Will ethanol E85 catch on in the US? Will we Live Green and Go Yellow?

rorr · June 2006

Fair enough.

I guess the only issue is whether or not there are enough snakeweasels out there to support a 100% EV industry. No offense meant.

tpe · June 2006

What if only 2-3% of the population wanted an EV. I think that is low but the fact is that no one currently makes them, at least not that are highway legal. I suspect that an upstart auto manufacturer could make some decent money capturing 2% of the market and I think you will see it happen. It may be a company from China and once again we'll be playing catch-up. I support PHEVs as a step in the right direction. Over time these vehicles will have more electric range and faster re-charge times. Eventually they will be able to discard their ICE as a useless appendage. Our current hybrids are still 100% dependent on gasoline so in that respect they represent more of a distraction. They did serve as a good test bed for advancing regenerative technologies.

snakeweasel · June 2006

My best guess is there is enough of a market out there that if GM had kept up with their EV program and followed through with manufacturing and marketing we might have at least a million out there by now. Not a whole lot but enough to be noticed.

socala4 · June 2006

What if only 2-3% of the population wanted an EV.

I seriously doubt that it is even that high, and there is nothing happening in the market today to indicate that it has a chance of happening.

Assuming that GM had leased an additional 5,000 EV-1's, that would have meant that 5,800 cars were put onto the road over a period of several years. If perhaps 50 million new cars entered the market during that time (I'm not sure of that figure, but close enough for the sake of discussion), that would mean that perhaps EV's comprised 0.012% of the US car market, or 12/1000ths of one percent.

There's probably a bigger market for kit cars than there was for EV's, the EV's are a non-factor in the market. Not surprising, because EV's don't offer the vast majority of consumers anything that they need when they need it, while tremendously eroding peace of mind to boot. There are a few very committed devotees, but no-one else.

I suspect that an upstart auto manufacturer could make some decent money capturing 2% of the market and I think you will see it happen.

This theory has been the basis of many a stock scam during the last several decades, particularly the fifties and sixties. It never, never happened.

It is very difficult to get 2% of the market with anything, particularly a fledgling company selling unproven technology. The US automotive industry has tremendously expensive barriers to entry, with large entrenched competitors with strong brands that will be hard to dethrone without a lot of capital and effort to do it.

tpe · June 2006

At the time that CARB overturned the ZEV mandate there were about 5,000 EVs on the road. I know that the EV1 and RAV4 EV had long waiting lists. I also know that gas was relatively cheap compared to the $3/gallon people are paying now in most parts of the country. So had the manufacturers been willing to meet demand and had they been offered nationwide instead of just CA and AZ I think your million vehicle estimate is probably good but I think the demand would still excede supply.

How much fuel would 1 million vehicles save. Probably about 500 million gallons per year. Not all that much relative to our total consumption but conservation needs to take place on the individual level. These million individuals will be doing far more than the drivers of hybrids or flex fuel vehicles burning E85, if they can even get E85.

tpe · June 2006

I think you need to also add in the RAV4 EVs, the Ford Ranger EVs, the Nissan Altras, the Honda EVs along with all the waiting lists. You then need to consider that this was just CA and AZ. You can then add in that gas was only around $1.50/gallon. And finally adjust for the fact that these cars weren't marketed by their manufacturers.

Regardless, I think if even 1% of the buyers would consider an EV that could change the market by changing the perception of the driving public.

socala4 · June 2006

I think you need to also add in the RAV4 EVs, the Ford Ranger EVs, the Nissan Altras, the Honda EVs along with all the waiting lists. You then need to consider that this was just CA and AZ. You can then add in that gas was only around $1.50/gallon. And finally adjust for the fact that these cars weren't marketed by their manufacturers.

Do all that, and you're still nowhere close to 1%. If that got you to even 0.05% of the market, I'd be surprised.

The market is a great tool, because it helps to sort out the wheat (reality) from the chaff (dreamy idealism.) Capitalists want to make money, and you don't see them in this space.

You can bet that this segment has been analyzed to death by many, many people looking for great opportunities. It is almost certain that there's a really good reason why none of the smart money is investing in it.

rorr · June 2006

"At the time that CARB overturned the ZEV mandate there were about 5,000 EVs on the road. I know that the EV1 and RAV4 EV had long waiting lists."

