I'm not a GM apologist by any stretch of the imagination, but I will give credit where credit is due. This is a big improvement. Let's just hope it's as reliable as my parents' Prius has been.

As much as people knock GM, this isn't bad. A fairly simple approach for some very good mileage from an SUV. I'm guessing that with the output of the engine still @ 170HP, they didn't even employ the Atkinson cycle? Assuming this would also weigh less than a hybrid Escape, I would guess that this would feel more powerful on the highway than the Ford.

Saturn may become GM's most popular line in the US if they keep this up. A few hybrid choices, a very popular "halo" sports car, price you see is the price you get purchasing (of course that means you can't haggle downwards and dealers may increase the price on their own).

I would prefer that the entire SUV category be discontinued. Unfortunately, that is just not realistic. Customers like them and certain carmakers depend on them for their profits. GM can decide to progress to mild and full hybrids at a later date and/or offer them in the more expensive vehicle categories. For now, every little bit helps to get hybrids into the mainstream of actual sales.

Beyond the fact that it is an SUV at all, the only real beef I have with the VUE is the styling. I've rarely seen such a downright ugly car! GM can do better in this segment, cp. the Opel Antara:

http://www1.opel.de/antara_pretease/

I disagree with Rafael. I don't think there's anything wrong with SUVs. These days, they're getting quite a bad rap due to the concerns of oil and gas prices. I remember in the 90s when people were more worried about SUVs causing accidents and road rage.

What we should do is make the SUV more fuel-efficient and that's what is happening. The Vue Hybrid is a good start and if GM puts out some more fuel-efficient vehicles, they may just pull themselves out of the hole they dug. Today more people prefer the car-based SUVs (Subaru Outback, Hyundai Santa Fe, Toyota RAV4, etc) or the hybrids. This gives them yet another option.

SUVs aren't the problem. The stupid, clumsy, wasteful culture that they've spawned, on the other hand... that's a problem.

So in that sense, Saturn's got the right idea. I personally find hybrid SUVs to be an oxymoron, but as they aren't going anywhere anytime soon, any sensible approach to improve their design is more than welcome.

My Toyota Prius gave me 51 mpg last tank. This piece of GM crap can only do 27 MPG.

There is a reason why GM has to give rebates to get rid of their cars and SUV's. There is also a reason why the Prius still has a waiting list at most dealers.

If GM really wanted to turn the company around they could:

1) Make every gas engine vehicle an E85 flex fuel vehicle.

2) Make every Diesel engine run on B100 Biodiesel.

They could do these 2 things almost overnight as the technology exists, right off the shelf.

Long term they should bring back the EV1 as a halo car. Toyota lost money on the Prius for 7 years before they finally turned a profit on the car in 2004. GM does not have the GUTS to do this kind of long term investment.

Kyle Dansie

This hybrid is pointless. The 7 seat RAV4 already gets 24/30. I can't believe how much further ahead Toyota is compared to GM.

>This hybrid is pointless. The 7 seat RAV4 already gets >24/30. I can't believe how much further ahead Toyota is >compared to GM.
The GM/Ford Hybrids are pointless far as I can tell.
A VUE which is lightweight and get about
24mpg without being hybrid. What GM does makes no sense at all to me on the planet earth. They have great tech, great manufacturing and great products sitting on the shelf yet they release half baked solutions. Sad :(

I think the simple belt alternator "hybrid" setup is a smart idea. It could, and I feel should be implemented on all cars as a simple method of improving economy with out the added cost and weight of a full hybrid system.

This is not to say that I am not a fan of the full hybrid systems such as the prius, but I feel that this type of hybrid could be used in a far greater # of vehicles without expensive redesign, and in that way conserve a greater amount of resources.

I did not realize that they are only offering this in FWD form....VERY disappointing! I just don't get it - they do something smart like this, but then eliminate the northeast and northern midwest areas from being customers by not offering an AWD version????

Compared to regular Vue, Hybrid-Vue is 1 step better.
At 23K price tag, Vue is 2K cheaper than Camry and 7K cheaper than Accord. This no-frills Hybrid could teach a lesson to Japanese.

