. ICE has been around for a long time, which is now coming to an end. I also think we are going to see a big reduction in owning a car in the first place. Interesting times ahead.

[Heidfirst]

So they do (I thought it odd that they didn't seem to) but only in the top spec which you have to select via a dropdown that I missed.

As always it's not that simple - the RAV hybrid can't use the electric motors at high speed so under those conditions you end up with a 150bhp ~33% thermally efficient engine versus a 150/165/175bhp 40%+ one in the Mazda - it's 1 reason why the Mazda has a higher top speed than the hybrid RAV4 (even the 150bhp version has a top speed 12mph higher than the supposedly notably more powerful hybrid RAV).

Interestingly the least powerful (143bhp) RAV, the 2.0l diesel, has a higher top speed than either the 151bhp petrol or the hybrid. 

Most manufacturers are not dropping diesel cars entirely, they are dropping small diesel cars because the additional cost of the engines & emission controls as a % of the total cost will be so high (indeed apparently VW are thinking of dropping the UP entirely in Europe irrespective of power source). Diesel engines of ~1.5l plus are still being developed for use in larger vehicles, many of which will spend time in the long distance/high speed regime which I contend suits diesel better than current hybrid. 

Yes, the market is changing. Another interesting article https://www.autocar.co.uk/opinion/motor-shows-frankfurt-motor-show/if-diesel-dying-hybrid-might-be-need-health-check-soon

[Phill111]

Thermal efficiency is not everything, nor is top speed. However, even at 70mph, the hybrid system still emits less NOx than the diesel, by a big margin. For most of us, the emissions at the exhaust are what counts and petrol has a big advantage over diesel. The whole hybrid thing really is a stop gap until either full EV or Hydrogen EV or even something new comes along. Diesel is dead, and no amount of defending it will change that. We know that a number of EU countries including here in the UK are going to ban their usage in new cars. We know that a number of cities are planning fees for their usage in certain zones. The writing is on the wall.  Here in the UK we will I am sure see some announcements in the next budget regarding diesel. Here is some information - http://www.buyacar.co.uk/cars/diesel-cars/460/diesel-tax-proposed-charges-and-surcharges-for-uk-drivers

[Phill111]

8 hours ago, Heidfirst said:

So they do (I thought it odd that they didn't seem to) but only in the top spec which you have to select via a dropdown that I missed.

As always it's not that simple - the RAV hybrid can't use the electric motors at high speed so under those conditions you end up with a 150bhp ~33% thermally efficient engine versus a 150/165/175bhp 40%+ one in the Mazda - it's 1 reason why the Mazda has a higher top speed than the hybrid RAV4 (even the 150bhp version has a top speed 12mph higher than the supposedly notably more powerful hybrid RAV).

I just needed to be sure before I responded to this point. Even at high speed, when you put your foot down the electric motors kick in to assist. I thought it was the case as I have seen it many times on my Prius+, and the one I had before. I checked on the motorway today, and I can clearly see it cut in. I also confirmed this is the case from Toyota directly. So the HP is available if you need it to for instance, overtake. It does not run all the time as it would drain the batteries.

The Toyota hybrid system is a lot more subtle than simply on or off. For instance, on the motorway today, even at 70mph, there were times when the ICE was totally off, such as on slight declines of slowing down for traffic. There were times when the motors were helping the engine, times when the engine was off and the momentum or braking was charging the batteries. It is not the system many seem to think is it.

8 hours ago, Heidfirst said:

Interestingly the least powerful (143bhp) RAV, the 2.0l diesel, has a higher top speed than either the 151bhp petrol or the hybrid. 

This is more down to the gearbox than the available power. Really, top speed is a non issue. I used to have a very fast car, never pushed it hard hence still having a clean licence despite clocking 40+k per year for nearly 20 years.

