New Toyota Yaris on its Way to the US in 2006
28 September 2005
|
| 2007 Yaris for the US |
The re-designed Toyota Yaris, which had its world debut at the recent Frankfurt IAA, is on its way to the US in early 2006 as a 2007 model year vehicle. Toyota will stage the premier of the new Yaris for the US at the Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA) Show in November.
The initial US Yaris will use a larger engine (1.5-liter) than its global counterparts, and appear first as a three-door liftback. A 1.5-liter gasoline engine was a standard option on the older Yaris, but Toyota removed it from its initial global lineup for the new Yaris.
The first version of the Yaris, launched in 1999, has been an extremely successful car for Toyota—with the sole exception of in the US market, where it was sold as the Echo and flopped. By contrast, the Yaris today represents 25% of all Toyota sales in Europe.
Toyota introduced the Japanese version of the second-generation model—the Vitz—in February (earlier post), followed by the global premier of the Yaris in Frankfurt earlier this month.
The new Yaris as shown in Frankfurt is slightly larger and roomier than its predecessor. It carries over the 1.3-liter, four cylinder VVT-i gasoline engine from the current range with 64 kW (87 hp) at 6,000 rpm and 121 Nm of torque at 4,200 rpm.
The new model also uses the latest version of the 1.4-liter D-4D 90 diesel which now develops 66 kW (90 hp) at 3,600 rpm and 190 Nm of torque from 1,800 to 3,600 rpm. The D-4D can accelerate the Yaris to 100 km/h in 10.7 seconds, making it the fastest car in the segment amongst those equipped with 1.3—1.5 liter diesel engines.
New to the Yaris range is the advanced 1.0-liter, three cylinder VVT-i gasoline engine which made it debut in the Toyota AYGO (earlier post), and replaces the older 1.0-liter powerplant. The new 1.0-liter engine weighs just 67 kg (148 pounds) yet delivers 51 kW (60 hp) of power at 6,000 rpm and 93 Nm of torque.
The 1.5-liter engine targeted for the US Yaris produces 79 kW (106 hp) at 6,000 rpm and 140 Nm of torque at 4,200 rpm. These parameters are very close to 1.5-liter engine version of the older European Yaris (77 kW/105 hp and 143 Nm torque). That engine consumed 6.8 l/100km of fuel (34.6 mpg) and produced 162 g CO2/km.
| Engines in the New Yaris | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 VVT-i | 1.3 VVT-i | 1.5 VVT-i (US) | 1.4 D-4D | |
| Fuel | Gasoline | Gasoline | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Cylinders | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| Max power (kW/hp) | 51/69 | 64/87 | 79/106 | 66/90 |
| Max torque Nm) | 93 | 121 | 140 | 190 |
| 0–100km/h (s) | 15.7 | 11.5 | NA | 10.7 |
| Fuel consumption (l/100km) | 5.4 | 6.0 | NA | 4.5 |
| Fuel economy (mpg US) | 43.6 | 39.2 | NA | 52.3 |
| Emissions | Euro 4 | Euro 4 | NA | Euro 4 |
| CO2 g/km | 127 | 141 | NA | 119 |
Unlike its cousin the Vitz in Japan, however, the world Yaris does not offer the start-stop function. Toyota did some minor tweaking on the 1.3-liter and 1.4-liter diesel to improve performance compared to the earlier versions, at an accompanying cost of a very slight increase in fuel consumption and CO2 emissions. The new 1.0-liter engine, by contrast, is more efficient than its predecessor.
Sales in Europe begin at the end of 2005.
(A hat-tip to Lou Grinzo!)
Cant wait to test drive the Yaris and Fit back to back.
Posted by: tjts1 | 29 September 2005 at 02:53 AM
I'd be interested only if they bring the start/stop and diesel to Canada.
Posted by: Doug Hawley | 29 September 2005 at 08:56 AM
Doug,
I don't think so. Not the CVT transmission either.
