Toyota C-HR - Subcompact CUV, will have hybrid option - Debuts March 2016

[Eug]

2017 Toyota C-HR subcompact CUV

http://jalopnik.com/the-2017-toyota-c-hr-is-your-woke-boyfriend-of-cars-1761521160

Will debut in Geneva in March 2016. Will compete against Honda HR-V. Interesting that the name is so similar.

 

[brainhulk]

why did they have to slope the rear hatch so much. that looks like significant lost cargo room to me

i wonder what kind of engine they put in it, hoping for something with guts. maybe their v6

 

[Drako]

Wow, another butt ugly Toyota. Shocking.

 

[Eug]

I think it looks good.

I also like that spoiler at the top, although it seems superfluous too.

why did they have to slope the rear hatch so much. that looks like significant lost cargo room to me

Probably. Also, take a look at that rear row door. Very odd shape and very odd door handle position. It suggests to me that the rear passenger seats aren't going to have much legroom. But then again, that's not uncommon in this segment.

i wonder what kind of engine they put in it, hoping for something with guts. maybe their v6

Not a chance in Hades. 4-cylinder or else 4-cylinder + electric hybrid. Remember, they don't even have a V6 in the RAV4 anymore.

 

[SparkyJJO]

What is the deal with Toyota making their tail lights stick way out from the body lines?

 

[Eug]

Seems to be a Toyota fad these days. Just like their cylon front end fad too.

 

[ChronoReverse]

why did they have to slope the rear hatch so much. that looks like significant lost cargo room to me

i wonder what kind of engine they put in it, hoping for something with guts. maybe their v6

CUV are a segment designed for looks rather than pure practicality.

As for the engine, at best Toyota might put in their new 4 cylinder turbo but I doubt it'll get even that.

 

[Yuriman]

CUV are a segment designed for looks rather than pure practicality.

As for the engine, at best Toyota might put in their new 4 cylinder turbo but I doubt it'll get even that.

Sorry, wrong answer.

Here are a few highly aerodynamic cars. See if you can spot what they all have in common:

 

[BoberFett]

I'm sure teenage girls will love it.

 

[Eug]

Not teenage girls, but I'm sure it will appeal a lot to the 20-40 age group (millenials), as long as they don't have kids.

BTW, I was looking around today, and I was surprised I hadn't really noticed it before, but the roof spoilers are actually very common.

eg. Lexus RX 350:

Toyota C-HR:

 

[tortillasoup]

Wow, another butt ugly Toyota. Shocking.

compared with the prius, this car doesn't look that bad. They really made the '16 prius look ugly.

 

[PhoKingGuy]

This and the Lexus NX are the only two toyota products i'd ever consider buying.

Too bad toyota shunned android auto/apple carplay for their own entune BS

 

[Eug]

This and the Lexus NX are the only two toyota products i'd ever consider buying.

Lexus NX:

Toyota C-HR:

 

[PhoKingGuy]

Lexus NX:

Toyota C-HR:

Exactly

I'm actually up for a new car soon. My passat lease will be up and VW has its thumbs up its own ass trying to figure out how to release the new tiguan outside of europe so I will likely be shifting over to a new make.

I like this a lot. If they drop a 1.6 turbo (doubtful but hopeful) in it I'm sold. I'm also probably right in their target market for this.

 

[ChronoReverse]

Sorry, wrong answer.

Here are a few highly aerodynamic cars. See if you can spot what they all have in common

Yeah, no. If those cars really got meaningful use out your so-called aerodynamic short slope then pigs will fly. Your own examples aren't even like the CUV's slope.

At higher highway speeds it could make a difference but poor gearing and engine sizing for those speeds in this segment would dominate the meager savings.

 

[Yuriman]

Yeah, no. If those cars really got meaningful use out your so-called aerodynamic short slope then pigs will fly. Your own examples aren't even like the CUV's slope.

At higher highway speeds it could make a difference but poor gearing and engine sizing for those speeds in this segment would dominate the meager savings.

You'd be surprised.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kammback

While the realities of fluid dynamics dictate that a teardrop shape is the ideal aerodynamic form, Kamm found that by cutting off / flattening the streamlined end of the tear at an intermediate point, and bringing that edge down towards the ground, he could gain most of the benefit of the teardrop shape without incurring such a large material, structural, and size problem. The airflow, once given the suggestion of the beginning of a turbulence-eliminating streamlined teardrop tail, tended to flow in an approximation of that manner regardless of the fact that the entire tail was not there. This is called the Kamm effect.

Automakers’ use of the term "Kammback" has diminished as Kamm's principles have become more generally assimilated into modern car design.

Aerodynamics is practically a dark art, if you're not willing to make your vehicle look like an airfoil. Very small changes in body shape can result in significant reductions in wake turbulence. The reason so many modern vehicles have kammbacks (of varying length and shape) now that there's legislation regarding fuel economy is no accident. You can bet your socks this vehicle, which has probably the greatest rear taper in its class, will have a class-leading drag coefficient, which, when combined with the hybrid synergy drive, will give it class-leading fuel economy.

 

[Eug]

Yeah, no. If those cars really got meaningful use out your so-called aerodynamic short slope then pigs will fly. Your own examples aren't even like the CUV's slope.

At higher highway speeds it could make a difference but poor gearing and engine sizing for those speeds in this segment would dominate the meager savings.

Undoubtedly, the car in the pictures (which is the hybrid version) would have an ECVT system, a computer controlled planetary gear system, so that the car would always be in optimal "gear".

 

[ChronoReverse]

You'd be surprised.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kammback



Aerodynamics is practically a dark art, if you're not willing to make your vehicle look like an airfoil. Very small changes in body shape can result in significant reductions in wake turbulence. The reason so many modern vehicles have kammbacks (of varying length and shape) now that there's legislation regarding fuel economy is no accident. You can bet your socks this vehicle, which has probably the greatest rear taper in its class, will have a class-leading drag coefficient, which, when combined with the hybrid synergy drive, will give it class-leading fuel economy.

We'll see then, the NX200t sure didn't have any of that

 

[Eug]

We'll see then, the NX200t sure didn't have any of that

The NX 300h does though.

 

[NutBucket]

It's a fine line though. Aerodynamics are great but not if it makes the car impractical. I mean, our Forester is a box but it's spacious and has a 32mpg highway rating (easily beaten too). What am I missing?

 

[ChronoReverse]

The NX 300h does though.

That's on the power plant (hybrid) and transmission (CVT). The "aerodynamic" shape is the same. Looks like this isn't a good example for your assertion but for mine instead.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Looks to be competing with the Hyundai Veloster.

And it's not only Toyota with the Cylon front ends as many car companies have grills that are 10X the size they need to be for functionality. It's the automotive equivalent of stuffing a sausage down your pants to make it look like you're packing!


Brian

 

[Kaido]

It's like a BMW i3 slapped with a Fast & Furious stick

 

[ElFenix]

people will buy hatchbacks so long as they're ugly enough you can call it a "crossover." if it's just inoffensively saccharine no one will buy it.

 

[Torn Mind]

CUVs are too cookie cutter to care about how they look. They are wagominivans. End of story. No fashion statement, and definitely will not find you a lover, make you tougher, and whatever marketing they try to pull. It's just the "in" thing like sedans used to be.