backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 111 comment(s) - last by darkpuppet.. on Jul 18 at 5:14 PM


400,000km in a Toyota Prius (Source: Gerry Kahrmann, CanWest News Service)
Prius travels 400,000km in 24 months

When it comes to stop-and-go traffic, hybrid vehicles are at their best in fuel efficiency. Traditional internal combustion engines (ICE) run constantly in traffic and as a result consume fuel and emit pollutants into the atmosphere.

Hybrids, on the other hand, operate on battery power when at a standstill. True hybrids like the Toyota Prius and Ford Escape Hybrid can travel at moderate speeds around town under full electric power -- as long as the battery is charged.

The reduction in fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions were enough for New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to declare that all yellow cabs would be hybrids by 2012.

"There's an awful lot of taxicabs on the streets of New York City obviously, so it makes a real big difference," said Bloomberg in late May. "These cars just sit there in traffic sometimes, belching fumes; this does a lot less. It's a lot better for all of us."

When it comes to the Toyota Prius, a Vancouver cab driver has shown that the mid-sized hybrid is up to the task of taxi duty. Andrew Grant and his partner operate a 2004 Prius that roams the streets 22 to 24 hours a day.

According to Grant, the Prius just surpassed the 400,000 kilometer (248,548 mile) mark. The Prius accomplished this feat by consuming just 10 to 15 liters of gasoline per 12-hour shift as opposed to 35 to 55 liters for traditional ICE taxis.

Over a 24-month period, the Prius had one-third less maintenance costs and there were no failures of the hybrid powertrain during 400,000 kilometers of driving. The lower maintenance costs coupled with a fuel savings of roughly 1,500 liters per month means that the Prius paid for itself in less than 24 months.

Grant's 2004 Prius is now the highest-mileage second generation Prius on the road. Not surprisingly, Toyota is interested in checking out the vehicle so it will soon be shipped to Toyota's Japanese headquarters for research.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Uh...
By Duraz0rz on 7/13/2007 12:05:40 PM , Rating: 2
Wow...so I think if there were any doubts about the durability of a hybrid system, this would blow those statements out of the water.




RE: Uh...
By MDE on 7/13/2007 12:33:48 PM , Rating: 4
You see one example (two, since this is the second-highest mileage 2G Prius according to TFA) and you're sold on the durability of it? I could probably find two examples of Prius lemons to discount these high mileage models. We need numbers on a bigger sample. Time may also cause the batteries to deteriorate, there really isn't a good way to estimate the wear of normal driving, except by driving them normally for an extended period of time.


RE: Uh...
By Duraz0rz on 7/13/2007 12:43:18 PM , Rating: 5
I think it's quite safe to assume that, if you put 160,000 km/year on a car and it's stood up this well, especially against the demands that taxi drivers usually place their cars in, it is a fairly good indicator of how well it can stand up.

Batteries may wear out over time, but they wear out far faster when you discharge and recharge them constantly. And with the amount of city driving he was doing, probably, that would be quite a lot of cycles by then.


RE: Uh...
By boobot on 7/13/2007 12:50:19 PM , Rating: 2
And you would never make a good forecaster or statistician. As mentioned above If we were to write a story on a Prius that had complete failures would this be indicitive of the Prius being a lemon?


RE: Uh...
By geddarkstorm on 7/13/2007 1:31:14 PM , Rating: 5
I think you're missing the point. This shows, irrefutably, the potential the hardware and system has. These are relatively new vehicles, so the numbers of Prius that have driven nearly that much can't be high yet. But the article stated that the thing had received only 2/3rds (1/3rd less) the standard maintenance of a ICE. That alone says a lot.

Whatever the statistics, that's irrelevant if we're talking about what the hardware could do, what it could live up to, which is what this shows. Toyota wants to look at it, obviously they want to see how so much wear has effected it and why it's done so good. There will always be lemons in every brand of vehicle, and I can show you any brand of vehicle with dozens of lemon stories, as there'll always be defects in manufacture and design (and I guarantee you, you won't be able to forecast which new vehicle will last better than another except in extreme cases, maybe, so don't even try that card). But for a design and standard manufactured piece of equipment to do this good is very warming. This is the positive control, now we know what can be, and it's certainly better than a lot of ICE brands. I'd like you to show me a Ford Focus that could go that far without major repairs and replacements (no new engine/new power train), and this one being the second Prius shows it isn't a fluke.

