I read this in the long-term update section of AutoWeek, regarding the Toyota Prius. I kind of feel sorry for those people who bought all the hype and waited a year to get one of these things. I would prefer a diesel Jetta anyday, for mileage efficiency.

Seems its charm has worn thin. Minus a couple notable exceptions, most of the staff has grown weary with our long-term Toyota Prius, whose empty promises of otherworldly fuel economy have all but lost the battle with our desire to actually enjoy the act of driving again.

We started out with high hopes for the car, too. After a fairly positive experience in 2001 with our long-term Honda Insight—a limited-use two-seater with meager cargo capacity that managed an impressive 52.61 mpg for close to 15,000 miles—we figured the four-passenger Prius hatchback could only do better. Problem is, we raised our expectations of hybrid performance over the last four years. We would happily trade in some efficiency for a little more performance, or vice versa. It’s called striking a balance, and in this way the Prius simply falls short.

Most on staff feel if we have to endure such wretched driving dynam_ics—numb steering, terrible handling—the least the Prius should do is deliver on a promise of super-duper fuel mileage. The EPA pegs the Prius for a combined 55.6 mpg; that we are getting 42.29 mpg year-to-date means the Prius ain’t cutting it. Any diesel Volkswagen can do that and still be a hoot on the highway—as well as offer the same utility as the hatchback on the Prius.

Or, as one particularly persnickety editor puts it, “I’m a driving enthusiast. That’s why I do this for a living. That’s why I like cars. That’s why I’ve read car magazines since I was eight. [The Prius] certainly goes fast enough in legal terms, but if you like driving, this thing offers no reward whatsoever. None.”

Of course the dissenters remain steadfast in their affection for the Prius, and to its credit, the Toyota has treated us well from a reliability standpoint.

We encountered mostly minor problems during our third quarter with the car, including a torn visor and burned-out headlamp, both of which Toyota repaired, to our pleasant surprise, under warranty. The car had two recalls addressed, one to recalibrate the ECU, the other to reinstall a leaky hood seal. We also took the car in for its scheduled 10,000-mile service call, which included an oil change, tire rotation and cabin and engine air filter change; that set us back $148.02.

However, a month later one editor had an unintended and unfortunate encounter with a raccoon (“not very environmentally friendly of me, I know”), which rendered the front fender flaps and bumper in less than intact condition. Repairing the damage cost $334.59—and five days without the car.

We’re not complaining about a whopping five days sans car; we should be so lucky to have any long-termer give us such little grief. But a recent drive of a Honda Accord Hybrid forced us again to examine our relationship with the Prius: The Honda not only delivers decent fuel mileage, but is the most powerful Accord in the lineup.

That’s a balance we could live with.

Originally posted by Kneel
Or, as one particularly persnickety editor puts it, “I’m a driving enthusiast. That’s why I do this for a living. That’s why I like cars. That’s why I’ve read car magazines since I was eight. [The Prius] certainly goes fast enough in legal terms, but if you like driving, this thing offers no reward whatsoever. None.”

That pretty much captures how I feel about the car - nice idea, cool gadgetry, but absolutely NOT something I would want to drive (at least, not as my only car). Did you see the story on the TV news recently (I saw it on several different stations) about the idiot in New York who is trying to sell his slightly used Prius for $37,000? He's figuring since there is still a demand and a waiting list for the car, someone out there with enough money who doesn't want to wait, will buy his. I guess actually that makes the person who BUYS the car the idiot, but on the news story the seller came off as smarmy and irritating which is why I consider him an idiot too. [:D]

Transcript:

ALLAN CHERNOFF, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Ken Ruck, proud owner of a brand new Toyota Prius. Fully loaded and with a hybrid engine, gas and electric, it gets 55 miles per gallon.

KEN RUCK, PRIUS OWNER: I love this car because, not only is it saving money on gas, but it also is pretty cool.

CHERNOFF: What he'd love even more would be to sell the Prius at a profit of $10,000. Ken, an employee of Virgin Mobil, is advertising on the web to sell for $37,000.

RUCK: I posted the car on Craig's List Web site for $10,000 more than I paid for it, and pretty much every day since then, I've had three to four e-mails offering me not as much as what I'm asking for, but more than what I paid for it.

