C-HR MK2 PHEV handling

[Louie]

I used to be a corrola Excel 2l hybrid owner  now my  current choice as I want a small SUV is one the CHR MK2 range of vehicles and currently the 2l PHEV is my choice because of the things Toyota offer when you purchase one. There are some downsides such as smaller boot heavier Battery which might affect handling and a question of realistic mpg on full electric charge some say its 40 mpg + but others say you are lucky to get 30 however to be fair the 0-60 time of 7.4 secs impresses me most. Logical thinking points to the 2L hybrid non PHEV.  Anyone have any opinions ?

[FROSTYBALLS]

Have a read of: 

 

[AndyRC]

12 hours ago, Louie said:

I used to be a corrola Excel 2l hybrid owner  now my  current choice as I want a small SUV is one the CHR MK2 range of vehicles and currently the 2l PHEV is my choice because of the things Toyota offer when you purchase one. There are some downsides such as smaller boot heavier battery which might affect handling and a question of realistic mpg on full electric charge some say its 40 mpg + but others say you are lucky to get 30 however to be fair the 0-60 time of 7.4 secs impresses me most. Logical thinking points to the 2L hybrid non PHEV.  Anyone have any opinions ?

The performance of the 2.0 HEV is not lacking when you need to overtake. As for mpg if you avoid motorways, stick to the speed limits , accelerate smoothly and coast more than hammering the brakes you should be able to achieve a genuine 63/65 mpg in the 2.0 HEV. 

[philip42h]

16 hours ago, Louie said:

the 2l PHEV is my choice

So, buy what you want! 🙂

If you have a regular daily commute of, say, 30 miles (so, 8k commuting miles pa) then the PHEV makes a lot of sense. You'll be able to cover off your commute as an EV and enjoy the improved performance on longer journeys.

If your daily commute is significantly shorter or, like me, you no longer have a daily commute at all, you will struggle to recover the additional cost of the PHEV - but you would still have PHEVy performance, if that's what you want.

Otherwise, a HEV will serve perfectly well. If you care more about economy, choose the 1.8; if you care more for performance, choose the 2.0.

Either way, just buy what you want (and justify your choice afterwards). 😉

 

[AndyRC]

19 hours ago, philip42h said:

So, buy what you want! 🙂

If you have a regular daily commute of, say, 30 miles (so, 8k commuting miles pa) then the PHEV makes a lot of sense. You'll be able to cover off your commute as an EV and enjoy the improved performance on longer journeys.

If your daily commute is significantly shorter or, like me, you no longer have a daily commute at all, you will struggle to recover the additional cost of the PHEV - but you would still have PHEVy performance, if that's what you want.

Otherwise, a HEV will serve perfectly well. If you care more about economy, choose the 1.8; if you care more for performance, choose the 2.0.

Either way, just buy what you want (and justify your choice afterwards). 😉

 

I’m not convinced that a 1.8 would that much more fuel efficient than the latest 2.0. The 1.8 engine definitely worked a lot harder than a 2.0 on a 25 mile  route I used to test the 5th generation HEV setup in a pair of Corollas the dealer let me borrow for a back to back test before deciding on which new gen CHR to order. The big downside for the 1.8 was how “busy” it sounded compared to the 2.0 which is effortless in comparison.  

[philip42h]

23 minutes ago, AndyRC said:

I’m not convinced that a 1.8 would that much more fuel efficient than the latest 2.0. The 1.8 engine definitely worked a lot harder than a 2.0 on a 25 mile  route I used to test the 5th generation HEV setup in a pair of Corollas the dealer let me borrow for a back to back test before deciding on which new gen CHR to order. The big downside for the 1.8 was how “busy” it sounded compared to the 2.0 which is effortless in comparison.  

Well, yes ... so, the 1.8 (0-60 in ~10 seconds) will encourage more relaxed and, thus, more economical driving while the 2.0 (0-60 in ~8 seconds) will encourage you to enjoy the performance at the expense of economy.

If you drive each equally hard in a WLTP test the 1.8 will return around 60 mpg while the 2.0 will manage around 58 mpg - so there's not that much difference between them under those conditions (but the 1.8 is more economical).