Really, the reason this is so remarkable to me is because of the inherent complexity of hybrid design. You wouldn't expect it to do this well--but the fact it is shows our technology has sufficiently developed and these may well be a good buy. The hybrid system is proving itself. And yes, I've taken college statistics. Consumers will be most concerned with the standard mean for this vehicle's performance and longevity, but engineers and designers will be most interested in these cases where they did so remarkably well for any design, and then to learn from that success in designing superior vehicles to come next.


RE: Uh...
By pixelslave on 7/13/2007 2:39:48 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Toyota wants to look at it, obviously they want to see how so much wear has effected it and why it's done so good.


I hope what they are not trying to look for a way to make the Prius LESS reliable so that (1) they don't spend extra money on making it so good; (2) Prius drivers will upgrade to another Prius faster.


RE: Uh...
By SiliconAddict on 7/14/07, Rating: -1
RE: Uh...
By kenji4life on 7/14/2007 6:42:58 PM , Rating: 3
It's called planned obsolescence. This hasn't been practiced so much since the Japanese companies started booming. It is however one of the reasons that the 'big 3' or 'detroit 3' fell behind. I think that GM/Chrysler/Ford have been trying hard to bury their past. They have for the most part finally come to realize that planned obsolescence just gives them a bad reputation. With the world blooming in the auto market now more than ever (look at hyundai) It's definitely in BIG3's best interest to build reliable cars. Unfortunately companies don't always act in the customer's best interest when they are focused (read: tunnel vision) on the bottom line.


RE: Uh...
By TomZ on 7/14/07, Rating: 0
RE: Uh...
By kenji4life on 7/16/2007 5:55:09 AM , Rating: 3
Don't know if you realize it, but your statement proves my point to a certain degree. By definition, if you design a car to go a certain number of miles, that is planned obsolescence.

Perhaps automotive engineers just didn't know what they were doing? Doubt that. It's more likely this:

The bottom line (read: making as much money as possible, despite the customer). If a company can make a car that will last at least until the warranty is up, they will save money in two or more ways.

1. lower cost of parts (they don't have to over-engineer a car if it only needs to last 3 years)

that leads us to:

2. lower cost of repairs (they don't have to repair vehicles under warranty if the parts last at least until the warranty is up)

bonus: if the owner brings out of warranty car to be repaired at the dealership, anyone knows the "stealership" makes a killing on these repairs.

That my friend is planned obsolescence. Ever hear the chevy guy talk about how much fords break down, ford guys talk about how much chevy's break down, and dodge guys talk about how much faster their dodge is than the fords or chevys (while the ford/chevy guys talk about how much dodge breaks down). Well, the truth is that all 3 of them break down; and none of the three are really faster..

Want to hear the "Japanese Scenario"?

1. Build the car with highest quality possible parts. Sell the car on it's reliability which is built on reputation. More people buy and production goes up with demand, lowering production costs and raising overall profits

2. Because oem parts are high quality, aftermarket parts are frowned upon because of their inferiority to oem. oem parts in turn sell for a premium because owners realize the parts are better.

bonus: Buyers realize they can get an overall better value buying from a reliable Japanese brand (cars and their parts alike)

result: American car companies feel the hit and are forced to rethink their business plan, along with strong lobbying to gov't. (Think hardcore import tax laws)

result #2: Japanese car companies move production to states so that they can skirt import laws.

result #3: Japanese car companies continue to gain market share, further diversifying the market and allowing more companies to break into the market (eg hyundai, kia)

Now don't take what I write too personally. I have no hatred towards any companies (although I tend to buy from some more than others).
I've owned vehicles from GM, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Nissan, Subaru, Toyota, Volvo, Mercedes, Kawasaki, Suzuki (motorcycles on the latter 2) All of these vehicles, for the most part were reliable and didn't have many problems. This had a lot to do with how they were treated and maintained.
If I had a choice of which one to pick not to break down on me at the worst time it would be a hard choice. My favorite, the Nissan may be my last choice; but that is because I am the hardest on it. I might pick the GMC pickup or the Subaru 3 banger. Perhaps I'd go with the Honda just because they never seem to let me down.
Even with everything that has gone wrong with my Nissan, it was a direct result of me replacing the OEM parts with questionable aftermarket ones. This perhaps just proves my point more than ever.

