I don’t see styling playing the driving role in sales. It may be more a result of functionality considerations.

What makes hybrid vehicles sell well are DISTINCTIVE RESULTS, LARGE absolute and percent MILEAGE DIFFERENCES for the vehicle class at a REASONABLE (consumer willingness to pay) PRICE difference.

Results:
Strong hybrids sell well at reasonable prices, weak hybrids don’t, with hybrid sales percent of platform growth exceeding mileage difference growth at large absolute mileage differences.

SUVs can carry an additional 10% price premium on mileage improvements without degrading their share of platform sales.

If you want to sell many more hybrids.
1. Start with high mileage hybrids and improve their mileage as much as possible with as little change to price as possible.
2. SUVs command a price premium but make doing 1. harder. Keep them light.
3. Get costs down, always.

Background:
Compare EPA fuel economies of:

a. Prius Hybrid and Corolla
b. Camry Hybrid and Camry
c. Highlander Hybrid and Highlander

and consider their relative sales numbers and prices. Here we go:

Prius get 53% better milage than a corolla, 33% of the sales and costs 25% more than a Carolla.

Camry hybrid gets 36% better mileage than a camry, 8% of the sales and cost 26% more than a Camry.

Highlander hybrid gets 30% better mileage than a Highlander, 16% of the sales and cost 35% more than a Highlander (confusing with the L4 and V6).

Since the price difference is constant for the Prius and Camry we can make a statement about better mileage and sales. A 17% decline in mileage savings equaled a 25% decline in sales, holding price differences constant, meaning that for strong hybrid sedans, a 1% improvement in mileage will give you around a 1.47% improvement in the % of platform sales that are hybrids.

That also means that hybrid sales ratio of platform growth increases more than mileage improvement growth, which means that if you have a minimal absolute difference in mileage on the same platform, regardless of price difference, you will have effectively no sales, GMs exact experience with weak and monster truck/SUV hybrids. That can’t be good for recouping development and trim costs, but is an excellent way to shoot yourself in the feet.

Since the information above is publicly available, I am forced to conclude that GM’s past hybrid strategy was a willful and conscious attempt to make hybrids look bad so they wouldn’t have to make them. That strategy has been completely undercut by the success of strong hybrids.

We compare the

a. Fusion Hybrid and Fusion
b. Escape Hybrid and Escape

Fusion hybrid get 56% better milage than a Fusion, too early in release to tell on % of the sales and costs 40% more than a Fusion.

Escape hybrid gets 39% better mileage than a Escape, 8% of the sales and cost 45% more than a Escape.

So it boils down to Toyota wants to sell hybrids and is priced aggressively, Ford is ambivalent and enjoys charging more for the mileage improvement hybrids and GM actively doesn’t want to sell hybrids.

The Escape hybrid gets a similar mileage percent difference and sales percent, but at a higher percent price difference to the Camry hybrid, so Ford is able to charge more for the Escape hybrid the same mileage % improvement as the Camry hybrid without degrading the sales percentage.

The Fusion gets a better than Prius like gas mileage percent improvement over its platform gas counterpart, but charges a greater percent price difference for that mileage improvement, so expect the Fusion hybrid sales to be between 8% and 33% of the regular fusion sales. If it ends up being more or less than that range, than either my analysis is suspect or incomplete or Ford has discovered something new (good if > 33%, bad if < 8%) in their marketing. I predict that the platform share of hybrids for the Fusion would have been 37%, if they had named it a dedicated hybrid name, like the Nextus.

No, I didn’t look at the GM , Honda and other OEM products. How much free work do you think I’m going to do ?

“I can’t wait until I can drive the Volt. As Teddy Roosevelt said in 1910, “If you build it they will come.” In this case, they will buy. ” Frank Weber, GM Global Vehicle Line Executive and Chief Engineer .
http://www.chevroletvoltage.com/index.php?option=com_kunena&Itemid=7&func=view&catid=11&id=75#143

Teddy R. was talking about the Panama Canal.

Effectively, that’s Say’s Law, from 1803, influenced by Condillac,1776:

“Say’s Law claims that total demand in an economy cannot exceed or fall below total supply in that economy or as James Mill was to restate it, “supply creates its own demand.” In Say’s language, … “a glut can take place only when there are too many means of production applied to one kind of product and not enough to another”.”

Such as too many full gassers and not enough (any) electric vehicles.

Say’s work is frequently used to defend laissez-faire (leave it alone) free market capitalism in opposition to Keynesian views.

http://homepage.newschool.edu/het//profiles/say.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Say's_law

The point is that if you have excess capacity (and we currently do in the US, to the tune of about 6 million vehicles a year), it’s ’cause you were building crap consumers didn’t want and not building stuff that consumers do want. Or maybe it’s entirely due to banks restricting credit.

Anyway, start cranking out those Volts already.