Already Ford has increased sales of H-Escape while Honda could not do the same with H-Accord.

Now the next question is, both Hybrid-Vue and Hybrid-Escape are 5-door, 5-seater vehicles with 30 MPG and 30 cubic feet cargo space.

So why should people pay 4k more for Ford. Time for Ford to remove some of the jazzy stuff and reduce the vehicle price. All that the people want is an affordable hybrid whose extra cost will get the return on investment.

GM's so called "Hybrids" make me want to spew. "Idle stop" does not make a vehicle a hybrid, although it is great and I think every car that can't be an actual hybrid should have this....GM is grasping at straws, BIG TIME.

Bud

There are 4 types of hybrid
Mild - Start-stop
Partial - Supplementary power
Full - Powering in low speed
Plugin - Charging from grid.

According to some people, only the plugin is genuine since it uses sources other than oil. We cannot keep whining. As long as vehicle uses some type of mechanism to capture the energy, its a HYBRID and we should appreciate the company for launching the product.

Lets appreciate GM. They are also launching vehicles with cylinder deactivation and 6-speed transmission.

Max, I appreciate your response. Yes, I drive a Prius. You will note that I applaud any vehicle that employes "Idle stop". The Prius does not qualify, because it never idles. Anyway, that being said, "powering in low speed" is not true. I live in Tennesse now, and in spite of what you have heard, the engine is off if the hill is steep enough even at 80 mph! Anyway, we moved here from Florida, and I'm gettin 58MGH around town, I only got 51 in the flatlands. Sorry I got a little off the subject, but I can't stand it when people like GM call a car a hybrid when it simply is not true..........SeeYa

I'm just hoping the idle start/stop system is implemented in as many cars as possible. GM should make a plan to include it on every 4 cylinder and 6 cylinder vehicle once they get all the kinks out of the system in the Vue.

Agreed. It's incremental but it's still an improvement. It needs to be implemented in as many models ASAP.

Vue is 2K cheaper than Camry and 7K cheaper than Accord. This no-frills Hybrid could teach a lesson to Japanese.

Those two cars can absolutely dust the Vue - especially the Accord. They also both get better mileage than the Vue - especially the Camry.

Can everyone imagine if every vehicle had OLNY Idle stop?? It would be major in fuel savings, but imagine the QUIET??

So what's in a name?

Why banter back and forth about what a "hybrid" is. Call it whatever the heck you like - the important thing is GM has offered a vehicle that over the long run will not only save gas, but save the consumer money relative to the "normal" version. When the average consumer sees this, American culture will be one step closer to accepting more fuel efficient vehicles. Personally, I would like to see GM use the BAS and variable cylinder technology across their entire fleet - maybe, just maybe this could be a prelude to that? (wishfull thinking, I know)

Peace,
Cosmo

Nah, you're right Cosmo. Whether we applaud it or not, it IS technically an attempt at a mitigation technology. A weak one and representative of GM's generally backwards policies towards market longevity in my opinion, but a legitimate one nevertheless.

I'd love for every selfish asshole on the face of the American map to get with the sense of urgency like most of us have and start walking or buying a serious hybrid, but it ain't gonna happen. This is one more light nudge in that direction.

IF GM can survive it. Coupled with their insane "gas-capping" campaign, they're seriously looking like a company on a deathmarch.

"Those two cars can absolutely dust the Vue - especially the Accord. They also both get better mileage than the Vue - especially the Camry."

JW-

Would you come to the defence of General Motors with a line like, "Their cars can dust everyone else's" or would it sound more like, "Another example of GM's excessive consumption catering to the NASCAR fuel hog horsepower crowd."? Just think what the Japanese could do if they didn't insist on all that power.

I am sure the Camry's shape and smaller tires goes a long way in helping it get better mileage.
JRod.

When gm makes econ cars they make em cheap because in general people who care about fuel econ dont have alot of moeny or dont care to spend it on a car or driving that car around.