And what was the cost to the manufacturer for the EV1 and RAV4 EV? Could this be one reason GM and Toyota canceled the program?

gagrice · June 2006

An electric car with minimal range and long refueling times doesn't make for a very good first or second car for most of us

You really should read your posts. They sound like a broken record. You are assuming you understand the average buyer. I don't think you are even close. There are now out of this small group 3 posters that would buy and use an electric vehicle for all the short haul stuff. Saving at least 3/4 of the cost per mile using a comparable sized gas car.

rorr · June 2006

"There are now out of this small group 3 posters that would buy and use an electric vehicle for all the short haul stuff."

But why not buy a plug-in hybrid instead so it could be treated as an electric vehicle for all the short haul stuff AND be useful for longer ranges? If one wanted to treat it as an EV vehicle they could. It would just have the added insurance of an onboard ICE.

socala4 · June 2006

You are assuming you understand the average buyer. I don't think you are even close.

I don't need to understand the average buyer, I just need to look at what they're buying, and why they buy it.

They had decades to buy the diesels that you so passionately adore, but they have never done it, whether or not they had the opportunity. Take the hint, that message is loud and clear.

There are now out of this small group 3 posters that would buy and use an electric vehicle for all the short haul stuff.

The devotees are the ones posting on this thread. Of course they will skew toward the pro-alternative crowd, that's why they're posting here.

You should ask yourself who isn't posting here. The average person who buys cars couldn't care less about any of this stuff. I'm sure you'll find several thousand Americans who want electric cars, but that isn't enough to create a market, which is fairly obvious given that there is no market today despite the existence of these cars for many years.

gagrice · June 2006

Could this be one reason GM and Toyota canceled the program?

It could have been. They were expensive. Same as batteries for a hybrid. The money saved on the gas engine and complex transmission could buy enough batteries to travel an extra 100 miles. I do think we will need better batteries for mainstream EVs. I would be an early adopter of an EV. Talk about loss of range the E85 FFV range is nothing to write home about. A Dodge Stratus using E85 has about a 200 mile range in town and a little over 300 on the highway.

rorr · June 2006

"Talk about loss of range the E85 FFV range is nothing to write home about"

Sure, but when a E85 FFV gets low on gas, what do you do? Pull into a gas station and 5 minutes later you're on your way again. Simple.

Um, can't do that with EV's.

socala4 · June 2006

Sure, but when a E85 FFV gets low on gas, what do you do? Pull into a gas station and 5 minutes later you're on your way again. Simple.

Um, can't do that with EV's.

I've got a patent pending on the Fifty Mile Extension Cord™, which will allow you to keep the car plugged in within that radius of your home or office. We haven't sorted out how exactly to keep it from getting tangled with semi-trucks, house pets and power-lines, but our engineers are working on it.

Problem solved. Or, maybe not...

gagrice · June 2006

despite the existence of these cars for many years

Where were these electric cars available for years? I have never seen them for sale only lease through exclusive offerings.

Or are back to the diesel cars being widely available? I have tried to buy a VW diesel off and on since 1978. They were always order and wait. The last time in CA was 2002. You could still get one if you ordered it and waited. Well I was not going to buy something without giving it a test drive. So if that is what you consider widely available I guess we just disagree. The fact you have glossed over is that 40% of the new Jettas sold are diesel. That without one sold in CA. Your negative views on diesel make me wonder what you would propose to save on fossil fuel.

gagrice · June 2006

Problem solved. Or, maybe not..

You make problems where they do not exist. I have a Lexus LS400 that has not gone over 12 miles from home for the last 5 years. An electric vehicle that would go 30 miles would be just as good & cost a lot less to drive those 12 miles.

socala4 · June 2006

Where were these electric cars available for years?

If GM had a market for electric cars, they would have increased production and started selling them en masse. (Why wouldn't they, if there was all that demand and no competition?)

So, why do you think that it didn't do it? As badly managed as they are, even GM knows to build a car that it already had in its inventory it it knew there was money in it. They stopped for a reason, and the reason is very easy to see.

The answer is obvious, and the answer is the market. No reason to build it if they aren't going to buy it.

gagrice · June 2006

why not buy a plug-in hybrid

Too complex. Too much crap to go bad. Toyota is thinking long term here. Sell it at a loss and get even when all that crap quits. It has already started if you follow the Prius posts. I still cannot believe a $250 charge to reset the computer if you run out of gas in a Prius.

gagrice · June 2006

No reason to build it if they aren't going to buy it.