But at least we're getting it much sooner than the US. I think October 17th is the release date.
Posted by: Mikhail Capone | 29 September 2005 at 10:20 AM
Oh, and apparently the new Yaris is ULEV-II while the last version (the Echo hatchback here in Canada) was LEV, IIRC.
Posted by: Mikhail Capone | 29 September 2005 at 10:25 AM
Once again, it's sad that our `Clean Air' laws, which don't take into account carbon dioxide emissions, have made the diesel version of this excellent little car unavailable to us Americans. If you're listening Toyota, try selling ONE diesel model here in the non-CARB states. I suspect it'd sell well given the price of fuel these days.
-mt
Posted by: marshall | 29 September 2005 at 11:42 AM
Won't a new regulation about low sulfur diesel become effective soon (2007, maybe?)..? That could be what everybody is waiting for before introducing diesel engines in North-America.
Posted by: Mikhail Capone | 29 September 2005 at 12:32 PM
Honda UK and EU already has quite a few Diesel options. I'm not familiar with the 2.2i-CTDi engine, but it has combined mileage of 55.4 in the new Civic, which is better than the diesel Yaris.
VW and Mercedes are already boasting increased sales of 10% in the US spurred by recent diesel sales.
Posted by: Dave Lazur | 29 September 2005 at 01:50 PM
55mpg in the UK = 45.7mpg in US gallons. UK gallon is 4.7 litres. US gallon is 3.78 litres.
Posted by: tjts1 | 30 September 2005 at 11:29 AM
45.7 US mpg is around 5.2 liters/100km, if I have calculated right. My Volkswagen Golf Diesel which I have
bought 1983 had that already on good days.
It had a stunning 88 Miles Topspeed with 50 HP and at cold
winterdays you had to be prepared to take the bus if you couldn't start it..
I wonder why you hear so little about the Volkswagen Diesels. They are the only one's with the Jeep Liberty on the market at the moment..
Posted by: Mike Weindl | 30 September 2005 at 01:14 PM
I wonder if the small car mfgs will hybrid the diesel engine? Seems to me it would naturally have a higher mpg than the petrol engines.
Posted by: Dave Lazur | 01 October 2005 at 06:49 AM
Diesel engines could benefit from hybrid drive, but there's already a ~$3000 price difference between a VW gasoline and diesel model, adding hybrid components to that would make for a prohibitively expensive small car, but very fuel efficient.
Posted by: Schwa | 01 October 2005 at 07:09 PM
But you'd get a $2000 tax break if it was a hybrid. Sufficient to offset the excess cost once gas savings are taken into account.
Posted by: Ash | 02 October 2005 at 10:16 AM
There seems to be a premium charge for diesel engines in EU mfgrs. Is that also true for the Toyota & Honda?
Posted by: Dave Lazur | 02 October 2005 at 10:51 AM
Generally. The only vendor who has deliberately zeroed out the price premium on diesels as far as I know is Kia witih its Rio diesel supermini.
Posted by: Mike | 02 October 2005 at 04:15 PM
Do you have engine bay photographs for diesel engine of Toyota Vitz or Yaris (2005-2006)
Posted by: rahane | 04 October 2005 at 10:16 PM
Am I the only one factoring in the encreased longevity of a diesel over gas? If a diesel engine lasts half again as long as a gas, it should be a no brainer as to it's long term viability. In addition, biodiesel seems to be much more viable over ethanol all over the world with the different types of vegetation that can be produced.
Owner of "96 VW Passat TDI.