The suv is simply a step up from a minivan allowing more people of larger size to ride comfortably.

Rather important for anyone with 3-5 children who are getting over the age of 10.

BUT its important to realize that most suvs arnt made for day to day driving. They are made for the weekly or teice monthly shopping and for vacation and entertainment driving.

Its just alot of people cant afford 3 cars or have room for em and so 1 commuter car and one everything else car. For alot of families that ebverything else car sooner or later becomes some size of suv.

Compare apples to apples.
The $18k Toyota RAV4 get 24 city, 30 highway.
The $23k Vue Hybrid gets 27 city, 31 highway.

This is simply shamefull on GM's part.

Detroit went from deathbed (remember Iacocca $1 salary?)to profits (invented the minivan & suv). They're late to the table on hybrids but don't count them out. The VUE is just a baby step, kinda clumsy but they could still get good at this.

On the same day, GM announces that buyers of gas guzzlers get $1.99/gal gas for a year if they live in FL or CA.

One step forward, two steps back. Way to go GM.

Saturn VUE Green Line 27 32 $22,995
(estimated not EPA tested yet)

Ford Escape Hybrid 36 31 $27,515
Highlander Hybrid 33 28 $33,030
Lexus Rx 400h 33 28 $48,535

rav 4 (now bigger!) 24 30 $20,300 MSRP
(4 cylinder 2wd base) (www.toyota.com)
rav 4 4cy 4wd base 23 28 $21,700 MSRP
rav 4 v6 2wd 22 29 $22,335 MSRP
rav 4 v6 4wd base/sport 21 28 $23,735/$25,190

Rav 4 numbers taken from www.toyota.com do not include delivery charge.

The saturn gets the best highway mpg of any of them.

5kw = 6.7 hp
60Nm = 13.488 lb-ft

The BAS gets rid of the starter and teeth on the flywheel, a belt and an alternator are much easier to change than a flywheel and a starter.

From saturns website they say that the hybrid battery runs the accessories, electric ac? Gm is already using electric power steering. Is it electric AC or do they keep the engine turning with the BAS and shutoff the fuel?

4kw of generating power ~ 280 amp range, my alternator is only rated at 100 amps. I'd love to be have such a powerful alternator and get rid of that 10 lbs of metal called a starter I'm not using %99.99 of the time.

This is going in a saturn so money says it will be an auto but think about this the torque smoothing abillity of the BAS could be used with a manual to help prevent stalling when you release the clutch.

"The vehicle’s 2.4-liter hybrid powertrain provides approximately 170 hp (127 kW)—27 more horsepower than the 2.2 liter engine that powers the conventional VUE."

Anybody noticed that the "green vue"'s engine is bigger than the non "green"?

"rav 4 (now bigger!) 24 30 $20,300 MSRP
(4 cylinder 2wd base) (www.toyota.com)"
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!

Open your local news paper! You'll see plenty of new 7 seat RAV4s for $18k. I'm sure GM won't be discounting the VUE Hybrid one penny since its "GREEN" hubrids are in high de mand.

Earlier people said that Escape-Hybrid will be dusted.

In YTD sales, Escape-Hybrid has dusted Accord-Hybrid, Vue-Hybrid is going to do the same.

There is not difference between OPEC which more than doubled the price of Oil and Honda which is charging 7K more for Civic-Hybrid and 10K more for Accord-Hybrid.

Why not they put their IMA system in Civic-LX and sell for 18K.

Consumers taught Honda a lesson.

When Prius-III gen comes with plugin version, those owners will call the Prius-II & Prius-I a non-hybrid.

So lets not define what is hybrid.

Would you come to the defence of General Motors with a line like, "Their cars can dust everyone else's" or would it sound more like, "Another example of GM's excessive consumption catering to the NASCAR fuel hog horsepower crowd."? Just think what the Japanese could do if they didn't insist on all that power.

Hello, JRod.

