Personal Picks: Luxury SUVs

Luxury SUVS…are there more politically-incorrect vehicles on the road today? The December test group of $58,000-$71,000 machines might seem like a head-scratcher now. But, surprisingly, our subscribers tell us in our Annual Questionnaire that they own these things: we have significant data on Toyota Land Cruisers, Porsche Cayennes, and Land Rover Range Rover Sports. However, we do not have enough data on the Hummer H2. It’s probably not a stretch to say that Consumer Reports subscribers and H2 owners usually don’t go together. So, why do we test them? To cover the full spectrum of mainstream models to empower our readers to make informed decisions.

What would we buy if we won the lottery? Here’s a look:

Tom Mutchler: If I’m in the market for a $60,000 SUV (trust me – I’m not), I don’t want to wind up annoyed every time I drive it. I don’t want the nagging feeling that a cheaper model was bigger and more capable. And when I drive it, I really don’t want people waving at me with less than five fingers.

That limits my choices here. The Porsche Cayenne annoys me: it has a stiff ride, tight seats, illegible optional $1,200 (!) brown-faced gauges, and inscrutable radio controls. A sweet exhaust note and good grip just aren’t enough to win me over. As nice as the Toyota Land Cruiser is, the Sequoia has a lot more space and tows more. (I can live without the LC’s cool “crawl” off-road mode for $10,000 less.) Unless I had to climb a rock hill everyday to get to work, a Hummer H2 isn’t in the cards. Passersby aren’t exactly afraid to share their opinions – pro and con – about the H2, either.

Even though I feel a bit guilty about it, I really like our Land Rover Range Rover Sport. It’s fetching in Lucerne green and pale leather; it’s no surprise that an identical truck was part of the prolific product placement on the aiming-at-the-upscale Bravo TV show “Top Design.” You sit up high and there are big windows. Power isn’t generous without the optional supercharger, but the HSE’s V8 sounds really good. Finally, the Sport handles a lot better than our 2005 LR3, which shares this truck’s platform.

I’m a logical guy. Land Rover is at the bottom of CR’s reliability ratings. An Acura MDX is a far more practical purchase. And the RR’s profligate with fuel. But I’m happy to put a (non-alcoholic) beverage into the Sport’s console refrigerator, go for a drive, and be happy that nothing’s broke on it yet.

Gabe Shenhar: If you’re going to be politically-incorrect and socially irresponsible, and still get your bonus this year, you might as well go all the way and treat yourself. Right? Truthfully, nobody actually “needs” any one of these four indulgent SUVs; there are other vehicles that do the same for less.

That said, I found myself enjoying two of these luxury SUVs for entirety different reasons. The Land Cruiser, with its comfortable ride, quiet cabin and utterly amazing off-road ability impresses the heck out of me. But as a suburban family three-row SUV, its tall stance, clumsy handling and compromised packaging detract. And, for that lofty price, I could get a Mercedes-Benz GL320 diesel that drives beautifully and gets decent gas mileage.

I also like driving the Cayenne. It’s one of the few SUVs you can truly hustle in corners, and it has the great steering and brake feel of a Porsche. The catapult and sound of the V8 is addicting. You put up with the stiff ride and some unintuitive controls, but what else do you expect for $70,000? Rationally speaking, however, there isn’t a whole lot the Cayenne does that the BMW X5 doesn’t do, other than being more exclusive.

Rick Small: I’m not a big fan of this group. The Cayenne is relatively sporty but heavy and large – seems like a rolling oxymoron. It really can’t do “sporty” very well and it’s too expensive. The Land Cruiser does a good job as a large luxury SUV. But for me it’s too big and clumsy to drive every day. If you need this size vehicle and want some luxury, the Cruiser is a good choice. The Range Rover is expensive and great off-road but not as comfortable or reliable as the Land Cruiser. I don’t think too many people do serious off-roading with a vehicle this expensive, anyway. The Hummer tows well but is not very roomy. It’s also expensive (do you see a pattern here?), thirsty and very awkward to drive. For my money, I would choose a three-row Mazda CX-9 or Honda Pilot. These are much less expensive, reliable, use less fuel and are better every day drivers than these luxurious beasts. The CX-9 favors the sporty side while the Pilot leans more toward comfort.