 

[Heidfirst]

4 hours ago, Phill111 said:

I just needed to be sure before I responded to this point. Even at high speed, when you put your foot down the electric motors kick in to assist. I thought it was the case as I have seen it many times on my Prius+, and the one I had before. I checked on the motorway today, and I can clearly see it cut in. I also confirmed this is the case from Toyota directly. So the HP is available if you need it to for instance, overtake. It does not run all the time as it would drain the batteries.

The Toyota hybrid system is a lot more subtle than simply on or off. For instance, on the motorway today, even at 70mph, there were times when the ICE was totally off, such as on slight declines of slowing down for traffic. There were times when the motors were helping the engine, times when the engine was off and the momentum or braking was charging the batteries. It is not the system many seem to think is it.

My understanding is that it's ~ a true (not indicated) 72mph (so probably ~78mph indicated) . The latest Prius plug-in apparently has had the system redesigned/tweaked so that can run in EV to just over a true 80mph. 

Yes, certainly the gearbox is part of the reason that the RAV Hybrid has a low top speed.

13 hours ago, Phill111 said:

Thermal efficiency is not everything, nor is top speed. However, even at 70mph, the hybrid system still emits less NOx than the diesel, by a big margin. For most of us, the emissions at the exhaust are what counts and petrol has a big advantage over diesel. The whole hybrid thing really is a stop gap until either full EV or Hydrogen EV or even something new comes along. Diesel is dead, and no amount of defending it will change that. We know that a number of EU countries including here in the UK are going to ban their usage in new cars. We know that a number of cities are planning fees for their usage in certain zones. The writing is on the wall.  Here in the UK we will I am sure see some announcements in the next budget regarding diesel. Here is some information - http://www.buyacar.co.uk/cars/diesel-cars/460/diesel-tax-proposed-charges-and-surcharges-for-uk-drivers

The higher thermal efficiency diesel will be more fuel efficient at high speed than the hybrid running on ICE & should produce  less CO2 (it would be really useful to have the emissions data from the new WLTP/RDE tests as afaik that will give figures at various speeds rather than the single metric given under NEDC). In the areas where you can do those speeds NOX (which is usually a fraction of CO2 emission levels) isn't a problem as it isn't in a confined built up area & will disperse.

The motor industry believes that there is a place for diesel but politicians once again are going for a knee-***** reaction which probably will prove to have ramifications down the line. Afaik no country is talking about banning diesel before petrol, they are talking about banning non-electrified ICE altogether (Britain certainly is) ? 

[Phill111]

Just for clarification, while the plug in can run in pure EV up to those speeds, above it, and like all the hybrids, the motors still assist the main engine when you accelerate right up to the top speed of the car. So you do get the power right through.

The rules in Britain are a bit odd. Petrol will still exist under the current ill thought changes. To be classed as an EV the car must do a certain distance on EV. They will still be able to be a hybrid after that, or have a range extender. I am guessing though that by 2040 most companies will have moved in a different direction.

[Phill111]

Just ordered the RAV4 today. Spoke to the dealer who sent me all the current specs etc. Reading those the current Hybrid version of the 2.5 which I will be receiving has a thermal efficiency of 38.5% (quite a bit better than the 33 stated above) and apparently they will soon be updated to the new dynamic force engine with a 41% thermal efficiency, very impressive for a petrol engine.

[Heidfirst]

On 14/09/2017 at 8:03 PM, Phill111 said:

Reading those the current Hybrid version of the 2.5 which I will be receiving has a thermal efficiency of 38.5%

2AR-FSE? I thought that the RAV ran the 2AR-FXE which is slightly less. (apparently there are different versions of even the 2.5 Hybrid powertrain with varying thermal efficiency [& the standard 2.5 is less again, it runs a lower compresion ratio]) .

 apparently they will soon be updated to the new dynamic force engine with a 41% thermal efficiency, very impressive for a petrol engine.

will be good when it comes but it will still lag the best diesels.

[Phill111]

What will be interesting is to see what comes out of the tech share between Toyota and Mazda in a couple of years.