Apart from the Hilux two other Toyota models caught my attention in the dealership’s showroom, while waiting for the safety inspection of my own car. Those were their latest models, both introduced in 2016. The Proace panel van and the C-HR, the Coupé High Rider.
The new second generation of the Proace panel van has been developed in cooperation with PSA (Peugeot and Citroën) from France. The first 2013 generation was merely a Toyota badge slapped on the grille of the already existing Peugeot Expert, Citroën Jumpy and Fiat Scudo. At that point Toyota didn’t have a panel van to offer; previously, their own venerable Hiace was withdrawn from the European market.
The second generation is the result of a recent PSA-Toyota partnership, meanwhile Fiat has left the building. PSA and Toyota seem to get along fine, basically since they founded the TPCA (Toyota Peugeot Citroën Automobile) joint venture in 2002 for the development and production of a small A-segment hatchback: the Toyota Aygo, Citroën C1 and Peugeot 107-currently known as 108.
Back to the Proace Compact van displayed in the showroom, which is the shortest version with a payload capacity of 1,125 kg (2,480 lbs). There’s also a Proace with a longer wheelbase, while the biggest model combines the longer wheelbase with an extended rear overhang. The latter is also available as a double cab panel van.
From top to bottom: Toyota Proace, Peugeot Expert and Citroën Jumpy. All front wheel drive with a MacPherson front suspension and a double wishbone rear suspension. Some direct competitors are the Volkswagen Transporter T6, the Ford Transit Custom (not sold in US), the Renault Trafic and the Mercedes-Benz Vito (Metris in US).
The PSA-Toyota triplet is also offered as a chassis-cab, which means you can have pretty much any custom-built body you want. The engines are state of the art PSA inline-4 diesels, either with 1.6 liter (95 or 115 hp) or 2.0 liter (122, 150 or 177 hp) displacement. All vans are built in PSA’s production facility in Valenciennes, France.
Peugeot, Citroën and Toyota also offer a minibus version with a more luxurious interior. Toyota calls theirs the Proace Verso.
The transmission choices are a 5-speed manual for the base models and a 6-speed manual or automatic for the more powerful models.
As you can see the cab, with three seats, is completely separated from the cargo compartment.
Here’s the longest Proace panel van with a double cab.
And now for something completely different, this is Toyota’s culture shock I found under the Christmas tree, the all new C-HR.
Good handling and driving dynamics were main attention points during its development. Or as the Japanese chief of design said in an interview I read recently: “Europeans don’t brake for an obstacle in a corner, they steer around it without reducing speed”.
The engine options are a 116 hp 1.2 liter inline-4 turbocharged gasoline engine and the well-known 1.8 liter hybrid powertrain, 122 hp combined, as used in the Prius and other models.
A C-HR 4wd is also offered, in which case you get the 1.2 liter turbo engine combined with an automatic transmission.
So far the late December mini showroom tour. Oh yes, of course the good ol’ Land Cruiser passed the safety inspection completely hassle-free. Take good care of your machinery and your machinery will take good care of you.
(Editor’s Postscript: the C-HR will be coming to the US as a 2018 model. Powertrains will be different, with only a naturally aspirated 2.0L four making 140 hp teamed with a CVT, and only in FWD. The C-HR is aimed primarily at Europe, and Toyota expects up to 75% of them there to be the hybrid version, as a cleaner alternative to diesels, which are not offered at all on the C-HR. Given current low gas prices, Toyota does not see enough demand for a hybrid version in the US at this time.)
Nissan has a panel van about the same size in the states. Toyota should too.
Without looking up the specs, the NV200 is smaller than this, and the NV is probably bigger. This is in between those two, although the larger versions would probably overlap the NV somewhat.
The big advantage compared to the NV is that it’s FWD, which means a lower floor and better space utilization.
That’s correct, the Nissan NV200 is smaller. Less cargo space, less payload capacity.
The Nissan NV300 (aka Renault Trafic / Opel Vivaro / Fiat Talento) would be the direct Proace competitor.
I’ve long thought the one major category Toyota doesn’t have in the US is a cargo van (or any mid-size or full-size van). I don’t know why they don’t bring one of these over. Actually yes I do, the 25% “chicken tax”. But they could circumvent that the same way Ford does with the Transit Connect – import only passenger vans which arent subject to the 25% tariff, then strip out the rear seats and windows and replace with steel panels.