Mike Quincy: The Cayenne, Range Rover Sport and (especially) the Hummer are train wrecks: people can’t help but stare and be oddly fascinated by what they see. If I had to pick my 9-year-old son up from school or at a friend’s house, he loved it when I showed up in the H2. If my wife and I were going out, she was always a bit more jazzed to see the Cayenne. And I agree with Tom’s assessment of the Range Rover Sport: it’s surprisingly nice to drive. But to keep these brutes running means paying hefty bills – either for gas, maintenance or both. At least the Land Cruiser has a history of good reliability, but its 14 mpg overall makes me cringe.

The truth is that if I’m spending crazy money, I’d rather have a good pickup truck than any of the models we’ve covered here. But I’ll stick with the “luxury” theme and treat myself to a top-of-the-line GMC Sierra Denali crew-cab pickup. Though still a gasoline pig, it has style, luxury, one of the best sounding and smoothest V8s around, and I can actually haul stuff without worrying about it getting dirty. I’ll also save enough to buy a new road bike (hint, hint…Christmas is coming, honey). In reality, I can’t afford the truck, though, but maybe the bike.

Automotive turkeys 2008

The word “turkey” means different things to different people. Thanksgiving, for many, is a great time for turkey…unless you’re a turkey. For those of us who drive different cars every day, we sometimes come across features that rank as turkeys – perhaps the designers/engineers created them with the best of intentions, but in the real world, they prove frustrating. We’ve already written enough about BMW’s iDrive, perhaps the biggest automotive turkey of all time. Some turkeys are nice ideas that simply fall short.

In an informal poll in and around the Consumer Reports Auto Test Center, I’ve come up with some other turkeys that particularly rankle our feathers:

•    Sirius radio reception in wooded, tree shade areas is awful. Also, some car audio systems have a long delay, making you wait to see the title of the satellite radio station identification.

•    Automatic door locks that don’t unlock when you park or allow a choice to set the locks to unlock when the car is turned off. This maybe a good feature for those who want the security in a tough neighborhood, but consumers should at least be given the choice. (This turkey was mentioned more than once.)

•    The government giving a tax credit if you buy a 19-mpg Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid but nothing if you buy a 32-mpg Toyota Corolla or 29 mpg Ford Focus.

·    Outside mirrors that automatically turn and give you a view of the ground below when shifting to reverse. While this offers a good view of the curb, it makes using the mirrors to back out of a long driveway useless. Convex or larger mirrors do it all.

•    Chrysler announcing its hybrid Aspen and Dodge Durango SUVs and then unceremoniously killing them four weeks later.

·    Mini Cooper’s radio controls (see photo above), which are scattered all around the center stack. The radio’s volume knob, for example, is mounted separate from the radio head unit, lower on the dashboard. It’s easy to grab the radio’s other knob by mistake; even though that’s a multi-function knob, it only serves as a tuning knob if you push the “m” button first. (Of course!) It also takes several button presses to change radio modes.

·    Re-inventing a wheel that wasn’t broken in the first place. For example: Some keyless ignitions work OK, but some “Start” buttons are hard to find and require a push-and-hold process to start the car. The worst are those on BMWs and Mini Coopers that require using a fob placed in a slot and then pressing a start button. What was wrong with a key?

·    Big key fobs are maybe OK if you use a purse, but they’re bulky in a pant’s pocket. Kneel down at just the wrong angle, and the panic button can be activated, resulting in the car’s horn going off and waking up the neighborhood.

•    Acura’s styling department is a whole, gobbling turkey within itself. Have you seen the beaks on the TL, TSX and RL? I can’t tell them apart. They all look like grinning teenagers with mouths full of braces.

•    The headlights in the Toyota Prius Touring. On a scale of 1-5 (with 5 being the tops), these lights got a 1. Even with Xenon bulbs, low-beam light doesn’t provide enough illumination forward to allow the driver time to see and react to objects in the road. The lights also have a distinct ramp-shaped cutoff between light and darkness at the top of the low-beam pattern. These lights leave us in the dark.

•    Paying a premium to buy a Smart (ours was just under $16,000) to get 39 mpg overall but putting up with the limitations of being able to seat only two people, limited cargo room, and maybe the worst transmission ever, when--for about the same a price--you could get a Honda Fit or Toyota Yaris, which seat five, and are infinitely more comfortable and (in the Fit’s case) fun to drive.

Anyway, that’s our short list. I’m sure we could go on, but you get the point. What particular car controls, models, or manufacturers drive you bonkers? Pass the gravy, and share your automotive turkeys in the Comments below.