They were already built. They refused to sell the ones they had out in the field. There is a lot of people in CA that wanted to keep their EV-1 when the lease ran out. I think that GM did not want to have the warranty to contend with. It is the same as the one on the hybrid crappola.

socala4 · June 2006

They refused to sell the ones they had out in the field. There is a lot of people in CA that wanted to keep their EV-1 when the lease ran out.

Somehow, you seem to think that the Prius is a flop, even though Toyota has now sold over 500,000 hybrids worldwide and sold over 100,000 Priuses in the US during CY 2005, yet at the same time, you believe that 800 people leasing an EV-1 over a several year period is a resounding success.

Forgive me for believing that your ideology is trumping your logic. Between 800 units over several years, and 100,000 cars in a single year, I think I'd know which one has a better shot at making it.

tpe · June 2006

From an Edmund's article

In a recent issue of Motor Trend, an interviewer asked GM chief Rick Wagoner about the central regret of his tenure. He said it was killing the EV1 program.

The answer is obvious, and the answer is the market. No reason to build it if they aren't going to buy it.

Try to imagine the frustration of a buyer being told that he can't have a product because nobody wants it. This buyer then asks, how do you know nobody wants it? Answer, we know that nobody wants it because we only sold 800 units in 4 years. The buyer then asks, how many units were produced? The answer, 800 units. So every unit produced was sold? Answer, yes. Were dealers offering big incentives or any incentives to sell these vehicles? Answer, no. Did these vehicles spend a long time on the dealer's lot? Answer, no, they were pre-sold. Yet there was no demand? Answer, yes, only 800 units were sold.

tpe · June 2006

You obviously feel that Prius owners represent what Americans want. Pure speculation here but I suspect that if you asked Prius owners if they would be interested in a Toyota RAV4 EV I believe a large percentage would say yes. Unfortunately they don't have that option because, according to you, nobody wants EVs.

You seem to think that you have some greater insight into what Americans want. How many people want Hummers? While I don't know the answer I'm sure it's not very many. Why are they being produced if nobody wants them? A company would be crazy to produce a car that a fraction of a percent of the market would buy. Right?

socala4 · June 2006

You told me that there was a 5,000 person waiting list.

If this was such a hot product, why wasn't there a 50,000 person waiting list? 100,000? 200,000? Why weren't they lined up out the door of the dealership, demanding their cars?

And why didn't all the other automakers see all of the excitement, and jump into the game? They all leaped in when they saw the minivan and SUV, and now they're jumping into hybrids, yet the EV programs remain tiny and experimental. Actions speak louder than words.

I appreciate the desire to find a silver lining on the cloud, but it ain't there. And as for Wagoner's regrets, I can think of several more things that he should really regret, but I guess that sounding green in retrospect sounds nice in an interview.

gagrice · June 2006

GM CEO Wagoner in Motor Trend, June 2006, p. 94: "His worst decision [was] Axing the EV1 electric-car program...it did affect image."

You may think it was good business I don't. I lost interest in cars when I bought my first Toyota Land Cruiser in 1964. So GM cars are of little interest to me. If any other automaker comes up with a reasonably sized diesel PU, the GMC PU will be sold. I know for a fact that a Ranger sized PU with a 4 cylinder diesel is capable of 45 MPG. That would suit my needs just fine. If not I keep using more than my share of fossil fuel. That should be simple enough to understand.

socala4 · June 2006

You obviously feel that Prius owners represent what Americans want.

Not quite. But the indicators thus far hint strongly that this technology has a real-world shot of breaking through the consumer market, because the right consumers (the innovators who like tech for tech's sake) are clearly interested enough to spend their money, and because the early adoptors (the visionaries who are ecology minded) seem to be transitioning the baton to the "early majority" (pragmatists who like to save fuel, even if the payoff isn't immediate and a premium price is required). This handoff from the early adoptors to the early majority is critical if the product is going to have a market breakthrough, and eventually gain mainstream acceptance.

EV's haven't even attracted the innovators, and there's no reason for them to do so. If anything, hybrids reduce the short-term likelihood of pure EV's making it in the short run, because hybrids have stolen all their thunder.

So I go back to the past bit: Without demand and a chance to eventually earn a profit, there will be no reason to build EV's. If you don't think that the auto industry has studied this forward and backward to see whether it makes sense to do it, think again.

tpe · June 2006

And why didn't all the other automakers see all of the excitement, and jump into the game? They all leaped in when they saw the minivan and SUV, and now they're jumping into hybrids, yet the EV programs remain tiny and experimental. Actions speak louder than words.