I’m starting to believe Toyota has a meth problem in their studios. That C-HR is horrid inside and out. The rear door handles may be the worst I’ve ever seen.
Interesting point of view. I’ve had a close look at the one in our company car park and I think it’s the best looking family-size Toyota you can buy in Europe. Autocar road test praised the interior. Exterior looks so much better than things like the Juke. If I ever need a “tall” car, this will be the one.
Toyota’s goal is to sell 100,000 of them in Europe. That’s annually. It was received well by the press, and the interest from the public looks promising.
Saw it on a TV ad last night. I’m with Phil on this – it’s hideous! But then again I don’t like SUVs anyway, let alone ones with far too much surface detail going on.
100,000? Hmmm… Judging by their performance here so far, they will probably sell 20 in Austria.
Toyota seems to going for an Imperial Stormtrooper vibe with their recent front fascias.
My take is that they are trying to say “See, we’re not boring! Really!”, to rejuvenate their image, and with the C-HR in particular going for the youth market by actively driving away older potential customers with the styling.
+1 (and Motor Trend agrees with you on the door handles, Phil…)
CC Effect AGAIN! ;o)
I got my monthly issue (2/17) of Motor Trend over this past weekend and in the “Trend” section was entitled “Attack of the Cute Utes” and featured this car.
Now, last time I checked, a “Coupe” has 2 doors, right? If you are going to lie to us Toyota, and try to hide the read doors, then do a better job hiding those door handles, please!
Actually, a “coupe” was never limited to two doors. It comes from the French “cut down”, meaning a shortened body style, compared to a full-size one. And compared to a CUV, this one does fit that definition.
I stand corrected, and thanks, Paul. Now that you mention it, the Saturn SC2 was a 3 door coupe, and upon further review, I noticed that the Mazda RX-8 was actually a 4 door coupe. You certainly wouldn’t call an RX-8 a sedan! ;o)
Perhaps then, by that definition, a ’68 Impala 2 door hardtop would NOT be considered a coupe, as it is not shortened, but exactly the same length as a 4 door Impala of the same generation. I suppose we yanks changed the definition of the word to our liking, or as does happen, words and language evolve. The word “decimate” comes to mind. The way it is used now, does not fit with its original definition which was “to take one tenth”.
Anyone that sees a lot the PSA vans (like me) can immediately realize that the aesthetics come from the French, so Toyota’s input must have been merely chassis (if they have done that) and quality control.
That said, when I see reviews of the TPCA A segment triplets I literally laugh as the Toyota is favoured being the same car
Let there be no mistake that it’s a French van. I think that Toyota’s biggest input was a bag of money. A wise decision. An automaker that can develop and build a better compact FWD diesel van than PSA and/or Renault has yet to be founded.
They also supplied the badge 😉 . So their involvement was inferior to the A segments, whose first gen was Toyota developed (the only PSA part I recognise are mirrors and the distinctive 206 door handles)
PSA and Renault. The cockroaches of van market. Just step to the street and one of those will pass by you.
I think the VW T5 and T6 are pretty good vans too, but now they won’t share designs with no one.
That’s usually how these things go, they trade their individual strength between them. There was a lot of first gen Toyota Yaris over the Toyota Aygo, Citroën C1 and Peugeot 107 triplets, fed by a threepot Daihatsu engine. It’s not like the French don’t know how to build small cars, but Toyota are masters in doing that with an unequalled trade-off between high quality, price point, and profit margin. It’s simply very difficult to produce a profitable small car that is good enough and cheap enough for that price segment. The same goes for building vans, where the French are masters of doing that, so it seems it’s a win-win for both PSA and Toyota, trading these things between them.
Starting to get an idea now, thanks 🙂
They are doing like Mercedes and Renault!
Mercedes gets the small dCi diesels and the Kangoo, Renault gets the engineering for some Infiniti models.
Those in the market for a used and cheap runabout can do much worse than getting a used 1.0 Citroën C1. Those cars will serve well for a long time.
“Europeans don’t brake for an obstacle in a corner, they steer around it without reducing speed”.