Posted by: kenneth johnstone | 07 October 2005 at 06:27 AM
Why aren't they offering the 1.0 litre, 3 cylinder version in the US? Why is there always this assumption that there is no market for cars among people that prefer fuel efficiency to "Pep" and rapid acceleration, etc. Always the marketing mindset is that Americans only have the preferences of an 18 yr old: ego, status & fun are all important. They would do well to remember the 1992-95 Civic VX - this is a much sought after car in the used market. If well maintained, it can get over 50 mpg, highway. Also, there was the 1992-94 Geo Metro XFi, w/ 3 cylinder, 5 speed that got 55 mpg. Why can't the Yaris achieve the 50+ mpg that the Metro XFi got 12 yrs ago? Gee, I mean we've had over a decade to further refine the technology.
Posted by: Chris A. | 14 October 2005 at 10:48 AM
I too hope that Toyota brings the diesel version into Canada. With the increases in fuel prices, VW Jetta and
Golf TDI's are EXTREMELY popular. Try and find a good used one these days! Or even a new one - dealers can't get them. It is perplexing why other makers don't introduce diesel powered cars into the North American market. VW Canada is doing extremely well - so why not! The new Yaris appears to be a great car ... I would be at the dealer showroom if a diesel unit were introduced!
Posted by: Brian R. | 19 October 2005 at 12:12 PM
Toyota - Where's the CVT and Start/Stop? Come on, don't screw up and release it in the US without these, especially since Nissan's new subcompact looks to have CVT...
Posted by: Andrew Hime | 26 October 2005 at 07:31 AM
I agree with Kenneth. In fact, if the Yaris merely matches or fails to match the current crop of gas-engine fuel efficient hatchbacks in the world of $3 gas, it's just another piece of crap among the rest of dreck hatchbacks. I don't care what their marketing mavens tell them us folks want(it used to be you majored in Phys ED. if you didn't know what the hell you were doing in college! No wonder we're so obese!). Let alone that french Derrida marketing clown in upstate ny who claims americans only want hummers. I wonder if he put gas price into his psycho-babble equation of what americans want! Of course people want big as they can get given the oil economics. Now both Ford and GM are junk status. I know a lot of wealthy people on down who hang up the phone, etc. when some marketer calls/targets them and who are happily throwing it down for a Prius, etc. A modest fun safe super fuel efficient car is sorely needed in the U.S. right now, along the lines of the old VX. (Safety, fun, and the highest fuel effiency available in a gasoline engine car in the U.S.--get it, marketeers?) It's a national disgrace really that it's not even offered when at the same time it's more blood for oil in the Middle East.
Posted by: seth sherman | 02 November 2005 at 07:47 AM
Rahane (Oct 4, 2005 10:16:55 PM) is completely correct.
Diesels typically go for 400,000+ miles before needing any major engine work compared to 150,000 or less for a gasoline version.
Diesels can run on 100% Bio-Diesel, and blends of Bio-Diesel with petroleum diesel.
Not only is Bio-Diesel a very clean fuel, it has better lubricating properties which will make the current diesels last way past the standard 400,000 mile mark.
Bio-diesel can be manufactured entirely in North America.
THE FACTS ABOUT HYBRIDS.
- Hybrids take a lot more energy and pollute MORE to manufacture.
- Hybrid batteries WILL eventually wear out (around 100,000 miles +/-) and they are not 100% recyclable, which will cause MORE pollution when they start filling up our landfills.
- The extra weight of the hybrid battery and electric motors (in addition to the standard engine) make the vehicle less balanced for weight distribution, and far less safe.
Compare two vehicles of the same weight, one a diesel, one a hybrid. Since a lot of weight is taken up by the battery packs and additional electric motors, that means the structure of the vehicle will be weaker to compensate for the additional weight. With a diesel, more weight can be added to the structure of the vehicle, making it more safe.
- Current AVERAGE price to replace a hybrid battery pack is $3000. Even if the price comes down to $1000, most people who buy cars with 100,000+ miles on them won't be able to afford to buy a new battery pack. When it wears out, and it doesn't get replaced, these hybrids will become gasoline only with additional weight, and pollute MORE.
