Funny Article About The Toyota Prius

[EC]

I think as a hybrid the Prius recharges it's batteries via the vehicles engine, regenerative braking, etc., but I could be wrong.

[Inspector]

I think as a hybrid the Prius recharges it's batteries via the vehicles engine, regenerative braking, etc., but I could be wrong.

That is correct. The car doesn't "plug in" to anything.

[Nayr747]

First, please tell me this isn't going to be the type of debate where everyone is too biased and stuborn to see any other point of view. If no one can accept new information or the fact that they may be wrong then I'd just rather not waste my time on this.

So are objectivists anti-environmental or is it just you guys?

Re: "improving our quality of life": Anyone can make any claim that something I do will improve their quality of life. One cannot give weight to other people's irrationality.

Sigh. I already stated that consumer reports, a source quoted in the original letter and considered to be a non-biased source only concerned with consumer's welfare, said "CO2 emissions have been linked to global warming." Ever consider that you may be being irrational? Read on to see my other proof.

Re: "reducing the amount of oil we buy from the Mid East": I'd love to send less cash to the middle-east, so that I can spend it all on Chinese goods. But, rubbing the environmentalists the wrong way is worth something.

What bias do you have against environmentalists? You do realize that colors your argument. I have to wonder, is there any actual reasoning in what you're saying or are you just mad at environmentalists?

The cost of the additional purchase price is still not made up for in eight years. What about after 10+ years? This is still an unknown, but it’s a gamble that buyers should be aware that they’re taking.

You're evidence is what one guy at the WSJ says? CR contradicts what he says is a comparable vehicle below.

Man-made “Global Warming” is a fabrication of the Environmentalist religion. It has no basis in fact.

That is a lie propagated by the Environmentalist movement. The majority of scientists do not in fact agree that global warming is caused by man’s activity.

“Even BP, a major oil company that has an obvious interest in keeping cars on the road, recognizes the link between CO2 and climate change. "In 1997," the company’s Web site notes, "BP was the first in our industry to accept that, while the scientific understanding of climate change and the impact of greenhouse gas emissions is still emerging, precautionary action is justified." "

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/persona...la%20mpg%20city

This is another argument altogether. I've already provided a quote from CR, which again, is a source quoted in the original article. If you could just provide some sources for you viewpoint we could leave it at that. The "environmentalist religion" comment though, shows that you have some sort of emotional reaction to this topic.

That is true, but what you’re “forgetting” is that the projected vs actual disparity is much larger for hybrid vehicles than for conventional vehicles. So the point of the article remains valid.

Um, no I'm not forgetting anything. Your statement is untrue. If you had read the CR issue, the disparity between the claimed and actual mpg is worse for hybrids than for some other cars but not all. The Jeep Liberty Diesel Ltd. 4WD for instance, got only 50% (11 mpg) of what was claimed (22 mpg). The Prius gets 20% less than what is claimed (55 mpg). http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/19813.shtml

In the "small cars" group, CR recommends the Toyota Prius in the auto. trans. category "achieving 44 mpg in their tests and with near-zero emissions." (CR, May '04) It also has the highest mpg CR has ever recorded in a five-passenger vehicle.

Also, an important quote from CR: "For the nation, where the fleet average fuel economy is near its lowest point in 17 years, the findings suggest that the country is far short of its energy policy."

The MSRP of the corolla, a comparable non-hybrid is $14,005. That’s a difference of $7720.

Well you say one thing, CR says another. I'm going to have to go with CR. If you had read the May '04 issue you would have seen that the Prius was 6th on their list of 16 cars, scoring "very good," and receiving a "CR Recommended." If you know anything about CR you know they are only concerned with frugal consumers. Why then would they recommend the Prius (the only car recommended in the 5 reviewed in that issue)? Also, the list of cars they felt were comparable were priced comparatively to the Prius. The Prius as they tested it was $22, 052. The fifth place car was the Chevy Malibu LS (V6) which was $22820. And the seventh place car was the same car but with a 4-cyl. It was $20,930. It also got more than twice the tested mpg than any of the 5 other cars tested which will save you around $500 per year if gas is $1.50/gal. and $1000/yr if gas is $3.00 according to CR.

A Kia Rio is $10,570, for a difference of $11,155.

An ’01 Kia Rio blue books for about $5500. (The ’01 Corolla for about $8450)

I’ll also note you can get a new Corolla for the price of that six-year-old Prius.

I’m sorry but those aren’t comparable cars according to CR.