Sounds like my kind of driving! Alas, not many of my fellow citizens think this way, hence BMWs braking for broad curves.
“Texans don’t slow down for speed bumps!” ― Gallagher
The C-HR’s taillights have the same tortured look that the new Civic’s does. Stylistic desperation?
I thought the same thing about the C-HR’s taillights, except they almost look more like the previous generation of the Civic right at the end (2015) prior to transitioning to the 2016 model, as car makers are wont to do. But then that could be just my eyes. My 2016 Civic Coupe’s taillights are different that the sedan’s pictured below.
Car companies do this though, they try to emulate what’s popular and trending. Remember EVERYONE seemed to have full width taillights in the 90’s, and the angular wedge look (as I call it) that was popularized by Mercedes in the 00’s, and then EVERYONE soon followed?
I think when people say all cars look the same, homogenous taillight design plays a big part, as that’s most of what you see on cars outside your own on any given day and it’s become much harder to tell one brand from another – as a kid in the 90s I could still easily tell regular cars apart by their tails from a mile away – The dawn of angular wedge look as you call it(I call them triangle lights) is where my skills began to be tested, and continues to today. I don’t find any “trending”(god I HATE that word) taillight designs attractive either, the only modern backsides I think look any good are the 2011- current Charger and some other Dodge models with similar LED loop taillights, and the Mustang’s classic three segments. Everything else looks like a Kia.
“Everything else looks like a Kia” – Matt; that should be the ‘Quote of the Day’!
When I was looking for a commuter car to place my Mustang on pleasure driving only status, that’s one of the things that turned me off to so many of the choices out there today. But never in a million years did I think I’d ever get myself a Civic, as they’ve always (in recent years anyway) looked very boring to me. At least the most recent one looks like something other than a Kia or its sister brand Hyundai. The coupe caught my eye. Hopefully in a few years hence, it won’t join the ranks of the boring to me. I love it (for now).
I still don’t like the way the taillights look on the sedan, but the coupe has a more subdued style, albeit with a really cool (to my eyes anyway) LED strip that goes between the taillights and fades towards the center. This looks really neat at night when they are illuminated.
Oh, and FWIW, I too hate the word “trending”… thanks Twitter for ruining THAT one. ;o)
Agree about the styling on the new Civic. Not the prettiest but very interesting to look at. Took an Uber ride one last week. What struck me was literally everything… from the quality of materials to the amount of space. Lots more rear seat room than in the Dodge 200 I was in two days before. It had the low-speed follow for traffic which was surprising on a base DX. The video game dash of previous Civics is gone. You sit low but the rear seat gives plenty of thigh support. (I heard there may be an issue with that for the driver’s seat?) The shifter is stubby and right where your hand rests with your arm on the console. The cabin styling plays up the width aspect and gives you a GT feel inside. I noticed some of them have dual exhaust tucked under the rear bumper, I’m guessing that’s for the EX. This is the kind of car that can make riding low cool again.
Actually calibrick, the dual exhaust is on the EX-T and higher. The base LX and LX-P models have a 2.0L naturally aspirated I-4. Once you get to the EX-T, like mine pictured below, you move up in horsepower (and down in size) to a 1.5L turbocharged I-4, which is pretty darned quick.
http://automobiles.honda.com/civic-coupe
It’s almost as quick from 0 to 60 as my V6 Mustang (6.8 sec vs 6.5 sec, respectively). Heck, now that the Mustang has north of 170K on the clock, the Civic may even be a tad faster in acceleration, and its governor is set higher (126 vs 115 respectively), although that’s likely a function of the standard tires that each car comes with from the factory.
As to the seating position, I’m 6′ tall and the seats are comfortable for me. Heck, even the backseat has plenty of room, even in the coupe. It’s surprising. Definitely more room than the Mustang in the back (although that isn’t saying much). And to Paul’s definition above of the word “coupe”, in this case that is so true. It really is shorter in length than its sedan sibling, but rides on the same wheelbase, which may explain the reason it has some room in the back.
For a size comparison with my Mustang….
I’ll take a 2017 Proace with camper van treatment and manual transmission, please.
+1
They lost me at CVT, one of the most useless inventions in all of automotive history. For the life of me I can’t understand why anyone would want to drive something with a transmission that replicates the sound and feel of a 1950’s Buick with Dynaflow. As always, YMMV.
