Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Prius Owners w/50K - What We Think Now

1356713

Comments

  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,850
    A link would be helpful with these reputable sources. I hear from reputable sources that CR is totally financed by Toyota. It would be hard to prove either allegation.

    Just to be fair and balanced. When I test drove a Sequoia yesterday. The salesman told me that the Prius is their best selling car. That was Mossy Toyota San Diego. They had at least 13 on the lot and offering good prices through the end of the month. Oh, I liked the Sequoia a LOT....
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    Gary says, "I hear from reputable sources that CR is totally financed by Toyota."

    Oh really? Got any weblinks to that effect? Hard to hide something like that.
  • PF_FlyerPF_Flyer Pennsylvania Furnace, PAPosts: 5,854
    I guess I got my answer to the SIMPLE question of whether any of our longterm Prius owners have experienced unintended acceleration. To date, I'm marking that down as a NO.

    Let's move on to another aspect of long term ownership of the Prius and get away from the discussion of validity of websites...

    Have any of you long term, higher mileage Prius owners run into any issues or concerns with your traction battery yet? Since the Prius went on sale in Japan in 1997 and worldwide in 2001, we're getting closer to that time when battery lifetime/replacement COULD start to be an issue.

    I'm not asking this to prove anything one way or the other about the Prius, so please don't jump in trying to defend or attack the Prius or hybrids. Just interested to hear from owners and their thoughts.

    If you've got 100,000 miles on your Prius and the battery is showing no signs of petering out on you anytime soon, let's hear that. If the thought has entered the back of your head and you've started to ask around about costs or recognition signs, post that too.

    Again, let's not turn this into a debate over the practicality of hybrids. Thanks!

    MODERATOR
    Need help navigating? pf_flyer@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • There is one annoying problem that's been presented b/4..the constant "Baffling Noise" you endure when you choose to open windows during moderatly nice days. The hatchback must be a factor. My dogs go crazy and I find it aggravating that I can't enjoy summer nights the old fashoned way. I've tried several window arrangments with little results that work.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,682
    Have you tried opening the right front and left rear windows? I like that setup on my hatchback, as it provides good flow-through ventillation with minimal buffeting and noise (since the driver's window is shut).
  • I appreciate your suggestion and I'll just say that was one of many variations I tried with no degree of success but I really think the problem has alot to do with the shape, design, and hatchback configuration. I have yet to replace the security cover for the back storage area. That may help if I can just find it.
  • PF_FlyerPF_Flyer Pennsylvania Furnace, PAPosts: 5,854
    That rear window buffeting is pretty much an issue in every car I've been in for the last 25 years.

    I have the feeling it's because cars are generally more aerodynamic now than they used to be, and the airflow across the rear doors is relatively smooth. Sort of like blowing across the top of a soda bottle to create a tone. Only in the case of the car, the tone is a VERY low frequency and you feel it more than hear it. :sick:

    MODERATOR
    Need help navigating? pf_flyer@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    Consumer Affairs is a not so subtly hidden screen for Liability Attorneys who have their seine nets out to catch any and all who are dissatisfied with any product.

    The Prius has a high profile and Toyota has deep pockets. Those are like chum to attorneys
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    Just turned over 55000 mi in 22 months. Nothing, outside of being hit twice and running out of gas 3 times, has occured out of the ordinary. I'm planning on this going about 250,000 mi.

    Of the 300 or so that I've sold..
    ..One couple has had 4.
    ..One friend has had two, his first Gen 1 he put 38K on it in one year, sold it and bought a Gen 2 in Jan '04. Now at 45 months he's just turned over 166,000 miles with no issues at all. He can't wait for the Gen 3.
    ..Several have bought one and then come back to buy another right away. Consider how hard it is to being driving for 2-3 yrs getting about 48-50 mpg then having to 'go back' to driving an outdated vehicle that only gets 30 mpg.
    ..Not one buyer has come back with anything other than good comments, if not raves.
    ..One has the perfect driving cycle. He's posted his best tank at 85+ mpg, 1025 mi on 11.9 gal.

    'Unintended Acceleration' is wishful thinking by the CA crowd IMO.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,850
    Now at 45 months he's just turned over 166,000 miles

    Now I see who is using up all our limited supply of fossil fuel. It is the hybrid owners. I have not accumulated 166k miles on nine new vehicles over the last 20 years.

    I find it interesting how people embrace entities like CR that tout hybrids, and poo poo the ones like CA & CNW that point out the negative aspects of the hybrids.