You may as well say that if Communism killed people, it wouldn’t have been endorsed by International ANSWER (A Stalinist group). Consumer Reports is well known for not being an objective source.

Prove that CR is not objective. Prove that you're not the only one that thinks so. You are obviously biased. As CR does not take ANY money from any source but subscribers, it’s only bias is to consumers and their protection. Comparing CR to a Stalinist group is laughable. If you want to be taken seriously use good analogies. And if it’s not a credible source then why is it quoted in the article?

Current resale values are based on ignorance. If these facts became widely known, it would indeed have an influence on resale values.

What kind of an argument is that? Current resale values are what they are, not what you want them to be. The article stated the resale value of the Prus would be lower than other cars. And in reality it is actually the opposite.

[EC]

Since when do consumer's need protection? And Objectivism is against environmentalism in all its evil forms. Also it is against forum rules to defend environmentalism in the general forums. If you wish to attempt to do that then that is what the debate forum is for.

[Nayr747]

How do you reconcile this with your claim that you can get an ’01 Prius for the Blue Book value?

What I wrote: “Used Prius's sometimes actually sell for MORE than they were purchased for.”

For a real indicator, try Edmunds.com’s True Cost to Own. The ’05 Prius is about $9500 more than the ’05 Corolla.

…which is not a comparable vehicle.

In the real world, the Prius will attain about 10MPG better in the city and no better on the highway than the Corolla, not 28 better city and 10 better highway, as the EPA claims. (That’s one reason why the EPA is scrambling to change their tests.)

Again, not true. As tested by CR, the ’03 Corolla LE gets an average of 29 mpg (20 city, 39 highway). The ’03 Prius gets 41 overall (30 city, 49 highway). The Prius gets 10 mpg more in the city, 10 more on the highway, and 12 more overall. The Honda Insight, another hybrid, got 51 overall (26 city, 66 highway). I would also expect the difference in actual overall mpg between the hybrids and conventional cars to be higher today, with 3 years of hybrid technology improvement.

Also, on the topic of cars with better emissions creating a better standard of living. Any of you guys live in LA? Where do you think all that smog comes from? If you don't think that affects your health then by all means go live there and tell me how you feel in 30 years.

** deleted **

[Edited out generalized, baseless insult - RC]

Edited January 18, 2006 by RationalCop

[Inspector]

So are objectivists anti-environmental or is it just you guys?

The official Objectivist stance on Environmentalism can be found HERE and HERE. Suffice to say, Objectivism opposes Environmentalism.

Sigh. I already stated that consumer reports, a source quoted in the original letter and considered to be a non-biased source only concerned with consumer's welfare, said "CO2 emissions have been linked to global warming."

That is ludicrous. CR is a product testing magazine. They’re not even a scientific organization at all, much less a reputable one. Also note that they are using the most cautious possible language: “have been linked.” They’re only saying that unnamed persons have linked CO2 emissions to global warming. They don’t even say whether they believe those unnamed persons.

What bias do you have against environmentalists?

I don’t know what you mean by “bias,” but I have the fact that they are irrational death-worshippers who openly lie to the public.

You're evidence is what one guy at the WSJ says? CR contradicts what he says is a comparable vehicle below.

As I said, my position does not originate with the WSJ article, it predates the article by a number of years. I just so happen to find the article both amusing and quite true.

“Even BP, a major oil company that has an obvious interest in keeping cars on the road, recognizes the link between CO2 and climate change."

A company’s decision to give in to a popular, though false, belief does not have any bearing on the truth or falsehood of that belief.

This is another argument altogether. I've already provided a quote from CR, which again, is a source quoted in the original article. If you could just provide some sources for you viewpoint we could leave it at that.

Global warming is not only a myth, but a lie, designed to make us commit industrial suicide in the name of the Environmentalists' irrational religion.

The "environmentalist religion" comment though, shows that you have some sort of emotional reaction to this topic.

It doesn’t show anything of the sort. Environmentalism is a religion. A nasty, death-worshipping religion.

That being said, you’re darn right I have an emotional reaction to this topic. That in no way, however, bears on the truth or falsehood of what I have said.

Um, no I'm not forgetting anything. Your statement is untrue. If you had read the CR issue, the disparity between the claimed and actual mpg is worse for hybrids than for some other cars but not all. The Jeep Liberty Diesel Ltd. 4WD for instance, got only 50% (11 mpg) of what was claimed (22 mpg). The Prius gets 20% less than what is claimed (55 mpg).

That’s a clever twisting of the facts you have there. The single example of the Liberty doesn’t disprove my point: that hybrids have a larger disparity between real world MPG and EPA numbers than do conventional vehicles.

This point is non-controversial and has been discussed in all of the automotive magazines for years. Here is just one article about it, on the Insight:

http://www.wired.com/news/autotech/0,2554,63413,00.html

This isn’t some kind of conspiracy, it’s simply a coincidence that hybrids do much better at the EPA’s test than regular cars, but a little better in the real world.

In the "small cars" group, CR recommends the Toyota Prius in the auto. trans. category "achieving 44 mpg in their tests and with near-zero emissions." (CR, May '04)

I read car and driver, road and track, autoweek, Edmunds.com, motor trend, autoextremist.com, popular mechanics, and others, and NONE of them returned numbers quite as good as CR. I’m not saying that the Prius can’t achieve those numbers, but they are simply not realistic.

If you know anything about CR you know they are only concerned with frugal consumers.

I happen to know quite a lot about CR, thank you very much. I noticed long ago that their magazine was an “echo chamber” where people who have biased notions can self-reinforce. (I cancelled my subscription and stopped taking them seriously long ago)

I am not alone in this discovery.

http://www.allpar.com/cr.html

Why then would they recommend the Prius (the only car recommended in the 5 reviewed in that issue)?

They must have reasons other than frugality.

Also, the list of cars they felt were comparable were priced comparatively to the Prius.

That is a list of comparably priced vehicles, not of vehicles that are actually comparable in capabilities.

I’m sorry but those aren’t comparable cars according to CR.

They are according to the facts. Those cars are nearly identical in size, wheelbase, passenger space, and intended function. By comparing the Prius, a compact car, to midsize cars such as the Accord, Malibu, or Camry, CR is distorting the facts. Those cars are larger and more expensive, and thus will get worse gas mileage and also compare more favorably to the Prius in terms of price.

Prove that CR is not objective.

I provided a link that does so nicely. But just read their magazine and it will be obvious.

Prove that you're not the only one that thinks so.

Unnecessary. Your demand is fallacious. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

As CR does not take ANY money from any source but subscribers, it’s only bias is to consumers and their protection.

That doesn’t prove that they are free of bias. Their staff’s personal biases show through in their car reviews (among other things), as does the fact that their subscribers have biased demands of their own.

Comparing CR to a Stalinist group is laughable. If you want to be taken seriously use good analogies.

Being taken seriously by the likes of you is not terribly interesting to me. I can tell you’ve drunk heavily from the CR kool-aid, as well as Environmentalism. The fact is that it was a fine analogy: an example of an organization that is interested in distorting the facts to serve an irrational agenda... just like CR.

What kind of an argument is that? Current resale values are what they are, not what you want them to be. The article stated the resale value of the Prus would be lower than other cars. And in reality it is actually the opposite.

What the article is saying is that if the facts about the Prius were to become common knowledge, that the resale values will be negatively affected.

If you’re saying that the majority of buyers for the Prius are Environmentalist kooks who are uninterested in facts, then no I suppose that the resale values would not change. But I think that a significant number of buyers are not kooks, but have only been duped by the kooks and will want to know the truth about this “economy” car.

Edited January 18, 2006 by Inspector

[Vitamin J]

I actually came accross this thread, and this Forum, while searching google.com for the weight of the Toyota 2JZ-GTE Supra motor to compare to the weight of the new Chevy LS7 that powers the '07 Corvette Z06. Long story short, I liked where the thread was going, and decided to join after being so frustrated with sharing my views with only myself.

Inspector has shown me that there are crazies on both sides of the spectrum. I used to think that only vegetarians accused people of worshiping death and initiated personal crusades against false "religions." But now I have proof that the universe is balanced.

So balanced in fact, that when you use gasoline to charge a battery, the battery only takes as much energy as the gas that was burnt. Amazing. Who'da thunk? I guess that's what my teacher was trying to tell me in high school physics. The extra mpg must come from regenerative braking, which is a total loss to conventional cars.

Also, the reason the EPA's fuel mileage tests are so varying is not because manufacturer's lie about the mpg's, it actually depends on certain variables. Variables like: how heavy your foot is, how fast you drive, if it's 40*F or 80*F, how much humidity is in the air, how windy it is (and if you happen to be driving the same way as the wind), how many people are in the car, how big the tires are, what compound the tires are made of, if you're listening to the radio, if the A/C is on, if the heater is on, if your headlights are on, if you're following a big truck or nothing at all, if the road is concrete or asphalt, if your window is down, if you've washed your car lately, etc.

In the end, a small european diesel, like a VW Golf TDi, will get roughly 2.5x better fuel mileage on any given trip than the Prius. It will cost less to own and be more reliable.

Not to mention the buggy software in the Prius which causes it to shut down completely, and the motor takes the power steering, ABS, headlights, and airbags with it. So if you happen to be doing 75mph down the freeway, you'd better hope it happens on the straight part, during the day.

Not to mention that no matter how long Toyota says it's battery's will last, they won't last as long as you'd hope. Battery life depends on rate of charge, length of charge, temperature, % full when starting and ending charge, and how fast they are drained. So it depends entirely on how you drive. Just like the reliability of conventional cars.

But I don't care about that, I have an SCCA Racing License which means I drive a car will a low restriction exhaust that it loud and has a removable catalytic converter. I use tires up very fast, and brake pads as well. But, my racecar, which happens to be a '92 Mazda Miata, causes just as much damage to the enviornment as the Prius, if not less.

Let me explain:

Back in 1992 when my Miata was brand new it weighed in at about 2600lbs with no driver, it had 116hp, and achieved about 28mpg combined.

But in the year 2006 it weighs exactly 2300lbs with driver, has about 125hp, and achieves about 32mpg on the road (if I have a light foot) and 12mpg on the racetrack.

But even though my car gets poorer gas mileage than a Prius, and is much dirtier, my car is made of metal, plastic, and glass. A Prius is made of all these things, but also has 10x as much corrosive acid, and complicated computers (that will be melted down in Asia and stripped of it's precious metals).

So, while my car may sit in a junkyard decomposing for 100,000 years. The Prius will take 1,000,000 to decompose.

But thankfully, my body won't take that long to decompose, so until then: Happy Motoring!

P.S. - I use a '94 Suburban to haul the Miata to the track, it gets 10mpg on a good day, and 6mpg while towing the Miata

Edited January 19, 2006 by Vitamin J

[Inspector]

Inspector has shown me that there are crazies on both sides of the spectrum.

If you're saying that those people are crazy, then why am I crazy for calling them crazy? I used the term "religion" simply because they do not believe in using science or facts regarding environmental issues; that they have their dogma and they stick to it in defiance of the facts (I can prove that if necessary); not that I am myself religious or am accusing them of being a "false" religion or that I am some sort of "crusader." (In fact, I am an athiest, so I say that all religions are false!)

So... the weight of the LS7 is 458 pounds, only 10 more than the LS2, which was about 10 less than the LS1. Funny how that works. Planning on throwing it into your Miata? I've heard of people doing LS1 into Miata swaps so it sounds at least feasible. Anyway, cool car; it sounds like it's fun to drive.

Edited January 19, 2006 by Inspector

[Vitamin J]

I used the term "crazy" lightly. I was simply stating that you're just as passionate about your views as they are about theirs.

Personally, I don't have enough time, or a long enough attention span to get that involved.

But yeah, the LS7 is all aluminum with titanium parts. and of course, taking some metal out of the cylinder walls doesn't hurt weight.

Now if you want an enviornmentalist's head to explode, point out the fact that the new Z06 with a 7L V8 and 505hp gets 27mpg.

[Inspector]

I used the term "crazy" lightly. I was simply stating that you're just as passionate

AH, I read you. I'd check out HERE for engine swap info, I believe a few over there have done the kind of thing you're looking at.

Either way you go, your major issue is going to be getting that chassis to control all that power. If you even want to!

[Vitamin J]

Oh, don't worry. I'm not trying to stuff a V8 in my Miata. I was looking at weight for another reason. I was just curious how much a Japanese DOHC Inline 6 with 2 turbo's weighed compared to an LS7.

[Inspector]

Oh, don't worry. I'm not trying to stuff a V8 in my Miata. I was looking at weight for another reason. I was just curious how much a Japanese DOHC Inline 6 with 2 turbo's weighed compared to an LS7.

If you find out let me know. I can't find the weight of the 2JZ-GTE.

[Scott_Connery]

I think the engine + turbos package is about 750 lbs. It is an iron block, and is pretty heavy. It is also quite large dimensionally because of its inline 6 design. The turbos, and associated plumbing account for 85 lbs.