I actually like driving them.
But then I again I used to snowmobile.
Which is why I also don’t trust the longevity of the belt in an automotive CVT. 🙂
They use a steel multirow-chain-type ‘belt’ now, but I agree long-term durability is still in question for me too.
Cars like CH-R seriously make me wonder if my life has become a nightmare I can’t wake up from. Someone please pinch me and tell me that isn’t real.
Is it OK that the cute little Aygo tries to wake you up…gently ?
Love the color on the C-HR. Sure reminds me of a Nissan Juke right down to the Maxima taillights.
Chevrolet Astro Cargo Van (R.I.P 2005) we miss you.
Wow, I didn’t realize it was as large as the Metris(Vito). I too thought it looked more NV200-ish from a size standpoint. I wonder whose rear badge will fall off first, hehehe.
Thanks for this, always interesting to see stuff we don’t get and would be unlikely to notice on a streetcorner unloading some cargo somewhere in Europe…
I predict the C-HR will do very well for Toyota and end up stealing sales from stuff like the Corolla for young folk hell-bent on a reliable, affordable but new car. And probably some older folk too. After all, the Honda HR-V is doing quite well over here and the Mazda CX-3 is picking up too. Nissan has the Juke and the new Rogue Select (Qashqai) that fit below the regular Rogue. Toyota needs this.
The Citroen and Peugeot will fall off first, as by the minds of a lot of people, Toyotas are unbreakable and French cars are rusty POS.
(Sarcasm mode: on)
Absolutely. Just like the lil’ Aygo gets better results in the satisfaction surveys than the 100% identical PSA models.
Same cars, same plant, same workers.
Unsurprising, as customer satisfaction surveys are utterly subjective, since some of the worst in reliability (like the Jeep Wrangler) poll the highest satisfaction according to Consumer Reports. That’s why one sees slogans like “It’s a Jeep thing, you wouldn’t understand.”
Though I would never buy one, I still love the Wrangler. Consumer Reports tries to convince people it’s dreadfully awful almost every year. Yet people love it because it does what it does better than anything else. I hope they keep making it forever.
CR’s reliability results are a matter of statistics, not editorial judgment. And Jeep owners are the last people I would expect to exaggerate reports of breakdowns.
It seems to me a bad idea to rely upon a statistically unreliable vehicle in the back country.
CR certainly does do editorial judgements. Here is one example, but they’ve done many on the Wrangler.
http://www.consumerreports.org/video/view/cars/auto-test-track/1398035763001/jeep-wrangler-2012-2016-road-test/
Reliability stats can often be deceiving as well. My Explorer was an unreliable POS but it never left me stranded. The 4Runner that replaced it was much more reliable but it left me stranded on more than one occasion.
I really don’t know how today’s Wranglers do in the real world, but you have to keep in mind a fairly high percentage of them, compared to the other CUVs in its class, are used off-road. That’s going to affect reliability statistics.
I wasn’t talking about CR’s editorial judgment at all, so I don’t know why you keep bringing it up. And of course failures don’t always result in stranding. Car buying is an imperfect science, but I’ll trust statistics before I’ll trust someone’s anecdotes.
My point was their statistical evidence is flawed (you don’t know the actual data behind a red circle and black circle, for instance, because they don’t release that) and their editorial opinions are often just ridiculous and don’t take into account how a vehicle is meant to be used.
It is something, and more reliable than anecdotal evidence, but in the end just a tool that does not have a major impact on my purchase decisions. That comes from personal experience with several of their recommendations that weren’t all they were purported to be.
Statistics are actually flawed more than most people realize (e.g. Fallacy of Induction), which has monumental implications, but I can’t think of a better basis for judgment here, especially since most commercial information sources have Conflict of Interest: corporate advertising. I’ll take my chances with statistical outliers instead of being played for a sucker by interested parties.
What do you base your purchase decisions on, then? I’m asking sincerely; maybe you know something I don’t. So far you haven’t offered a more rational alternative.
It seems to me like the C-HR blends the drawbacks of a CUV and a sporty coupe with the advantages of neither.
The C-HR reminds me of a Hyundai Veloster with a lift kit and a quasi-boattail.