If you need the performance of the 2.0, that is, obviously, the better choice! 😉

[AndyRC]

2 hours ago, philip42h said:

Well, yes ... so, the 1.8 (0-60 in ~10 seconds) will encourage more relaxed and, thus, more economical driving while the 2.0 (0-60 in ~8 seconds) will encourage you to enjoy the performance at the expense of economy.

If you drive each equally hard in a WLTP test the 1.8 will return around 60 mpg while the 2.0 will manage around 58 mpg - so there's not that much difference between them under those conditions (but the 1.8 is more economical).

If you need the performance of the 2.0, that is, obviously, the better choice! 😉

When we did the back to back test in the 1.8 v 2.0 driving at similar speeds on the same road the 1.8 felt far less relaxed than the 2.0 , it has to work harder than the 2.0 to make the same progress. I find the 2.0 keeps up with traffic flow on the lightest touch of the throttle 👍

[philip42h]

9 minutes ago, AndyRC said:

When we did the back to back test in the 1.8 v 2.0 driving at similar speeds on the same road the 1.8 felt far less relaxed than the 2.0 , it has to work harder than the 2.0 to make the same progress. I find the 2.0 keeps up with traffic flow on the lightest touch of the throttle 👍

So you fall into the category of someone who needs the performance of the 2.0 ... 😉

Honest John's Real MPG doesn't yet have data for the Mk 2. For the Mk 1:

• The WLTP figure for the 1.8 is 58 mpg and drivers report 58 mpg, achieving 100% of the predicted WLTP figure.
• The WLTP figure for the 2.0 is 54 mpg and drivers report 48 mpg, achieving 90% of the predicted WLTP figure.

Those results may or may not carry forward to the Mk 2 but illustrate my point - if you want best economy, choose the 1.8 and drive it gently.

Oh, and, my wife drives a 2.0 Mk 1 ... I never even considered getting her to test drive the 1.8 ... 😄 

[TonyHSD]

The 1.8 Toyota hybrids will be more efficient in town driving and B roads, where the lighter overall mass of the car will be propelled easier on ev or with less ice needs and it will lose or be equal on motorways high speeds against the 2.0 hybrids.
Even gen 4 1.8 with 122bhp drives effortlessly and are very responsive, nippy and pleasure to drive cars. And no one actually need to keep up with traffic nowhere, keeping up with traffic these days and place (uk) means no Toyota cars except Yaris gr4 or supra and gr86 are capable to do so , including all hybrids. There is no travelling anymore but races, everywhere, every vehicle, every driver.
Pretty much every single car on the uk roads been driven like an emergency response vehicle 🚗 🚨🚓🫢

[AndyRC]

2 hours ago, philip42h said:

So you fall into the category of someone who needs the performance of the 2.0 ... 😉

Honest John's Real MPG doesn't yet have data for the Mk 2. For the Mk 1:

• The WLTP figure for the 1.8 is 58 mpg and drivers report 58 mpg, achieving 100% of the predicted WLTP figure.
• The WLTP figure for the 2.0 is 54 mpg and drivers report 48 mpg, achieving 90% of the predicted WLTP figure.

Those results may or may not carry forward to the Mk 2 but illustrate my point - if you want best economy, choose the 1.8 and drive it gently.

Oh, and, my wife drives a 2.0 Mk 1 ... I never even considered getting her to test drive the 1.8 ... 😄 

I “need” the 2.0 for the refinement it offers 😉. As for performance these days I stick to the speed limits 👍 the number of times I get overtaken to pull up behind the same car a few miles down the road in a queue of traffic at a junction 🤷‍♂️

[Louie]

I am an ex biker and I do like my horses the quicker of the mark from 0-60 the better and when I test drove the vehicle the smooth power delivery for acceleration was astonishing but then it has 222 BHP luverly jubbly, having said that I am not a boy racer and I am pretty restrained when driving so just nice to know you have all that meat under the bonnet when you need it.

 

[AJones]

On 8/3/2024 at 7:15 PM, Louie said:

There are some downsides such as smaller boot heavier battery which might affect handling and a question of realistic mpg on full electric charge some say its 40 mpg + but others say you are lucky to get 30 however

Do you mean mpg / miles per gallon, or miles electric range? Your mpg will depend on your mixture of journeys and the split between proper EV miles, using the charge from plugging in and HEV miles. On short trips within the EV range the mpg is irrelevant as there's no fuel used at all, on really long distance stuff the mpg will be equivalent to a HEV, everything else will be somewhere in between. 