Well maybe they didn't embrace EVs because they didn't see the profit, which is not the same thing as not seeing the demand. When Toyota, Datsun, Honda, VW offered small cars in the 60s and early 70s the big 3 didn't jump on the bandwagon for the same reason. Why manufacture a car that generates less profit? In retrospect maybe they would have been smarter to sacrifice immediate profitability for long term competitiveness. I believe it will happen again.

You've made posts regarding disruptive technologies. A viable EV is the Godzilla of disruptive technologies in that it challenges the biggest industry on the planet. Don't think it won't have obstacles to overcome. One of them being the public perception that was created by a campaign of disinformation.

tpe · June 2006

Are hybrids making a profit for their manufacturers? Is it comparable to their non-hybrid counter parts? Would this profitability, if it exists, still exist without government tax breaks that artificially create demand?

socala4 · June 2006

One of them being the public perception that was created by a campaign of disinformation.

I think that one basic truism is that if we need a conspiracy theory to support our beliefs in a technology, then the technology probably doesn't make sense.

You should find it interesting that none of the automakers have expressed more than a modest interest in EV's. Not the behemoth US dinosaurs, not the Japanese market leaders, not the aggressive niche players, not the Asian upstarts, not the Germans, and not even the major makers outside the US market such as Renault and FIAT have done it.

Why not? While I wouldn't expect everyone to do it, I would expect some of them to do it if it was a great idea. Apparently, it isn't, they've seen the results to date, and obviously don't think it's worth it.

socala4 · June 2006

Are hybrids making a profit for their manufacturers?

No, the market is still too small for that.

TMC is trying to create a market, and obviously thinks that it's worth the investment. At this pace, I would expect this to become a profitable technology and a great brand builder, almost surely worth the investment.

tpe · June 2006

I grew up in CA but haven't lived there since 1986. I was on the East Coast when this CARB ZEV mandate came about. I remember thinking, what have those tree huggers done now? Then over the following years I read stories about these crazy, impractical cars that nobody wanted but were being forced to buy. I had the image in my mind of golf carts disguised as cars that had to pull over to re-charge every few miles. I remember thinking, what a misguided disaster. I've recently come to find that my perceptions weren't accurate. I found this realization not only amazing but scary. How did I develop these perceptions from 3,000 miles away? I don't know the answer but I suspect it was according to someone's game plan. I've never driven an EV1 or a RAV4 EV so to some extent I don't know what I'm talking about. Wouldn't this discussion be great if it was held amongst people that had actually lived with these vehicles?

tpe · June 2006

I agree. From an engineering perspective multiple drive systems is not ideal. I only support it because I believe it represents going in the right direction, which is better electric motors, better batteries. I think that if someone started manufacturing PHEVs it would be a fairly short step to get them to offer that vehicle without the ICE capability.

socala4 · June 2006

I think that if someone started manufacturing PHEVs it would be a fairly short step to get them to offer that vehicle without the ICE capability.

I think that you need to realize that you are one of a very small group of people who think that this is important.

The average consumer does not loathe the gas engine as you do. Sure, they won't mind an EV that works, but right now, they don't work. (And yes, the range and inability to refuel on the fly are significant problems.)

The automakers need to appeal to customer needs, whether they are current needs or indicative of an unserved but pent-up demand.

Your EV doesn't do that. There are different market segments with different priorities, but almost nobody wants a car with about as much range as has your typical car when the "low fuel" light comes on, and then requires all day to fill up.

There is no value proposition in that to anyone but for a few ideologues, and there aren't enough of those to create a market. It's not a conspiracy, it's just the market at work, and the key to success comes from serving the market, not from an Area 51 bogeyman that doesn't exist.

snakeweasel · June 2006

So had the manufacturers been willing to meet demand and had they been offered nationwide instead of just CA and AZ I think your million vehicle estimate is probably good but I think the demand would still excede supply.

I was originally thinking a lot more than the million mark, but then I figured that would be more of a demand figure that wouldn't be satisfied.

How much fuel would 1 million vehicles save. Probably about 500 million gallons per year. Not all that much relative to our total consumption but conservation needs to take place on the individual level.

Well its been said that the journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. Or the journey to save a 100 billion gallons of gas starts with 500 million.

tpe · June 2006

TMC is trying to create a market,

Create a market? That's an interesting concept from someone that states manufacturers don't offer diesels or EVs because a market doesn't exist. Toyota has been trying to create this market since 2001. That's a pretty big investment on their part based on a future market. So why are you so quick to dismiss EVs or diesels based on current sales?