You must have not read the prior thread about GM's fuel subsidies. Max had first brought up the price of the Vue relative to the Civic Hybrid, emphasizing how it wasn't much more expensive but had much more cargo space. I responded that if cargo space was the criterion most important for a car buyer, then the xB and Fit both have excellent cargo space and better fuel efficiency than the Vue, for $8,000 less. Max then replied that some people believe they need a substantial amount of cargo space afforded by a vehicle such as a Vue (in excess of that available in the xB or Fit) and that for people looking for that specific type of vehicle, the Vue is a good choice. I concur.

So that's the context of the conversation he and I are having on this thread, and which you are obviously unaware of.

On this thread, he then compared the price of the Vue to the hybrid versions of the Camry and Accord. My comment was simply to point out the different qualities that some might favor (like performance and amenities) that would lead one to perhaps choose a faster family sedan over a relatively slow SUV with FWD. I also pointed out that the Camry and Accord hybrids both get (much) better mileage than the Vue Green Line.

So, what you jumped in to was a civil conversation about relative merits of disparate vehicles, and simply an affirmation that it's hard to compare disparate things (ie SUVs to family sedans or SUVs to economy cars).

Surely you understand that fuel economy is not the sole criterion that people use when purchasing a vehicle. If that were the case, almost all of us would drive the Honda Insight - a vehicle which is being discontinued and has never had large sales volume. The reality of the world is that the Camry and Accord are the two of the best selling automobiles in the United States. And many of those sales will always be for the more powerful versions of those vehicles. In fact, my next door neighbor has both a V6 Accord and a V6 Camry.

So, I'm of the opinion that it's pretty astounding that one can have vehicles like that (with around 250 hp) and yet get the fuel mileage similar to an auto-tranny Toyota Corolla with them. Toyota took a slightly different approach with the Camry Hybrid by suping up its 4 cylinder and getting the 4th highest mileage gasoline vehicle for sale today -- averaging 39 mpg with almost 200 hp.

As for what "the Japanese could do" about fuel efficiency, let's review the highest fuel efficiency vehicles for sale in the United States today (30 mpg combined or more). I've excluded transmission variations and rebadges. Vehicles with the same rounded fuel economy numbers are sorted by EPA's raw numbers.

1) Honda Insight - 63 mpg - Japanese
2) Toyota Prius - 55 mpg - Japanese
3) Honda Civic Hybrid - 50 mpg - Japanese
4) Volkswagen New Beetle - 40 mpg - German
5) Volkswagen Golf - 40 mpg - German
6) Toyota Camry Hybrid - 39 mpg - Japanese
7) Volkswagen Jetta - 38 mpg - German
8) Toyota Yaris - 37 mpg - Japanese
9) Toyota Corolla - 36 mpg - Japanese
10) Honda Fit - 35 mpg - Japanese
11) Scion xA - 34 mpg - Japanese
12) Honda Civic - 34 mpg - Japanese
13) Ford Escape Hybrid - 34 mpg - American
14) Hyundai Accent - 33 mpg - Korean
15) Toyota Corolla - 33 mpg - Japanese
16) Kia Rio - 33 mpg - Korean
17) Toyota Matrix/Pontiac Vibe - 33 mpg - Japanese
18) Scion xB - 31 mpg - Japanese
19) MINI Cooper - 31 mpg - British/German
20) Ford Focus - 31 mpg - American
21) Lexus RX 400h/Toyota Highlander Hybrid - 30 mpg - Japanese
22) Mazda 3 - 31 mpg - Japanese
23) Nissan Sentra - 31 mpg - Japanese
24) MINI Cooper Convertible - 30 mpg - British/German
25) Mercedes-Benz E320 Cdi - 30 mpg - German
26) Acura RSX - 30 mpg - Japanese
27) Saturn Ion - 30 mpg - American
28) Mitsubishi Lancer - 30 mpg - Japanese
29) Hyundai Elantra - 30 mpg - Korean

So, I'm seeing 17 of those 29 made by Japanese manufacturers, including the Top 3, 7 out of the Top 10, and the Top 9 gasoline-fueled vehicles. The highest-rated American vehicle is at #13 and the highest-rated GM vehicle (not made by Toyota) is at #27.