The EV range on a PHEV will vary depending on the driving conditions. Nice weather, no heating or aircon needed at modest, urban speeds will give you max mileage. Driving along with aircon or heating on high, at 70mph and in the rain gives the worst.

On 8/3/2024 at 7:15 PM, Louie said:

Logical thinking points to the 2L hybrid non PHEV.  Anyone have any opinions ?

Try test driving one, driving around with a PHEV in EV mode is a lot nicer, smoother and more responsive than in HEV mode with the engine,  the EV mode is the best bit.

[CassUK]

Some deal for a PHEV GR Sport here:

https://quotes.carwow.co.uk/deals/5c2265f054b1fdf583f41b9b5e568477

[Louie]

There have been some on line unfavourable comments regarding stodgy handling round corners because of the heavy Battery slung underneath the drive's seat also care has to be exercised when parking etc because of the low ground clearance of the installed Battery. Does anyone have any comments? also I would like to  add that this  came from various web reviews and generally   I don't take them as gospel as my experience is that most of them  tend to be exaggerated.

[FROSTYBALLS]

Duplicate topics merged.

[TonyHSD]

14 hours ago, Louie said:

There have been some on line unfavourable comments regarding stodgy handling round corners because of the heavy battery slung underneath the drive's seat also care has to be exercised when parking etc because of the low ground clearance of the installed battery. Does anyone have any comments? also I would like to  add that this  came from various web reviews and generally   I don't take them as gospel as my experience is that most of them  tend to be exaggerated.

Hi, 

you had a Corolla hatchback before? 
The chr is pretty much the same car just few cm higher. 
Handling is very similar, power is similar and so are the efficiency and reliability. There are some small difference between like interior space and design, the seats , the biggest difference is the look from the outside. 
What people are complaining is nonsense.

What heavy Battery in Toyota hybrids?

Unless of course phev which are heavy indeed and will affect handling little bit and add unnecessary complexity plus expensive part that outside warranty if replacement needed will be costly. That’s all. 
If you are buying new car , only planning to keep for 3-5 years , covering 30000 or less a year , lease or any other financing then buy anything you like and after the period ends just return it and get a new one to enjoy. 
If the plans are buy once and keep it as long as possibly or forever then non phev just hev Toyota are better option. 👍

[Cyker]

The Battery in the HEVs is pretty small and probably weighs the same as a very overweight human (Or maybe just 2 normal humans...?)

I don't know about the CHR so much, but the new TNGA platform all the new cars are built on has vastly improved handling; The whole suspension is much better set up and the chassis has been stiffened significantly. Despite my Mk4 Yaris being 100-200kg heavier than my Mk1/Mk2, it is much more agile and less rolypoly because of all the chassis improvements. It's a lot like driving a Fiesta (RIP), which is/was my benchmark for economy-segment cars with excellent handling.

But this is purely within the context of Toyotas, which frankly isn't a very high bar. It still isn't anywhere near the handling of say, an MX5 or a sporty BMW.

Also, the CHR is still an SUV so it's never going to have stellar handling. I think you'd need to test drive it to really get a feel for it, as it really depends on what you're comparing it to!

 

[forkingabout]

2 hours ago, Cyker said:

Also, the CHR is still an SUV so it's never going to have stellar handling. I think you'd need to test drive it to really get a feel for it, as it really depends on what you're comparing it to!

FWIW the C-HR has pretty decent handling due to the TNGA platform & rear suspension set up used. 

The TNGA platform has certainly made modern Toyota products fun to drive - not that a lot of average Toyota owners would ever notice 🤣

[TonyHSD]

Typical Toyota hybrid Battery weights between 40-50kg , or less. 
This is well compensated by the smaller petrol tank and overall light weight chassis so a standard Toyota hev isn’t any heavier than a petrol or diesel powered car of the same size. 
Since 2016 and gen 4 hybrids the traction Battery is located under the rear seat and this actually improves stability as is equalises the weight distribution  between front and rear axle and lower the centre of gravity. Corolla for example handles as good as golf or focus or even better and weight the same.