One of my dad's Volvos had well over 500k miles on it. Just goes to show that a well cared for vehicle has much more potential than one that is abused. Know what finally stopped that Volvo? It was a guy running a red light. My dad got out without a scratch.

But I have seen many cars from all sides of our muddy pond break down. In the end, I believe that planned obsolescence has long ago went the way of the Caveman: gone but not forgotten.


RE: Uh...
By TomZ on 7/16/2007 8:19:58 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
By definition, if you design a car to go a certain number of miles, that is planned obsolescence.

You're close, but not correct. Planned obsolence in that case would mean that something in the car is designed to break after 100K miles. That is completely different than everything in the car being designed to last at least 100K miles (except for tires, break pads, oil, etc).

It's really a question of cost. If you try to design for something way past 100K miles, like they do for heavy-duty highway trucks, it just ends up costing a lot more. For trucks, that cost is justified, but for cars, people generally don't want cars that run that long. That's because old cars are worn looking inside and out, their style is out of date, new models are much improved over old models, and I think some people (not all) get tired of driving the same car for many years.

Finally, anecdotal evidence of quality is very misleading, and you can't really use it to judge overall quality. For every 500K mile Volvo story, you'll find another guy with 500K Buick story, or whatever. Just search the web, you'll find these kinds of "testimonials" for every brand. These stories are fun, but they don't tell you much about the statistical probability of you running into problems or not with that particular model. You have to look to actual reliability statistics for that.


RE: Uh...
By kenji4life on 7/16/2007 4:41:56 PM , Rating: 2
It's funny because as I got to the end of my writing last night I started to realize that the quality of the parts/vehicle is a small factor in the larger equation, where the owner of the vehicle is the most important variable.

That doesn't mean that the USA has never practiced planned obsolescence. I don't think for a minute they do now, on the kind of scale that they may have in the past. But I never thought of it as "designed to break" so much as "designed not to last". This is shown in my original arguement.

BTW I agree with you on the 'anecdotal' experience (is that a word?). I believe that Volvo is a prime example to somewhat displace the arguement that 'for every volvo, there's a buick'. Do buick owners have a high mileage club?
Volvo has a high mileage club. I'm willing to bet that if you do the numbers, there are a large percentage more high mileage volvos than there are high mileage buicks. Does buick make a sticker that says "500k club" or "1 million miles club"? I doubt it. This goes to show that while oftentimes it's only an isolated incident, there is also the case where quality is the #1 factor.

Don't forget, I'm not biased towards any company. But if you told me that you had 500k on your mitsubishi eclipse (original motor); I would be shocked. If you told me you had 500k on your GMC Pickup, I'd be less than surprised. If you told me that you had 500k on your Volvo, I'd just say welcome to the club.


RE: Uh...
By kenji4life on 7/16/2007 4:47:39 PM , Rating: 1
OTOH, If you told me that your __anycar__ broke down, I'd question your ability to maintain your car properly. If your car was one that I knew to have reliability problems, I might give you more credit and simply recommend that you buy a different brand/car that has a better reputation.


RE: Uh...
By TomZ on 7/16/2007 5:56:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you told me that your __anycar__ broke down, I'd question your ability to maintain your car properly

Huh? You're blaming all design and manufacturing problems on the user now? LOL.

I've got an appt. later this week with Toyota dealer to try to have them fix the DVD player again (in warranty). You think I could have somehow prevented the problem with that?

Also on my Toyota, they have a premature tire wear problem with the run-flats, so they'll be replacing all the tires. Could I have prevented that also?