Corporate Average Fuel Economy numbers for the two main Japanese manufacturers are also substantially higher across all vehicle types compared to their American counterparts.

Perhaps you should be turning your "critical" eye towards GM, the company that can only muster the 27th most fuel efficient vehicle. Just a suggestion.

I think this is a positive thing - I'd rather have GM selling this car than not.

But it is important to remember that originally this was going to be a full parallel hybrid Saturn VUE and GM execs canceled that and went cheap several years ago (just before the hybrid market took off).

Thanks Joe

Camry-Hybrid being V4 and 3rd gen tech gives 39 MPG city, how about Accord-Hybrid.

Honda made a wrong decision going with V6 and no wonder the hybrid buyers ditched it.

Toyota is sprinting ahead, no doubt about it.

But Ford & GM could jump ahead of Honda if they keep wavering.

GM has been making gas-guzzlers for so many decades, but now they are turning towards right direction by selling hybrids, cylinder deactivation, 6-speed tranny, etc.

We cannot expect them to stop selling SUV's, but definitely the SUV sales are coming down (2 % in 2004 and 13 % in 2005). 1st casualty this year is Hummer-H1.

I could see this being immensely beneficial to GM, who obviously is very heavily dependent on sales of SUVs.

If GM were to take this technology and really refine it to a point where it boosts the mileage of SUVs to 30+ MPG, they'd make a fortune. The same is true for Ford; an Explorer with great mileage would be a massive source of revenue as well as a valuable boost to the fuel economy of the US fleet.

A Chevy Suburbam or Yukon Denali that gets 30 MPG city would be a mint for GM; a large segment of the US car market wants big vehicles, but the price of filling them is one of the reasons why they are not buying large SUVs. Resolving the issue of low mileage would enable buyers to "have their cake and eat it too" and produce huge profits for GM.

Aaron, there will be more GM hybrid SUVs. The Chevy Tahoe, GMC Yukon, and Cadillac Escalade are going hybrid.

JW-

My only point is I wish Toyota would go for even more mileage. Just because they have the most efficient cars doesn't mean they should substitute unnecessay power for more efficiency. Why let the other guys even be close? I don't critize GM because everyone else does that for me.

Cheers,

JRod.

My only point is I wish Toyota would go for even more mileage.

They sell 5 of the Top 10 highest efficiency gas-powered vehicles and you're critical of them?

Just because they have the most efficient cars doesn't mean they should substitute unnecessay power for more efficiency.

Which of those cars has unnecessary power?

Why let the other guys even be close?

They don't appear to be - especially your beloved, the world's largest automaker.

I don't critize GM because everyone else does that for me.

Right - your role is to be the noble defender of poor, helpless General Motors and their product line, whose most efficient vehicle is the 27th most efficient vehicle for sale on the US market at a paltry 30 mpg.

I know it upsets you that people have the temerity to be critical of your beloved, but they really do work doubly hard to make themselves a pariah and a joke. The latest incentive program (giving buyers of their biggest gas hogs fuel subsidies) is a perfect example of this.

I commend them on their baby steps with vehicles like the Vue, but they have a long, long road ahead of them. Let me know when their best-selling vehicle has a 39 mpg, 192 hp version.

JW-

I'm not sure why you think I am in love with GM. I just think Toyota/Honda gets a free pass on alot of stuff, while GM gets every move scrutinized. I don't drive GM. And I don't think I defended them here. I don't mind you making fun of them either, I just wish you would spread the fun around.

JRod.

I don't mind you making fun of them either, I just wish you would spread the fun around.

Fair enough.

Let's see - most Toyotas bore the heck out of me and their monster SUVs are an abomination. They've killed the only three interesting sports cars they had - the Supra, the MR2, and the Celica GT-S. I commend them for the engine on the last one, as it's the one being used in the Lotus Elise.