In the case of diesels you are really off target. I realize that only about 1% of vehicles sold in this country are diesel. Here's a hypothetical question. If Toyota offered a diesel Camry or Honda offered a diesel Accord do you think it would only account for 1% of these car's sales? Your answer will say a lot about how in touch with reality you really are.

snakeweasel · June 2006

I don't need to understand the average buyer, I just need to look at what they're buying, and why they buy it.

Its kind of hard to look at what the average car buyer is buying and then say they won't buy something thats not even avaliable to them. Secondly unless you can read their minds you can't know why they are buying them. maybe they are buying them because there is no alternative.

snakeweasel · June 2006

Try to imagine the frustration of a buyer being told that he can't have a product because nobody wants it. This buyer then asks, how do you know nobody wants it? Answer, we know that nobody wants it because we only sold 800 units in 4 years. The buyer then asks, how many units were produced? The answer, 800 units. So every unit produced was sold? Answer, yes.

The sad thing about that is that they had at least 5,000 people on a waiting list. And it was a waiting list you had to wait to get on.

tpe · June 2006

What is the average consumer? Is there any vehicle that represents more than 50% of sales? Obviously not. I'm pretty sure that no single vehicle represents even 10% of total sales. So its not a matter of going after what Americans want but going after the top niche markets. I happen to believe that EVs could be one of these niche markets and, yes, I believe a bogeyman is involved in it not being represented.

Most of our decisions involve tradeoffs. Granted EVs aren't suitable for everyone based on limited range and re-charge times. But they do have the positive aspect of reduced fuel consumption and costs. Depending on the individual these trade-offs may or may not make sense. I contend that for a significant number of people the pluses outweigh the negatives. I don't know what this number is but I think it is marketable.

socala4 · June 2006

You still haven't told me why nobody who actually might stand to profit from this hasn't yet done it.

TMC is proving there's a market for hybrids by selling products as fast it can make them. 100,000 units is respectable for a mass market car. The fact that automakers are scrambling to launch their own version shows you that the industry leaders think that there's something to it.

All we have is your hopes and dreams, no data that supports your conclusions. Since it is your theory, you need to provide support for your supposition that there's a market. Your theory is built on the notion that everyone in the industry is dumb, and that none of them understand the results of their own research and development.

If Wagoner means it about the EV1, then he needs to revive it. If GM could use it as a turnaround product, he'd be a hero...but he seems to betting on HHR's, instead.

tpe · June 2006

The average consumer does not loathe the gas engine as you do. Sure, they won't mind an EV that works, but right now, they don't work. (And yes, the range and inability to refuel on the fly are significant problems.)

I don't loathe the gas engine. Much like the telegraph, it was great for a while but it is now time to move forward. I'm definitely not an expert in the field but I do suspect that an EV could potentially re-charge on the fly, giving it unlimited range. I think it is possible to create roadways that allow for an EV to re-charge while driving over them. I'm not an expert in this field so I don't have a good feeling about the feasibility but it is a potential that doesn't exist for an ICE powered vehicle.

socala4 · June 2006

I'm definitely not an expert in the field but I do suspect that an EV could potentially re-charge on the fly, giving it unlimited range.

You've either described a perpetual motion machine or a hybrid.

You need to have another source to fuel the battery and to power the car when the battery lacks power, regenerative braking doesn't provide enough energy to do it. The hybrid basically takes the refueling system and marries it to the engine, rather than relying strictly on another secondary source (the power grid), which is not a bad idea at all given what technology we have and are likely to have.

One point is that the hybrid need not necessarily be a gas engine, and alternative technologies may come down the pike that can be used to provide power when the electric motor cannot, while keeping the battery charged.

In any case, we need stuff that works, and this works reasonably well now and will probably improve, and best of all, the market seems ready to embrace it. You can't say that about electric cars, except in very limited circumstances.

tpe · June 2006

I don't want to come across as a know it all. Everything I say is a personal opinion based on the best information I've been able to come across.

Other manufacturerers are following Toyota into the hybrid field. Its kind of like Toyota following GM and Ford into the FFV field. Its not so much that they think it is a good idea but that they realize it is a big enough market that they can't be left out.