I agree that some problems can be prevented, but a large majority cannot.


RE: Uh...
By kenji4life on 7/16/2007 6:40:30 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry, did I ever say that? If you re-read my comments you'll see that I did not. I'll be the first person to tell you that companies put low quality parts in cars to save money. Often there are also just flaws which should have been worked out before they were released.

Don't think for a minute that you can blame most car failures on the manufacturer, though. A well maintained piece of crap will not always run better than the over-engineered dream car that's poorly mistreated and poorly maintained, but this is not my arguement.

Simply, you take two cars and both have no major problems to begin with: the car which is abused and not well maintained will break down before the car that is treated the opposite.

Where do you get the idea that I'm blaming the user for everything? I'm not going to tell you: "Oh, you blew a fuse. You shouldn't be using your headlights so much."; But I will tell you: "Oh, you blew a fuse. Maybe you should be more careful about putting aftermarket bulbs in your headlights."

Everyone knows that parts fail, and I would never argue otherwise. If I was that crazy, I'd probably believe that all cars which are well maintained should last forever. . .
There's only so much you can do you live a healthy life, but in the end it's futile because death is inevitable.


RE: Uh...
By Calin on 7/17/2007 3:11:27 AM , Rating: 2
And something more: if a car goes strong after 100k, its resale value is greater - so if you use your car only 100k, you get more money back (towards your new car)


RE: Uh...
By kenji4life on 7/17/2007 9:15:41 PM , Rating: 2
I don't see how your car going over 100k raises the resale value. Incoherent statement?

Did you mean that cars with a good reputation to go longer than 100k have a higher resale?

If I were to try and get the most out of a car on resale, I'd probably shoot for 60k miles. I think it tends to kind of decline more quickly as you get closer to and beyond 100k. Of course a 1995 car with 100k from 1 owner with highway miles and service records would be more enticing to a buyer than a 2000 car with 100k and 2 owners with no service records.

It's all a game of "needle in the haystack"


RE: Uh...
By Ralph The Magician on 7/13/2007 4:06:00 PM , Rating: 3
No. You are wrong. The OP is correct. You are the one who is "missing the point."

This is one article, highlighting one instance where it's being *reported* that hardware has stood up extremely well. That it. There are little, if any, sweeping generalizations you can make. Even Toyota acknowledges this to some degree, as they want the vehicle back so they can tear it apart.

If you actually think that a single example shows, "[I]rrefutably, the potential the hardware and system has," then you really don't have a clue.


RE: Uh...
By Duraz0rz on 7/13/2007 4:22:44 PM , Rating: 3
Toyota wants it back to study how well the parts have worn from driving 400,000km. That's what would make sense to me.

Considering most of these cards come off of an assembly line and made to precise standards, how does one example NOT show the potential of how well-built something is?

Face it...if we were talking about the overclockability of CPUs, and we saw one instance of it being overclocked to double its stock clock speed, then we would be all over it.


RE: Uh...
By Duraz0rz on 7/13/2007 4:25:15 PM , Rating: 1
Sorry, I should elaborate a bit more.

If they came off the same assembly line, and were built to the same exact specifications, then it's reasonable to deduct that that model will have the potential to perform just as well as this car did.


RE: Uh...
By TomZ on 7/14/2007 2:48:45 PM , Rating: 3
Bad assumption! First, "built on the same assembly line" doesn't mean each piece rolling off that line is exactly identical. Component parts have variance, as does the manufacturing process itself.

Second, a sample size of n=1 is not statistically significant. You need more samples to tell you whether this is typical or an outlier.


RE: Uh...
By encia on 7/14/2007 5:02:54 PM , Rating: 2
Refer to Prius 1.x for n > 1.


RE: Uh...
By depravedone on 7/15/2007 11:24:35 AM , Rating: 2
There is still some value to Toyota in examining the wear on the parts of this high-mileage example. It's also important to note that the tight tolerances and quality standards required by japanese car manufactures far exceed those even imagined by their American counterparts and it would be much more representative of other units from that particular line in a given time frame than you would think.