As for Honda, they are really dropping the ball on hybrids, IMO. They under-promote the Insight and the Accord Hybrid, and I'm disappointed with the fuel economy and weight of the Fit. I wish they would go back to producing 1 ton vehicles that aren't dogs like the Insight. The new Civic drives nicely, but it's nothing like the older Civics - far too big and heavy. And it was dumb of them to stop producing hatchback and wagon versions of it. Their light truck options need fuel economy improvements - especially the Element. It's underpowered and its fuel efficiency is bad compared to the much larger Benz (I mean, Dodge) Sprinter. It'd be nice to see Honda work harder to fill the void left by the Eurovan. And they also need to do something about the abysmal fuel economy of the S2000. A four-banger with 240 hp shouldn't be getting the same mileage as a 400 hp V8 (the one in the Corvette).

GM has some interesting vehicles, but they need to get off their obsession with light trucks and stop greenwashing their products. More Corvette, Cadillac sedans, and some of the Buicks. Less Pontiacs, oversized Saturns, and monster SUVs. They also have a huge cultural problem at the dealer level (ie, dissing fuel efficiency), and their follow-through with the Solstice was horrendous. I hope they work out the problems with that with the new Saturn Sky.

How's that?

All very true. I'd like to see them turn up the heat with a diesel accord.

Cheers,

JRod.

Pay a $5000 premium for a 2mpg advantage with legendary GM reliability? Ehhh... NO! I'll take the Toyota any day.

I thought the Vue Green Line sounded like a nice, cheaper alternative to other fuel efficient SUVs I'd been investigating, such as the Liberty CRD and the Escape hybrid...until I saw that it will be FWD only. The whole 2-wheel drive SUV thing bewilders me. Why buy an SUV in the first place if you can't have all 4 wheels pulling you through snow, or mud, or standing water after a thunderstorm? And that doesn't even begin to cover my main reason I'd like an SUV...trail riding on the weekends. The Liberty diesel would be my pick in this category because I love the idea of a small turbodiesel for which I could at some point brew my own biodiesel, and still get all the rugged truckiness and towing capacity that makes it a Jeep. The Escape hybrid offers a nice "green" package, but it costs too much and is a tad too urbane for my taste. The Saturn Vue Green Line would be a viable contender if it had 4WD but the extra drivetrain drag and weight would probably mitigate the fuel savings to the point that it would be hard to market the extra expense.

Frankly, I'm a Ford Bronco guy at heart and I'm still waiting for FoMoCo to give me a new Bronco similar in execution to the concept a couple years ago including the diesel engine. I even wrote Ford and told them so. In the mean time the whole SUV market leaves me cold. The only respectable SUVs (IMHO)are most of the trail-rated Jeep, Hummer and Land Rover lines, the Nissan Xterra, the Toyota FJ Cruiser, the Mercedes-Benz G-Wagen and...well, that's all I can think of at the moment. I've heard the VW Toureg is good off-road, but I can hardly fathom ever taking one there. Most of those are too pricey for me except for a Wrangler or Liberty, and none of those (save the Liberty) inspire me with their fuel economy, but I guess to get a "serious" SUV without a diesel engine means to sacrifice economy, since all the hybrid SUVs are a bit pansy when it comes to combining work and fun.

The technology is there to get more mileage, even incrementally, as shown by the Vue, from just about any vehicle type, so I'd like to see it applied more widely, so that not just people who are willing to buy green-mobiles will start to see the benefits. If the technology is leveraged across the entire line, then costs should come down.

i need to know the bio waste used for car fuel.

Sivacumaar,

Biodiesel fuel can be made from used cooking oils, such as from the deep fryers at McDonald's. Ethanol can be brewed as a substitute for or additive to gasoline from grain, in much the same way that beer or moonshine is made. Methanol can be distilled from woody biomass...mulchy type of stuff from what I understand. Probably the easiest for home manufacture would be the biodiesel, as I think you would need to get a federal exemption from the moonshining laws in order to produce ethanol, and methanol distillation seems to be a more complex process. I haven't done any home fuel manufacturing, but that's why I want to get a diesel powered car...so I can try my hand at biodiesel. You can do an internet or book search for more info on manufacturing techniques for each type of fuel.