Wagoner's comment probably reflect a missed opportunity. I'm not entirely sure he could revive the EV1 because I don't think the batteries are available. When GM got out of the EV business they also sold their battery interest to an oil company (Chevron). Its clearly a very complicated issue. I don't know what's going on. I can only speculate like everyone else.

tpe · June 2006

You've either described a perpetual motion machine or a hybrid

Not really. I can envision specialized lanes on an interstate for transferring energy to re-charge batteries. It has nothing to do with perpetual motion and the recipient would pay a fee. Its futuristic but its doable. ICEs represent an archaic technology thats clinging on to life.

snakeweasel · June 2006

Not to much different than how a subway train or an electric street car works. However I do think its not feesable. on a large scale basis.

socala4 · June 2006

Exactly. Big difference between a mass transit driver traveling along a fixed route, with the line supporting a fairly low volume of traffic, and having tens or hundreds of thousands of cars in multiple lanes, traveling in multiple directions, utilizing such a system.

It would be easier to get them onto these more easily managed trains and buses than to try to provide individual customized powerlines for everyone. And you can't wire the entire country to such a great extent.

snakeweasel · June 2006

Its possible to do I just question the ability to put such a system along the entire interstate system let alone on over a million miles of American roads. It can be done but not cost effective on a large scale. Its not individual customized power lines but a single shared system.

It can be done but the logistics of it on a large scale is very hard.

tpe · June 2006

Feasible or not it doesn't represent the crux of EV viability. I was merely alluding to a potential that can be utilized with an EV but not an ICE.

My biggest hope is that gas prices stay high for at least a couple more years. Whether or not EVs end up being part of the solution these high gas prices have definitely increased exploration into alternatives.

gagrice · June 2006

So why are you so quick to dismiss EVs or diesels based on current sales?

It is something he has never tried and has a fear of anything new. I can guarantee if he drove one of the new diesel cars that are available today he would whistle a different tune. The way it is he is more comfortable behind the keyboard passing on information that the media spews out. Reading books that guess what people want. Knowing what people want is a science that eludes the brightest of minds. Most of which do not hang out blogging on Edmund's.

I'm like you I was too late to have a shot at any of the EVs. I tried buying a couple of the golf cart type and found they are not allowed on most streets I need to drive on. Batteries are still an obstacle to electric vehicles that are reasonably priced. The savings in gas could be recouped faster with an EV than with a hybrid.

gagrice · June 2006

The sad thing about that is that they had at least 5,000 people

The real sad part is they jumped out just as they had the donkey by the tail. They had developed what is today the standard battery for all hybrids the NiMH. If they had hung in and followed those that were with them they would probably killed the hybrid market before it ever developed. I can tell you I would buy a RAV4 EV long before I would consider a Prius. And I don't even like the looks of the Rav4 that is currently being sold.

socala4 · June 2006

It is something he has never tried and has a fear of anything new.

Sorry, but this has nothing to do with me personally, and what I like or dislike, or fear or embrace. My tastes are not of issue here.

It's about the marketplace. You have not demonstrated any reason to believe that your chosen favorites have any hope of success. Show us the money, or at least some reason to believe that there is going to be some money, some day.

gagrice · June 2006

You've either described a perpetual motion machine or a hybrid

We have trolleys running all over San Diego on electric. I think he was putting forth an electrified road system that was projected when I was a kid in the 1950s. I guess we just have not advanced very far in the last 55 years. We let the oil companies and the automakers dictate what we should or should not drive. Has nothing much to do with what we want. I have not been able to buy what I really want for 30 years. All my vehicle purchases were compromises.

and best of all, the market seems ready to embrace it. You can't say that about electric cars

I can and will continue to say that. I test drove the first Prius in San Diego twice. I thought it was cool. Wife hated it and we did not buy it. They had two and they were there for two months. They called me several times to reconsider. The biggest selling point for me was 8 years 100k miles Bumper to bumper. What did I have to lose $20k even. They were saying at that time in 2000 that Toyota had $35k in each Prius. The Prius Classic was never a success here or abroad. The Prius II came out in late 2003 with all the fanfare and freebies for the Hollywood elite. That is what sold the car. Just like the diesels and EVs the Prius has been dribbled out so that you do not know the true market value. That is the part you leave out. People want what is in short supply. If the market gets flooded with diesels and hybrids, neither one may sell. That is when I pop in and buy at a decent price. Never pay MSRP for a vehicle.

Will ethanol E85 catch on in the US? Will we Live Green and Go Yellow?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles