But then, do you end up removing enough battery weight to offset the weight of a whole ICE?
Toyota is the biggest seller of HEV's, Stellantis of PHEV. That's the difference. EV's on paper should be the most reliable, but Tesla is the biggest seller of those. If you want reliability, choose by brand rather than engine type.
Mostly issues with 12V battery, it seemed like.
In the end I bought a Stellantis EV so I probably deserve everything I get - but they are cheap!
Eh, it's not so much nonsensical, as it is that you're just misinterpreting the data.
This conversation here is specifically about powertrain reliability, but that isn't what consumer reports measures. They measure complaints about any feature on the vehicle, including ancillary accessories unrelated to the vehicle's ability to transport people.
But also as you point out, shitty engineering (Stellantis's specialty) is a bigger issue than any particular drivetrain type.
Just think - if two drivetrains were less reliable, wouldn't you see that with the Prius?
On the other hand, a Toyota hybrid doesn’t have a gearbox at all, not even a CVT. Instead it has something similar to a differential, it’s mechanically simple and very reliable. It uses the electric motor in place of a turbo, so that’s another common failure point removed. It doesn’t have a starter motor, and the Atkinson cycle engine should suffer less stress than an equivalent petrol.
Practically the biggest problem is finding a 3rd party garage who will inspect the hybrid parts as part of a service.
Commercial aviation is a great example of taming extreme inherent unsafety of aircraft by applying a lot of resources to the engineering side. Another is space programs.
And car power trains have nothing on those ;) As Toyota has shown, it's totally possible to make reliable hybrid cars with enough engineering thrown at the problem.
So if all things were equal, you'd absolutely expect an EV to be more reliable than a hybrid, but all things are rarely equal.
I hate to break it to you but something like a Rogue or HRV does circles around an Altima or Civic when it comes to daily flexibility and utility for a fairly paltry additional cost. It doesn't take a degree in rocket surgery to figure out why they fly off the shelves. For the average person they're a good combination of attributes.
A practical car is a station wagon, not an SUV, many of which have less storage space.
Please, cut the needless snark. People do buy vehicles for edge cases but the lack of smaller, practical vehicles is driven is large part by manufacturer profit.
I agree that there's a lot of stupidity going on when it comes to station wagons vs crossovers vs compact SUVs and the OEMs really do SUV-ify a lot of things that ought not to be.
The shape of these vehicles is fairly preordained by the nature of the fuel economy regulations and wind resistance and other regulations that apply equally to all of them. You're not gonna find "more space" in something like a Subaru Outback by squashing it on the vertical axis unless you stretch it in another dimension or find somewhere else to find space. Maybe you might be able to eek out a slightly better angle on the hatch or something but it ain't gonna be much. Fuel economy regulations make cars with thicc asses like the big sedans and station wagons of yesterday nonsensical.
The snark is not needless. It is tautologically impossible for the overwhelming majority of people do be "doing it wrong" on a matter that is in large part a subjective one of preference. If someone wants to assert that then I will talk down to them.
People buy these small SUVs left and right because they're seemingly the best option when it comes to well rounded boring A to B vehicles.