--Mike Quincy

2008 SEMA - Sleepers and creepers

Given SEMA’s tendency towards the extreme, its refreshing to see two groups of concept vehicles here that buck the trend. Call them sleepers and creepers.

A sleeper is a car that is faster than its looks let on. Two notable manufacturer-tuned cars here this year illustrate this. Subaru brought a concept Forester XTi to the show; beneath the boxy styling beats the drivetrain of an Impreza STi. (Watch our Impreza STi video review.) Calm down the show-floor paintwork, and this seems like quite a good way to get your family to the slopes on time - once you put on winter tires.

It’s a bit hard to call any Dodge Challenger a sleeper, but given what lurks under the hood of the Challenger SRT10, that term may apply. Note the SRT10 designation – as in the 10-cylinder engine from the current Dodge Viper. This car is a favorite among CR’s auto test engineers here at SEMA. As Jen Stockburger put it, "It’s the best of both worlds. You get the Viper’s engine and you don’t burn your legs getting in and out." With Chrysler trying to find a buyer for the Viper line, maybe they should hold onto a few engines.

As for creepers: a lot of the four-wheel-drive trucks here seem to be emulating Bigfoot. (Not the hairy one.) They’re jacked way up in the air, have lots of chrome, and big power mods. There was even an aftermarket lifted 2009 Forester that almost looked almost menacing.

In that vein, I like the contrast of seeing bare-bones elemental off-roaders here. Two trucks here came to mind. Jeep showed their Wrangler "J8 Sarge," an open-back basic Wrangler with a turbodiesel four-cylinder from VM, the same company that supplied the diesel in the Liberty a few years back. Given Jeep’s heritage and the fact that even the $30,000 Wrangler four-door hardtop we tested wasn’t a paragon of refinement, this idea seems right.

The same goes for the Toyota Tacoma concept. Even the name is basic. This four-cylinder truck harkens back stylistically to the mid-80s. Seeing this off-white truck with vertical brown-gray stripes across the floor, I thought they had restored an old truck. Even the brown Recaro-labeled fabric on the seats (not to be confused with actual bolstered Recaro seats themselves) harkens back in time. But once you get up close and can put the size into scale, the largeness of the current Tacoma compared to the (much smaller) older trucks becomes more obvious. Mechanical upgrades were mostly limited to swapping in the axles and transfer case of the very capable FJ Cruiser.

This is one of the joys of SEMA for the enthusiast—the idea that there really does seem to be something for everyone.

—Tom Mutchler

Read about more cars, gear, news, and views from SEMA.

                                                                                                           

                   

Personal Picks: 3-row SUVs

Times are tough if you’re selling SUVs these days. While many families like the space offered by midsized and larger three-row SUVs, they’re often concerned about fuel economy. Once you add AWD and common options, these vehicles don’t come cheap, either – a problem in a tight economy. Finally, while big truck-based SUVs used to generate big profits, sales are moving toward car-based alternatives. So how do you sell such vehicles in this climate?

Gathered in the November 3-row SUV test group are some of the latest efforts from Detroit and Japan. But as far as fuel economy goes, if you want the best you have to pony up over $40,000 for a Toyota Highlander Hybrid—but it returns an impressive 24 mpg overall. At the other end of the spectrum are the old-style, truck-based SUVs, such as the Cadillac Escalade, Dodge Durango, Ford Expedition, and Nissan Armada, which all get 13 mpg overall.

But are these vehicles necessary? Here’s a look at what we would choose if we wanted a three-row SUV in our garage:

Rick Small: Within this category, I like to drive the Mazda CX-9 the most. It has quicker response and a sportier feel to it than other competing models. The driving position is pretty good for my tall frame. But fuel economy could be better – it gets just 16 mpg overall. The new Ford Flex was a pleasant surprise; it’s quiet and rides very well. It has plenty of room in the second-row seat and a useful third row. While I like the versatile cargo area is, I wish the driving position was more comfortable.

We also have the latest version of the GM’s three-row crossovers, the Chevrolet Traverse. So far it’s very similar to the Buick Enclave and Saturn Outlook versions we previously tested. The Traverse has a good ride, fairly responsive handling, and a roomy second-row seat and useful cargo area. Unfortunately, the Enclave, Outlook and Acadia all have below-average predicted reliability. (We have no data yet for the new Traverse.)

The Honda Pilot does most things pretty well; it gets a little better fuel economy than the others here and we predict above-average reliability. You couldn’t go wrong by buying it – just don’t look for a sporty experience.