- The fact that the battery packs will have to be replaced, and the extra complexity of hybrids will require more maintenance, will give hybrids a far LOWER resale value than a diesel of the same car in the same condition.
This is just a small list of negatives hybrids have that most people don't realize.
Hybrids are a fad.
The future is Bio-Diesel.
A clean, green fuel that we can manufacture in North America to eliminate most of our dependence on foreign fuels.
The vehicles and fuel distribution infrastructure for Bio-Diesel are already in place.
When hybrids start filling up our junkyards, diesels will still be running like new cars.
I will never buy a hybrid.
My next car will be a diesel.
Posted by: Bob | 04 November 2005 at 01:11 AM
Dear Mr Sherman!
Sorry to say but even a Diesel powered with BioDiesel has some downsides:
1) All the agricultural area of Germany could not produce enough BioDiesel (RME) to cover the need of all Diesel-Engines in the same country. I am not so sure about North America...
2) Vehicle-Manufacturers (such as VW or Mercedes) let you use BioDiesel instead of fossil Diesel. However, once a problem with the engine occurs that can be traced to gaskets or seals rotted by the BioDiesel, you’re on your own because suppliers such as BOSCH do NOT support the use of RME with their Diesel - equipment.
After driving a VW Lupo 3L TDI (yes, it DOES consume about 3 liters to 100 kilometers) for six years, I cannot understand why the production has been stopped. A comparable successor is not in sight. Although it was comparably expensive, it was (and for me still is) the only proper vehicle to take me from "A" to "B" with the least possible amount of Diesel. Over here in Germany, driving at 100kph can sometimes be a little annoying for others but in the US, rolling along a highway at a constant 55mph should break any record.
I am also waiting for the new Hybrid Yaris. The Prius is nice, but too large and too expensive for me. Plus, five liters of Gasoline to 100 kilometers would increase my "mobility expenses" considerably.
Unfortunately, the German Brands prefer producing SUV's and sportscars that no one can honestly afford. But then, maybe they wake up and offer a "2-litre-car" some time in the future. I will surely check it out.
Let's see, what the future brings.
One thing is however sure: all the fossil fuels will become more and more expensive. And once the alternative fuels, such as BioDiesel or Hydrogen become more popular, the governments will add their share of taxes. And that's what really makes driving a car expensive over here.
Posted by: msx2plus | 04 November 2005 at 04:38 AM
Sorry, I meant to address my post to Bob instead of Mr Sherman.
Mea culpa.
Posted by: msx2plus | 04 November 2005 at 04:39 AM
[Comment deleted, due to impersonation of another by the author. Originating IP address has been banned.]
Posted by: Null | 02 January 2006 at 10:22 PM
I will highly disagree with the bio diesel statements. It works great if you are recycling fry oil but there is only so much of that(most of it is recycled cooking oil right now) Speaking as a farmer, bio diesel and ethonol will NOT work. First of all we cannot produce enough crops to feed sufficiently every one one the planet let alone power all the vehicles. Second to grow the crops needed for the oil, ie rape seed and corn for ethonol, it takes nitrogen, the nitrogen is produced by using large amounts of natural gas. Alot of power is needed to run the tractors to plant, till, and harvest, be it bio or regular diesel. Then more energy is needed to process the crops into the final product, fuel. There has been several studies that have shown that there is a net energy loss in the making of these to fuels and some show a net energy gain. I tend to agree with the first but even if the second does tend to be fact we are talking about single digit effecientcy. Now add to the fact that we would be raping the land as well(modern agriculture already is because there is very little humus being added back to the ground). The only true solution I see is using pure electric vehicles for local use and going back to trains for long distance. Lead acid batteries are compleatly able to be recycled. Electricity would have to be generated by wind, solar steam generators, ocean currents, solar cells(not very effecient) and nuclear(if it is radioactive when dug up whats wrong with buring it in the same place?)
Posted by: Jay Moyer | 31 March 2006 at 09:20 AM