    I do believe and have said before, if you are commuting long distances every day a hybrid may be a good choice. By contrast if you only put a few miles per year and want to keep a vehicle for 10+ years the hybrid will probably be a bad choice.
  • akollerakoller Posts: 15
    I do believe and have said before, if you are commuting long distances every day a hybrid may be a good choice. By contrast if you only put a few miles per year and want to keep a vehicle for 10+ years the hybrid will probably be a bad choice.

    You must not own one. There's a lot to like, and if the ONLY reason to buy were to reduce emissions (which is not even MENTIONED here), that would be reason enough to consider a hybrid. But that isn't why I like my Prius; it's because of the quiet, elegant, smooth ride; the great looks; the excellent mileage; and the chance to support a newly developing alternative fuel technology (storage batteries) that will be used in almost every area of consumer electronics in the future. Good enough for me!
  • Since when is it not smart to drive a hybrid either long mileage or short? How can one say that any situation of useing less fuel is anything but intelligent? My biggest annoyance is pulling in next to a gas-guzzler (Hummer, Armada,Excursion, etc) and watch them dump 30-40 gallons of fuel into their monstrosities and know that they'll be back in 3 or 4 days to do it again. What a gluttenous waste. Let's hope intelligence wins out!
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    It's his 'office', before the first Prius he had an Escort that had 210,000 miles on it

    The Problem with both CA and especially CNW is that both have ulterior motives so the data is cherry picked to prove their preconceived notion - or agenda.

    CA just wants to find customers for it's principals whether it's toothpaste, pharmaceuticals, baby toys or autos.

    CNW is purely bogus. A number of people have shown how ludicrous his assumptions and therefore conclusions are. My friend with 166,000 miles on his Prius doesnt exist in the CNW world. The failing that everyone picks out is that he arbitrarily chose 109,000 miles for the Prius' useful service and 300,000 miles for the Hummer's. Well at the time of his study the Hummer had only been out a few years so none at all had reached 300,000 miles. In addition he made the erroneous assumption that Prius would be city vehicles that only drove about 7000 miles annually. Using one for a mobile office or to commute 150 mi a day never was considered. Yet these are two of the best reasons to own a Prius. The mega-milers such as my friend are far more likely to buy one simply for the huge savings in fuel.

    One of the best counter arguments to CNW's whole thesis is presented by Michael Karesh of True Delta. Let me give you one example based on a GM vehicle...standby.. ;)

    Here is the line from TrueDelta: http://www.truedelta.com/blog/?p=48

    An except that pretty much says it all:
    The least expensive car, allegedly, is the Scion xB. It is projected to cost 0.492 dollars (love the precision to three decimal places!) over a lifetime of 189,000 miles. A little math finds a total cost of $92,988. And this is the cheapest car to own, by a good margin. Five cars from the bottom we’re already at 0.70 dollars per mile. And the lowly Chevolet Malibu, one of the least expensive “lower mid-range” cars? $1.962 per mile. Muliply by the projected lifetime of 163,000 miles, and we’ve got a lifetime cost of $319,806.

    Let’s assume these cars will be driven 12,000 miles per year. Then that Malibu costs $23,544 per year. Own two similarly mid-level cars? Then apparently you’re paying about $46,000 each year to buy them and keep them going.

    How can CNW issue a report with these numbers, and keep a straight face? Not just once, but now for the second straight year? These numbers aren’t just off. They’re so far off that the study was clearly based on extreme assumptions that, based on the results, should not have been made. (These assumptions discussed in a subsequent blog entry.)

    Yes, they’ve calculated the amount of energy required, then converted this into dollars based on the current cost of energy. But in the capitalist system within which we live, virtually all costs end up reflected in the price to the customer. No one is heavily subsidizing General Motors’ electric bill. Or the energy bills of its suppliers. Or the energy bills of its employees. GM pays its employees and suppliers (who pay their employees), and GM’s customers pay GM.


    But to elaborate to show just how ludicrous this study is..

    CNW pretends that a Malibu will 'cost' us $319,806!!! How can this possibly be?? A $23000 vehicle to the consumer ( Big Assumptions here: it costs GM less than $23000 to build it; GM's suppliers sell parts and subassemblies at a profit; neither GM nor its suppliers 'subsidize' various costs to the consumer ).

    OK the buyer takes delivery of a vehicle at $23000 which is fully costed with no subsidies. The driver puts about 169,000+ miles on the vehicle according to the study at an average fuel economy of say 25 mpg. This equates to about 6800 gal of fuel at say $3 per gallon. That's about $20500 in fuel cost. ( 2nd set of BIG Assumptions: the oil companies are selling the fuel at fully costed prices and making profits from it; they are not subsidizing the purchase price of the fuel ).

    Here is the clincher and why this whole study is so bogus. Those that keep referring to it should be embarrassed ;) :P . The vehicle is scrapped and recycled. The final 'dust to dust' lifetime cost is $319,806 !! Wait a sec.... $23000 + $20500 = $43500, call it $50000 for round numbers.

    It costs $269,806 to scrap this vehicle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Who paid for that? It certainly wasn't the owner. It certainly wasn't me or you. Someone spent $269,000 to scrap and recycle one Malibu??? How did that person get repaid? What about the thousands and tens of thousands and millions of other vehicles on the road that get scrapped each year. Say 2 million vehicles 'leave' the national fleet.

    Math: 2,000,000 x $260,000 per = a stupid number that somehow was never paid by anyone. The car gods absorbed the cost.
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,788
    "My biggest annoyance is pulling in next to a gas-guzzler (Hummer, Armada,Excursion, etc) and watch them dump 30-40 gallons of fuel into their monstrosities and know that they'll be back in 3 or 4 days to do it again. What a gluttenous waste. Let's hope intelligence wins out!"

    And lets hope you don't have to tow a trailer or carry seven passengers with your Prius!

    Different vehicles for different purposes. I am always interested to see single drivers in the monster vehicles. But I know that sometimes people do need those large SUVs, and perhaps that single woman just dropped all her kids off at school.
  • You make a good point. Sometimes you need more capacity for loads be it passengers or towing but I say that most (90% to 99%) of the time the Prius and other hybrids deliver the goods. Next time you see a Hummer, Excursion, etc check out the number of passengers and if they're towing something. It's rare.
    Secondly, I started this thread just to bring attention to the voices of Prius owners who mostly seem to agree with me that this is one heck of a "green" money saving car. There were quite a few naysayers trashing the car b/4 it had its' chance to prove or disprove itself. Things like... "It costs way to much more than a conventional car."...."It was to complex in its' hybride format."..."The batteries will fail costing the owners mega-bucks to replace.".."MPG's fail to live up to EPA ratings"(as we all know no car lives up to those ratings. Oh, and my favorite..."Resales will plunge." I personally know 6 other owners of Prius's and it is unanimous..."Best darn car ever!" I presently and anxiously await a new and better Hybrid Prius or something new to taste this year.(probably 2009)
    P.S. By the way...A Prius can handle 5 adults reasonably well..o.k. as long as they're not "Andre The Giant."
  • We have 01 Prius w/ 95k mi. See if your dealer will do a long test drive, or has a Prius to rent for the weekend, so both (all) drivers can have enough driving time to evaluate comfort. I find that this is not the most comfortable car for long drives.

    We live in lower New England - get snow, sleet, but it's not too hilly. I would not want to HAVE to drive Prius in bad weather... DH drives Prius to commute 45 min to work; if he knows weather will be bad he sometimes takes AWD SUV instead.
  • We have 01 Prius... when this car needs replacing we may not be getting another Prius, will depend on styling. Hatchback looks great, but backseat headroom is significantly less than in the older style... No, we're not a family of "Andre The Giant"s, but 3 of 4 members are 6', 6'1" tall, I'm the shrimp at 5'8"
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,788
    "Hatchback looks great, but backseat headroom is significantly less than in the older style... No, we're not a family of "Andre The Giant"s, but 3 of 4 members are 6', 6'1" tall, I'm the shrimp at 5'8""

    Yes, the Gen 1 Prius was similar in design to the Echo, which was ugly, but very functional and roomy. They sacrificed some of that headroom for the CU Ft of a hatchback, plus the better cD.
  • I must say that my '04 Prius is more than satisfactory as to headroom ...I'm just under 6 foot and I found the hdrm more than adequate. I must say tho that my old Buick Riviera had no hdrm in comparison. First test ride my wife drove while I rode in the back with a big smile completely impressed with the hdrm & legroom.
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,788
    "I must say that my '04 Prius is more than satisfactory as to headroom ...I'm just under 6 foot and I found the hdrm more than adequate. I must say tho that my old Buick Riviera had no hdrm in comparison. First test ride my wife drove while I rode in the back with a big smile completely impressed with the hdrm & legroom."

    I haven't sat back there. Sure looks small though...
Sign In or Register to comment.