Has anyone been following the Volkswagen Lupo, a clean non-hybrid diesel? Supposedly gets 90+mpg but the VW folks won't sell it in the US because they don't feel there's a market. I saw one in Mexico in March. I would test drive if it were available. My point is this: Green high MPG cars exist in many places in the world but there seem to be forces holding them back.

Sunday, whatsisname won the big racecar race. He went round and round fast, faster than anybody else, in his fast race car and won. Go racecar man! yeaa!

The other big racecar race on Sunday, the other guy won in another fast racecar that went fast, so fast around and around and around that he beat the other fast racecar racers and won the other big racecar race. Go other racecar man! yeaa!

General Motors is the devil, my mom and dad said so.

I'm one of the few people who really needs a 4 wheel drive high clearance vehicle -- in my copious spare time I do field botany and restoration stuff on forest fire sites, and am starting to do some field sampling for insect labs.

Everyone benefits from a useful hobby (grin) and it gets us outdoors a lot.

That means I drive maybe 2,000 miles a year, half of it on steep forest dirt/gravel roads, some 10% grades. City? Bicycle, walk, take public transportation.

But try to find a 4wd-road truly capable vehicle these days! I'm (shudder) looking at Toyota's new land cruiser model, at a horrible 15 miles per gallon, if I have to buy a new vehicle. And I might. Damn!

(Anyone want to sell me your SUV/4wd vehicle still in good shape? It's stupid to buy new for driving only a few thousand miles a year, but tough to find good used)

I'm wearing out the 1988 4wd low-range gearbox Subaru wagon, 250k miles; kids stole and destroyed my 1983 Tercel 4wd wagon (lost all our camping/ photography/ surveying gear. Good thing I had backed up all the maps and photos and notebooks....)

So it's an odd use -- but once you get ten or twenty miles off the paved roads, all you see is big hulking Dodge, Chevy, Nissan, Mercedes, Ford, Toyota trucks and SUVs. Monsters in the woods!

Hank,

How would a diesel retrofitted classic Land Rover suit you? If you do an eBay search with the key words of "diesel" and "Land Rover", you should get a few hits on a dealer in North Carolina that fits small displacement diesels into Defender 110s and 90s and other rugged old Rovers. Most of the auction listings describe economy in the low to mid 20 mpgs. As I recall they even offer to arrange transportation to their dealership from a local airport. I can imagine few vehicles that would have the off-road moxie of a diesel Rover.

84- 2001 jeep cherokee. (not grand)

light weight ~ 3000 - 3400 lbs

Older models can be had with a diesel.

The 4L I6 produces almost 200 ftlbs of torque @ idle

4 cylinder also availabe

I'm biased I have 2

an 88 with only 146,000 mi
4.0L auto
17.5 mpg last tank
That is with 31" tires and taller springs.
Passed emissions test, produced no measured CO.
HC emissions were also low, 8 ppm (220 allowed)

2001 117,000 mi
4.0L auto
curent tank 19.7 mpg
mpg even with the power robbing mpg sucking california emissions package. (but im not bitter)

Cheap, reliable, clean, good off road, good mpg what more could you want?

Boy, you guys are missing a lot in this discussion. You compare the 170 hp Vue to the 2.2 liter 4 cylinder Vue. These are different engines. The 170 hp Vue is much better (Variable Valve Timing, other enhancements) as well as delivering 25+ additional horsepower over the 2.2 liter in the non-greenline Vue. That is a huge difference. I drive an '04 with that same 2.2 liter engine, and I don't like it. The gas mileage is very good, but that engine is weak. This 2.4 liter 170hp is a great combination for comfortable, spirited driving that also delivers decent performance gains over the 2.2 liter in the standard vue. I think that everyone needs to factor this into the equation, especially when people are praising the 2006 Accord hybrid, with its paltry 25 mpg highway see http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=109182