CHERNOFF: Yes, the Prius is popular. Toyota says the average wait for the car is two months.
(on camera): With gasoline prices near record levels, some people don't want to wait. They want their Prius now. Kelly Blue Book, the authority on car prices, says used Priuses are selling for $1,000 to $3,000 above sticker price. You can find them at cars.com or eBay Motors, but $10,000 above list?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're either crazy, or it's a great car. One or the other.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, maybe he's a better businessman than I am.

CHERNOFF (voice-over): This Toyota dealer says his customers need wait only a month for a Prius, but in New York, he says, anything is possible.

BRUCE EDLEMAN, QUEENSBORO TOYOTA: We're not paying $10,000 more for a car, no matter how great the car is. But there are some individuals who really want the car, and they're like on a quest that they want to get that car, and they'll pay. They'll pay a high, high premium over the sticker price of what the customer paid for it. Probably he will get it.

CHERNOFF: If Ken Ruck gets his price, he says he'll buy another Prius to turn a quick buck, but perhaps only he sees green when looking at his silver car. At the very least, he'll save money on gas as he shows off his Prius.
Allan Chernoff, CNN, New York.

I also remember how many auto journalists kept talking about how much money Toyota must be losing, by selling a car with such technology for around $20k. They were actually worried that Toyota might be losing money - Ha!! If anything it just illuminated how overpriced many cars are these days.

If I had $37k to spend right now, I would have my order in for a Shelby Cobra GT500 - not a Prius.

Wow the dude trying to sell the used Prius is a moron... but there's gotta be a bigger moron out there that will buy it off him[rolleyes]

For my money, if extreme mileage was my concern I'd definitely not look to the Prius first, if at all. I've heard its highway mpg is OK/mediocre compared to what one might expect of a hybrid in these days of crazy technology.

I like idiots that buy hybrids. They make me smile. why? because its very likely that they will never recover the premium that they paid for that fuel economy.

Lets look at a Corolla vs a Prius, which are basically the same from a functional aspect and have that same mythical toyota quality.

Assumptions:
- looking to own the car for 5 years, the average length of ownership among new car buyers,
- a constant rate of fuel cost pegged at $2.25
- average yearly mileage of 12000.
- same insurance and maintainence costs (which I'd bet are higher on the Prius)
- both vehicles similarly equipped

Corolla:
base price $13,750
35 mpg combined
= 342 gal/year@2.25 = $771 * 5yrs = $3857
Residual value at sale = $8725 (2001 model to make it fair, the prius didnt exist in 2000)
total out of pocket cost = $8882

Prius:
base price $20,975
44 mpg combined
= 272 gal/year@2.25 = $613 * 5yrs = $3068
Residual value at sale = $15105 (subsititute 2001 model)

total out of pocket cost = $8938

So, total cost saved for buying an oh so fuel efficient prius is in the neighborhood of -$56... hmmm. Seems all those eco douches get to pay a premium for their fuel efficient car.

Like I said, I enjoy seeing people driving priuses feeling all smug about themselves, because I know that they can't do math.

So, total cost saved for buying an oh so fuel efficient prius is in the neighborhood of -$56... hmmm. Seems all those eco douches get to pay a premium for their fuel efficient car.

Like I said, I enjoy seeing people driving priuses feeling all smug about themselves, because I know that they can't do math


I agree... but you forgot one big expense the corolla doesn't have... battery replacement. But figure a lot of people who drive them are truely enviromental whacko's. They care about mother earth so much that they will sacrifice there dollars to save her. [rolleyes]

what is funny about the battery replacement is that those eco nuts now have a large, highly dangerous, toxic battery to dispose of...

I think hybird technology is awesome. Fuel economy only increase in coming years with even better technology, and emissions will be driven lower as well. I would like to think that hybirds are only the begining step of smarter driving habits. Imagine Hydrogen powered cars using fuel cell techonlogy. Zero emissions and cheap plentiful fuel. Now imagine a hydrogen powered hybird. The possibilities are amazing. Roll your eyes if you want, but realize that the oil age is a mere speck in human technological evolution and its coming to a close, sooner than you think.