Tom Mutchler: As our Ratings show, the three-row SUV market is crowded with a lot of good choices. In fact, I’m having a hard time narrowing down which one I’d buy. I’ve very happily taken long road trips in our Mazda CX-9, Ford Flex, and our previously tested Buick Enclave. Which one you prefer depends on details: the CX-9 has sporty handling, the Flex has distinctive looks, and the Enclave blends room with luxury.

Maybe the reason I’m having a hard time picking a three-row SUV is that I’d rather own a minivan. (Indeed, I do.)

Beyond towing my someday-Airstream, there isn’t anything that I would need a SUV to do that a minivan can’t do better. My Honda Odyssey has much more cargo volume, allowing me to haul my whitewater kayaks and mountain bikes (standing up!) inside with room to spare. There’s more passenger space, with business-class accommodations in the second-row captains chairs. Like the CX-9, the spry Odyssey is surprisingly fun on twisty back roads, as proven convincingly on a vacation turn on Skyline Drive. On that same trip, I averaged 25 mpg, far better fuel economy than I got out of the SUVs. (Our test results show similar benefits.)

Sure, I don’t have AWD, but a set of Bridgestone Blizzak snow tires improve snowy road stopping and turning beyond just the traction gains of AWD. I do wish it was quieter inside, like the Flex and Enclave, but a Toyota Sienna rivals them.

Nope, a minivan isn’t cool. No one dreams of conquering the Sahara or the arctic tundra behind the wheel of a minivan. But for hauling your family or lots of stuff, you can’t do better.

Mike Quincy: Since my life doesn’t include towing heavy trailers or going very far off-road, I’m still sticking with the Toyota Highlander Hybrid. It’s the king here for fuel economy, predicted reliability is off-the-charts good, and it drives more like a nice car than a truck. I also find it more entertaining to drive (and quieter) than most minivans. I still like GM’s Traverse/Enclave/Outlook/Acadia lineup, but my wish that I made for these a little over a year ago for “a torquey turbo-diesel engine” still hasn’t come true. But now, more than ever, is the time for fuel efficiency. With improved fuel economy, GM could right the listing SUV ship.

3-row SUVs - Road test and videos

Our November test group evaluated 3-row SUVs. These large vehicles have been favorites with families, offering seating for up to eight, four-wheel-drive capability, and plenty of cargo space.

The full road test from the magazine has been posted at ConsumerReports.org, along with videos hosted by our automotive experts. These videos highlight the strengths and weaknesses of each model, bringing the road tests to life.

SUVs tested include the new Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid, distinctive Ford Flex, upgraded Mazda CX-9, redesigned Honda Pilot, and truck-based Toyota Sequoia.

At the other end of the spectrum from these people-movers, read our Smart ForTwo review and watch the video. It may be cute and fuel efficient, but be forewarned: the ForTwo finished at the bottom of our subcompact car Ratings.

In the December issue, we’ll report on luxury SUVs.

—Desiree Calamari

Toyota announces natural-gas Camry hybrid

The first alternative-fuel car of the 2008 Los Angeles Auto Show has already been announced; Toyota will combine natural-gas and hybrid power in its CNG (compressed natural gas) Camry hybrid concept. (Camry SE shown.)

While natural-gas cars get roughly equivalent fuel economy as those powered by gasoline, the key difference is that emissions are cleaner. Plus, natural gas is clean-burning and in abundant supply in North America. However, tanks to hold natural gas are very large and hold relatively little fuel. Thus CNG-fueled cars tend to have a fairly modest driving range. And with only about 500 CNG stations nationwide open to consumers, the short range is a big problem. The hybrid system helps alleviate that somewhat. Our gasoline-powered Camry Hybrid had a range of 600 miles, so if the CNG version has conservatively half the range (roughly the same relationship of the Honda Civic Hybrid compared to the Civic CNG), it would be close to that in most gasoline cars.

In our testing of a gasoline-powered Camry Hybrid, we noted its relatively small trunk, worsened by constrained access resulting from the hybrid-battery cooling systems. With a large CNG tank, the trunk may be tiny. We’ll keep you posted when we see the car next month at the L.A. Auto Show.

For now, the CNG Camry Hybrid is a concept car; Toyota announced no plans to build more of them.

Look for live, daily coverage of the Los Angeles Auto Show starting November 19th.

—Eric Evarts

Learn more about fuel economy in our guide to driving green.