RE: Uh...
By TomZ on 7/16/07, Rating: 0
RE: Uh...
By TimberJon on 7/13/2007 4:07:46 PM , Rating: 2
Im sure they want the car back to evaluate the level of wear and tear on the synergy drive system, but also on bearings, and most rotating parts to look for wear. They are probably VERY interested in getting the car back because there was something engineered on the vehicle that some engineer said WHOOPS! and it was too late to change it because it had already gone to full production. In that case, evaluations are made on whether or not that oops will fail or if there will be any problems. In this case, if it is valid.. it was then decided by a team that it should be ok, with emphasis on should.

If that was the case, this vehicles high mileage and success would tell them that although there was an OOPS in the design somewhere, that it lasted this long (not taking into account what parts were actually maintained or replaced in that 1/3 less maintenance estimate) would be shocking to the engineering team and the guy the office was voting against. That possible design failure lasted 250k miles plus without a problem, would tell Toyota that even though that was an oops, that it held and performed. Thatd be a stack of kudos to the designer, even if he messed up on it.

Whether thats the case or not.. they are probably very interested in the fact that the vehicle survived extremes of cold, and corrosion.


RE: Uh...
By HilbertSpace on 7/13/2007 4:52:27 PM , Rating: 3
Vancouver is one of the mildest climates in Canada, maybe once every couple of years do you get any appreciable amount of snow. Salt is rarely if ever put on the roads, so corrosion is much less than any other city in Canada. Couple that with the lack of highways in Van, and you have some fairly easy driving conditions.


RE: Uh...
By depravedone on 7/15/2007 11:41:41 AM , Rating: 2
A lack of snow does not mean the driving conditions are "easy" in this particular situation. City driving accounts for much more wear and tear on a vehicle than highway driving as you'll be stressing the drivetrain with starts and stops.

You can, expecially in rural areas, go for several miles without any braking or gear changes on the highway. Your engine will also experience less stress on the highway due to maintaining steady speed often averaging lower peak RPMs than in the city.


RE: Uh...
By pchan126 on 7/15/2007 11:27:35 PM , Rating: 2
Salt is only used when the extra couple of degrees of melting point change would make a difference. Most of the prairie provinces only use salt for the first snows, then switch to gravel when the temperature really drops.


RE: Uh...
By Zoomer on 7/14/07, Rating: -1
RE: Uh...
By darkpuppet on 7/18/2007 5:14:01 PM , Rating: 2
I'd like you to show me a Ford Focus that could go that far without major repairs and replacements (no new engine/new power train),

Head over to focuscanada.net and look up the user 'gapboypcs'.. he's put nearly 300,000km on his focus without any major issues, and he owns a 2k1 I believe.


RE: Uh...
By MDE on 7/16/2007 8:30:15 AM , Rating: 2
As my high school algebra teacher always said, "When you assume, you make an ass out of you and me." Assumptions and spotty anecdotal evidence are worth nothing, where's the real proof?

"The 1986 Nissan Stanza wagon was a really durable car because my Dad's got one with 220,000 miles!"* See what I mean? There's always one or two examples of statistical anomalies, we need a bigger data sample.

*Yes, we do have an 86 Stanza with 220k sitting in the garage.


RE: Uh...
By copiedright on 7/14/2007 2:24:21 AM , Rating: 4
Taxi Cabs always get good life due to the fact that they are kept running warm for most of the day. The quickest way to kill a car is to use it sparingly. Vehicles that work hard last the longest because all parts are working how they are designed, at designed temps and with circulating oil.


RE: Uh...
By Mday on 7/16/2007 2:44:12 AM , Rating: 3
Maintenance is also a factor. No doubt the longevity of the Prius is due to proper maintenance.


RE: Uh...
By MonkeyPaw on 7/13/2007 12:44:38 PM , Rating: 2
Well, one good result doesn't mean it's the average. My Dad got an Isuzu pickup to last for 360,000 miles, but I don't think his result was typical. However, this hybrid story is encouraging, as it at least suggests that the cars can last a long time. The fact that Toyota wants the car back should say something, too.