Yes, hybrid tech. is getting good real fast. There is already a team of performance nuts testing a prius on the salt flats for for racing purposes. I like to the idea of hydrogen cars, but what people don't realize is that it takes coal burning, and other polluint plants to create the hydrogen gas we'd use. And factories create more pollution per capita than cars do. So we need to find an even better way. I think hydrogen will be yet another stepping stone is human tech. evolution, but not the holy grail.

Roll your eyes if you want, but realize that the oil age is a mere speck in human technological evolution and its coming to a close, sooner than you think.


there are plenty of scientists who are saying we will never run out of oil.. don't ask me how.. but I guess you have to think outside the box.. we have always been told that the end is near for oil.. but here we are 30 years later.. doing just fine thank you...

Exactly right! Oil is not going away anytime soon. The powers to be will see to that. The big players are too heavily invested in oil to abandon it for egalitarian reasons. Fuel costs will only continue to escalate. Whats exciting is that manufacturers are discovering performance increases all the while chasing better fuel economy. Eventually the hybrid technology will trickle down to the average consumer. As it stands now the good performing hybrid vehicles are just too expensive. $30,000 plus for the Accord hybrid? C'mon!
Oh, watch out for the Chinese though. Malcolm Bricklin said in an interview that he wants to eventually offer an entire line of hybrids with the Chery brand of Chinese vehicles he plans to import to the US. They may be ahead of the curve on this one.

Thats a narrow minded way of thinking, that we will never run out of oil?? You do realize it is a non-renewable resource being consumed at staggering rates, not only by the US but by other developing countries. And your right, oil wont go away any time soon. But with an oil based economy like ours, it only takes the slightest dip in production to cause serious economic chaos.
Call me a nay-sayer if you wanna, Chicken Little prehaps, or you can continue to keep your eyes closed to the problem and pretend it dosent exist, whatever works for you. Granted, I realize this isnt a Hummer message board with people driving gas guzzling monsters vehicles getting 9 MPG on the highway, but everyone in the world will be affected.

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

The funny thing about this "hydrogen economy" that all of the eco-nuts tout is that the cheap and abundant energy is a fallacy. Hydrogen as a gas does not exist in nature and is extrememly easy to oxidize - that's the reason we have so much water on this here beach ball. As such it takes a whoooole lot of energy to split it back into a gas. The net energy that you get from hydrogen is fairly small compared to fossil fuels. Hydrogen is a joke as far as a sustainable energy source. If it had been established as the initial energy source in the 1890's, yes, it would be a fine energy source now. but it would take a HUGE amount of investment to support just the US economy with enough hydrogen for just transportation.

There is no magic bullet.

"We're in a hole Harry, we've just gotta dig ourselves out" - Lloyd Christmas, Dumb and Dumber

dont forget about the fact that hydrogen is a higly explosive atom. there's reasons why the blimps (zepplins, whatever) stopped using hydrogen and started using helium. *coughhindenburghcough*. Not to mention the amount of engery needed to extract the hydrogen from water is equal to, if not more, than the amount of energy yeilded by the hydrogen itself, so youll have just as many fossil pollutants in the air; wind/water energy production isnt nearly enough to even dent it.

The explosion argument is baloney. We have hydrogen containers that are incredibly strong now. Not only that but hydrogen is so light that it floats away as it is burning. What you saw on the hindinburg was the painted canvas cover burning. when that was on fire, all of the hydrogen was already gone.

Gasoline, now there's a dangerous chemical. carcinogenic, highly explosive with incredible energy density in the gaseous form, heavier than air. The argument that hydrogen is more dangerous than gasoline from ANY perspective cannot be made. Remember that you already drive around every day with a big a$$ bomb seated right behind you.

Silver03SVT,

Fantastic link, very interesting. I read probably 70% of it and skimmed the rest. It makes me want to invest in oil holding companies.

Nice quotes bwojdyla!! [headbang]

Its funny, a guy I work with bought a Prius, we all hate the guy, you can't drive a competitors car, well anyways, he got rear-ended and the car was totalled. It didn't even look that bad from the pictures, but I'm guessing the battery was toasted. Now he's back in line for another one, which is a year long wait he was told. "Flipping IDIOT"

There is a tax break on Prius, right?