 

$750 billion bailout contains a gift to GM

A little noticed part of the giant $750 billion economic bailout package passed recently to shore up banks by allowing taxpayers to buy up bad loans and bank stock is a provision promoting electric cars. Make that plug-in hybrid vehicles, including the Chevrolet Volt. 

Under the provision, buyers of the Volt would receive a tax credit of $7,504, the highest available on a car. The new law gives higher tax credits for cars with bigger batteries. In effect, these batteries would be too large to be charged just by an onboard engine in a traditional hybrid and would have to be plugged in to recharge. So far General Motors and Toyota are the only automakers that have announced plans to produce plug-in hybrid vehicles in the near future. However, pure electric cars that run on batteries would also qualify, such as the Tesla Roadster, and small electric commuter vehicles.

General Motors had been lobbying Congress for higher tax credits on the Volt, claiming that its large, advanced battery pack would push the price of the car beyond the reach of average consumers.

In June, General Motors Vice Chairman of Global Product Development Bob Lutz said the Volt  would have to cost $40,000 for GM to break even on the car.

Earlier, the company indicated a target price for the Volt of around $30,000 to make it competitive with other high-priced small sedans. The $7,500 tax credit could go a long way toward making the Volt affordable for consumers.

-- Eric Evarts

Edited 10/24/08

Replacement costs drop for hybrid batteries

A frequently voiced concern about hybrids centers around the high cost of replacement batteries, which have ranged up to about $3,000. Now some relief may be on the way. Toyota announced last month that it has reduced the price of replacement batteries for the current (2002-2009) Prius by $686, to $2,299. Batteries for the first-generation Prius dropped $397 to $2,588.

That still seems like a lot of money. But overall, we have found hybrids to be very reliable in our subscriber surveys and relatively inexpensive to own. Automakers are required to warranty batteries for 8 years and 80,000 miles nationwide or 10 years and 150,000 miles in states that follow California emissions regulations. Relatively few hybrids have exceeded that mileage yet.

Given the length of the battery warranty, even if a hybrid owner does have to replace the battery pack after 80,000 or 150,000 miles, the cost is comparable to the cost of a transmission, which would likely have failed in other cars before that point. And hybrids have fewer other issues, which more makes up for any added battery cost.

Toyota says it has been able reduce costs in part by building its own batteries through its joint venture with Panasonic, through Panasonic EV Battery Corp., thereby reducing the impact from the battery middleman. And the company says it expects battery price drops to continue.

The nickel-metal hydride batteries in the all of the current hybrid vehicles are also recyclable which may help with price reductions.

Cheaper batteries are good news for more than owners of hybrids today. Electric cars, and hybrids that plug in for extra power are the most promising near-term alternative to oil consumption. And those cars will require bigger and better batteries to meet consumer demands for performance and range.

The next generation of advanced batteries are called lithium-ion batteries, like the one we had installed in the plug-in Prius we are testing. Lithium Ion batteries are smaller and lighter for the same energy storage capacity and so lend themselves better to full electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles. However, they cost even more than nickel-metal hydride batteries. And expensive lithium-ion batteries are the biggest stumbling block to building more electric cars. So the race is on to lower the price of batteries across the board.

Toyota will start building lithium-ion batteries in 2009 and mass-producing them in 2010, the company says. But Toyota’s National Manager of Advance Technology Vehicles Bill Reinert says the company is already looking beyond lithium ion for future energy storage.

Dilithium crystals or a Flux Capacitor, anyone?

—Eric Evarts

Learn more about alternative fuels in our guide to driving green. And read "Taking charge: Toyota Prius plug-in hybrid."

Taking charge: Toyota Prius plug-in hybrid

Several companies have begun converting Toyota Priuses and Ford Escape Hybrids to plug-in vehicles. Having watched this aftermarket industry develop, we have had our Prius Touring converted to a plug-in for evaluation, sacrificing a factory warranty for science. Toyota, too, has taken notice and developed its own plug-in Prius, which it showed at the Los Angeles Auto Show last November. The company plans to offer a production plug-in Prius based on the next-generation car by 2012.