The major issue I have with hybrids aren't so much about cost, but if they actually benefit the environment in the big picture. Sure, they might reduce emissions on the street, but what about the environmental impact that goes into manufacturing and disposal of the batteries? Most cars aren't carefully recycled; they get sold to junk yards or crushed into cubes.


RE: Uh...
By Treckin on 7/13/2007 1:04:53 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, thats fairly common for small import pickups...
I own (although Its not my daily driver (: ) a mazda b2000 with 480k miles on it, and my friend has the same truck with 368k... change your fluids, do you preventative maintenance, etc. DONT LET YOU WIFE TOUCH IT!!!


RE: Uh...
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 7/13/2007 2:53:26 PM , Rating: 2
Ive got a B2000 mazda as well. Has about 520k miles on it, still works, although I had to get the clutch replaced on it last year. Nothing last forever :P


RE: Uh...
By PitViper007 on 7/13/2007 4:21:38 PM , Rating: 2
I had a b2000 as well, and I think it had close to 400k on it when I finally took it to the junk yard. A good truck.... Not a lot of power, but durable.

PitViper


RE: Uh...
By Andrwken on 7/14/2007 7:09:46 PM , Rating: 4
Depending on the year of above poster's Isuzu, its a gm small pickup clone. So the import stereotype does not apply. Although I just turned 300,000 on a 94 s-10 (motor and transmission have not been touched, have receipts to show only $500 in parts last 5 years. 1 alternator, 1 starter, 1 fuel pump and pickup assembly). Taking care of it is the biggest issue, but I can assure you that with my father running an auto repair shop for evidence, that the gap between domestic and import cars has closed to the point that if any of the big 3 are in business after the legacy costs subside, they will build as good or better cars than any manufacturer out there. The biggest problem now is fit and finish due to cost cutting and not reliability.


RE: Uh...
By lynxss on 7/13/2007 2:50:34 PM , Rating: 2
It's not uncommon to find a few exceptionally long lived vehicles in one otherwise bad product line. My neighbor used a '85 ford ranger in his ferrier business with a portable forge built into the backend and when he finally sold the business it had 650K miles on it. On a brand and model who's doors fall off and the engine explodes as soon as the warranty is up, lol.

I agree with the other poster, small import trucks always do very well. My gf's nissan truck has 280K miles, my best friends nissan truck has 320K miles and my other neighbor's ancient toyota truck has 475K miles. My Jeep truck, however, I've had to replace the engine at 250K miles, although its been much more heavily abused offroading.


RE: Uh...
By Googer on 7/15/2007 11:10:09 PM , Rating: 2
You don't even realize that the Isuzu your dad bought is an a GM product!

The Isuzu Hombre comes off the same production line as GM's GMC and Chevrolet pickup trucks. GM sells the vehicle to Isuzu and they put their Name badges on the front grille, dashboard, and rear tailgate. So 360,000 for an AMERICAN Vehicle is not too surprising.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isuzu_Hombre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isuzu
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/1996-to...
http://www.theautochannel.com/vehicles/new/reviews...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=isuzu+hombre+...


Quite impressive...
By killerroach on 7/13/2007 12:02:13 PM , Rating: 1
About 250K miles on a Prius is saying that the batteries are holding up better than one would think that they would... it's entirely possible that all that New York driving means that it may have to rely on the gas engine more, though (that being said, were it not for the price of electricity, a plug-in hybrid might be ideal for that sort of situation).

In regards to the gas mileage issue, though, the main NYC taxi vehicle is a Ford Crown Victoria, so saying it's getting substantially better gas mileage isn't saying a whole lot.




RE: Quite impressive...
By Pirks on 7/13/07, Rating: -1
RE: Quite impressive...
By quiksilv3r on 7/13/2007 12:25:49 PM , Rating: 2
Are you on crack?
Oh, you must be, because the two aren't even comparable.


RE: Quite impressive...
By Keeir on 7/13/2007 12:31:26 PM , Rating: 3
I doubt that...

Maybe when in motion the Prius and the Yaris are equally as gas efficient. But the Prius in this application would most likely still be significantly more gas efficient than the Yaris because of the engine turn off feature.