Hydrogen is extremely explosive. Yes, we have strong containers to hold it, strong HEAVY containers.

I hope you aren't telling me you work for Ford and this guy is driving a toyota. WHAT ABOUT THE ESCAPE HYBRID. sheesh. If he's going to be an idiot, at least he can be an idiot and pay for half an engineers salary. I despise people who don't buy what they make. I work for Visteon now (wooo hooo biggest loser on the S&P500 for April - 38% rock on!) so we have a large degree of freedom on what we buy as a supplier (honda, nissan, toyota, hyundai, GM, chrysler) but obviously I'm still loyal to the mother ship.

Originally posted by Sonikku
dont forget about the fact that hydrogen is a higly explosive atom. there's reasons why the blimps (zepplins, whatever) stopped using hydrogen and started using helium. *coughhindenburghcough*. Not to mention the amount of engery needed to extract the hydrogen from water is equal to, if not more, than the amount of energy yeilded by the hydrogen itself, so youll have just as many fossil pollutants in the air; wind/water energy production isnt nearly enough to even dent it.

Actually, the Hinden Burgh‘s explosion was due to an agent in the silver paint that was extremely sensitive to static electricity. When a highly volatile storm set in, static electricity charged, and a spark ignited around the highly flammable gas.

1) the containers that I speak of at are a woven kevlar composite overlayed with a carbon fiber matrix. It is extremely strong and much lighter than tanks of old.

2) Hydrogen is NOT extremely explosive, it IS extremely flammable. Hydrogen doesn't have the energy density to make things explode like gasoline does. If that was the case, the hindenburg would have been in little bits everywhere instead of a burning carcass.

What about ethanol? That has to be at least as flammable/combustible/explosive as gasoline, right?
http://i.tnpv.us/2005/WKA200505/WKA2005050373269_pv.jpg

Yes, but again, it takes more energy to produce it than you get out of it. Not only that but you need to be able to run the entire supply chain on ethanol, from tractors to refineries.

Ethanol is like adding water to whisky. A little bit doesn't make it taste any different and actualy makes it a little more palitable, more makes it less effective, all water doesn't cut it.

Originally posted by bwojdyla
Yes, but again, it takes more energy to produce it than you get out of it. Not only that but you need to be able to run the entire supply chain on ethanol, from tractors to refineries.

Makes sense to me. Basically, there is no free ride. Everything comes with a cost.

The more I look at all the alternative energy options, the more I like the biodiesel option.

I'm saying ethanol doesn't work as an energy source. Corn is basically a solid form of solar power that is chemically stored by plants. we take that stored energy and refine it and throw a lot of it away before we get a liquid form that we can use. the net energy that we get out of ethanol is negative, so we would literally run out of fuel by making ethanol.

A novel idea that I like is corn based steam power. Corn is pretty energy dense and can be used to power a boiler. In the early days of cars, steam, electricity, and petrol power were duking it out as the goto energy source. so I don't see why steam wouldn't work again.

Yes, I work at the Mothership. The dbag's claim was that the Escape wasn't out yet when he got the first one, but now he's just straight up being a dbag. I'm okay with driving a competitors car if you don't make something that competes. But if there is a comparitive product there is no excuse.

Ethanol is horrible, they use so much of it in some places of Illinois that they ruin some engines. We had some Lincoln LS's that wouldn't run because there was so much ethanol in the fuel that it wouldn't combust.

Originally posted by Kneel
Makes sense to me. Basically, there is no free ride. Everything comes with a cost.

The more I look at all the alternative energy options, the more I like the biodiesel option.

Exactly. Biodiesel....buring our trash into the future...lol

From what I gather; to reach the stored energy potential of one bbl of crude oil, that same bbl would cost $200 of any other energy source. So until the price of oil hits $200 a bbl, dont look for energy companies to invest in any alternate source.
They dont call it the 'Energy Crisis' for nothing.

edit
Here is an informative interview from a congressman on an energy related news cast:
http://www.energybulletin.net/5429.html

Originally posted by Templar
what is funny about the battery replacement is that those eco nuts now have a large, highly dangerous, toxic battery to dispose of...

My thoughts exactely....oh yeah, and the one thing they really hate... The VW TDI still gets better milage...