Like today’s hybrids, plug-ins improve gas mileage by using both electricity and a gasoline engine to power the car. However, plug-ins have bigger batteries than ordinary hybrids, and the batteries can’t be recharged by the engine alone. They have to be recharged by being plugged in, much like a cell phone or laptop. Automakers and automotive engineering organizations say that electricity is a much more efficient power source for a car—as much as three times more efficient than a gas engine. So when the cars run on electricity, they can save money on operating costs compared with burning gasoline. To be truly green in terms of emissions, however, the source of your electricity also needs to be "clean" (that is, not from a coal-burning powerplant)

Most plug-in hybrids are rated according to how many miles they can drive on electric power without using the gas engine. Some future models, such as the Chevrolet Volt and the Fisker Karma, can drive up to 40 miles (according to the manufacturers) without ever using the gas engine. Chrysler has recently shown prototypes making similar claims.

Toyota says its factory Prius conversion has an electric range of just seven miles. It has an additional 6.5 amp/hour battery pack in the spare tire well. Unlike in our converted car, there is no spare tire.

I had a chance to drive the Toyota version of a current Prius (which is still not for sale) on a trip to Portland last week to attend the Toyota Sustainable Mobility Seminar. The iridescent green and gray version we drove in Portland wasn’t fully charged when we got in. (Charging takes three to four hours from a 110-volt household outlet.) With the EV-mode button switched on, we were able to drive all around downtown Portland on a trip of about four miles, and the gas engine never started during normal driving. It sparked to life only when I intentionally accelerated hard once to see what would happen. Even pulling out into traffic from an uphill ramp out of a parking garage, the engine didn’t turn on. Toyota claims their plug-in Prius will go 60 mph in EV mode before starting the engine. We didn’t have a chance to test that claim.

While Toyota’s plug-in Prius was impressive, and may represent the way many future cars will operate, don’t expect to find it at dealerships, ever. The real promised plug-in Prius will be a new, next-generation design, and it may be smaller than the current body-style Prius we drove.

—Eric Evarts

Read our "Green tour of the Detroit auto show" and "We plug in our Toyota Prius hybrid."

Saving gas, beyond the car

Taking a hard look at the relationship between peak oil (when the maximum rate of oil extraction is reached) and water shortages paints a grim picture.

Oil supplies from non-OPEC sources have already peaked, according to Dr. Peter Wells, an oil industry consultant who works for Toyota. Drilling may produce new sources, but they are likely to be much smaller and many times more expensive to extract than existing wells. Producing energy from untapped sources (such as shale and tar sands), as well as producing alternative energy requires massive amounts of water that the U.S. currently doesn’t have.

Back-to-back presentations on these subjects at the recent Toyota Sustainable Mobility Seminar were enough to dampen the car enthusiasm of a room full of automotive journalists. In the final analysis, nothing is ever likely to be as cheap or convenient as the light, sweet crude oil of years past. 

This raises two key questions: As a society, where do we go from here? And if you’re in the business of making cars, how do you plan your future?

The answer to both questions involves learning to use less gas – and soon. The event last week in Portland, Oregon, showcased the alternatives. Portland has two forms of light rail (transit and trolleys), in addition to buses, car sharing, bike lanes, and even skateboard lanes and electric vehicle charging stations. With voter support, the city imposed an urban growth boundary in 1973 to limit sprawl, preserve open space, and concentrate development downtown. One effect was to reduce the need for cars and to make riding public transportation attractive. As some automotive journalists noted, it also reduced congestion and made the city more attractive for car drivers.

Other cities around the world and in the U.S. have made similar efforts. Boulder, Colorado, has a similar growth boundary. New York City is debating implementing a toll for bringing cars into the city, as London does already. Curitiba, a city in the south of Brazil, saves tax dollars by substituting bus lanes for light rail.

A tour of Portland revealed that the plan has helped make the city a vibrant, attractive place to live.

One afternoon, I had a few hours to kill before my flight home. I had read about a new mixed-use development in the Portland suburbs designed for people to be able to walk to stores and to the Max light-rail line. I decided to jump on the Max line and see if it was as easy to access as the city claimed. It couldn’t have been simpler to walk the four blocks to the Max, wait for the right train, ride 20 minutes, and walk 1/2-block into the development, called Orenco, in the city of Hillsboro. Orenco proved to have attractive single-family homes, as well as townhouses with hidden two-car garages, condos, and lots of parks.

My brief excursion demonstrated that with the right planning, you can build appealing communities with the promise to reduce oil consumption by reducing the need to travel, as well as by replacing individual gasoline-powered cars with alternative fuels. (Long-term sustainability and application to varied communities in other locales is an open question, though it is an appealing prospect.)

Apparently Toyota thinks so too, as it is donating four of its used battery-powered RAV4 SUVs to the city for use in a city car sharing fleet.

—Eric Evarts