Not to mention that a manual yaris would be annoying to drive in city traffic for 12+ hours at a time


RE: Quite impressive...
By Flunk on 7/13/2007 1:01:39 PM , Rating: 2
How are you going to get passengers for your Yaris taxi? I know I would't be willing to pay the same fare in for a Yaris opposed to the much larger Prius.


RE: Quite impressive...
By Ringold on 7/13/2007 1:06:16 PM , Rating: 3
A moving yacht with strippers to either side of the driver would still be annoying as hell to drive in NY traffic.

That said, a question. It's bloody hot outside. The AC compressor gets powered from the battery, right? Not like the Ford Escape which apparently turns the AC off when under battery power. I'd imagine this might be a comfort issue when sitting in gridlock.


RE: Quite impressive...
By Keeir on 7/13/2007 6:43:12 PM , Rating: 2
Well

#1 from Vancover
--> Not NYC traffic
--> Usually not needed large amounts of AC

#2 In comparison, a fully automatic CVT Prius is significantly more comforatble to drive in City Traffic than a Manual Yaris, the auto that would get better gas milage


RE: Quite impressive...
By GreenEnvt on 7/13/2007 8:15:06 PM , Rating: 2
Temp's are pretty similar. Just because it's Canada, doesn't mean it's colder then a US city.
Vancouver average temp over the year is 52 F, NY is 53F.


RE: Quite impressive...
By Keeir on 7/14/2007 12:53:11 PM , Rating: 3
Average of Year is alot different than Average per Month.

For example

New York in July is 85 Average High and 68 Average Low

Compared to Seattle in July (the US city most similar to Vancover in location and geography to elimitate difference in measurement methodology) is 75 Average High and 55 Average Low

Conversely, it is warmer in the winter
New York 38/28 (January)
Seattle 46/36 (January)

But over the whole year,

New Yorks Avg Temp is 54F and Seattles is 53F.

Of course your going to get great milage when you need to run both AC and Heater Less.

* All Data from US Governement Sources


RE: Quite impressive...
By JonnyBlaze on 7/13/2007 3:57:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
In regards to the gas mileage issue, though, the main NYC taxi vehicle is a Ford Crown Victoria, so saying it's getting substantially better gas mileage isn't saying a whole lot.3


This cab isnt from NYC. Do you think cabs in NYC use Km?


RE: Quite impressive...
By Hoser McMoose on 7/13/2007 4:33:39 PM , Rating: 4
While you're correct that the cab isn't in NYC, it is in Vancouver, and the most common cab there is also likely to be a Crown Vic. In fact, Crown Vic's are pretty much standard fare for cabs everywhere in North America.

And yes, beating the fuel efficiency of a poorly designed and outdated fat car with a V8 engine isn't exactly ground breaking news!


RE: Quite impressive...
By Scrogneugneu on 7/13/2007 8:25:31 PM , Rating: 2
I can say that in the Montreal region, you'll find much, MUCH more Toyota Camry as cabs than anything else.


RE: Quite impressive...
By feelingshorter on 7/14/2007 2:32:34 AM , Rating: 2
Can someone confirm that they actually drive Crown Vics in Vancouver? The guy above me said that there are mostly Camry cabs in Montreal. So why would they drive Crown Victorias in Vancouver and not in Montreal? I know its two different cities, but this it is Canada, not the US. So if this thing beats a Camry, and not a Corwn Vic, then thats quite an achievement.


RE: Quite impressive...
By Aprime on 7/15/2007 10:04:22 PM , Rating: 2
Cab cars are midsize sedans and vans here, ranging from Malibu, Camry, Impala to Grand Caravans.

Crown Victorias aren't part of cab fleets because they can't be sold in Canada to particulars, only police forces.

The Grand Marquis (only Mercury you can get in Canada because all the Crown Victoria (and the CV) derivates are made in Canada) and Town Car can be purchased by particulars, though... But usually Town Cars are funeral-mobiles, along with the low-end Cadillacs.


RE: Quite impressive...
By InflatableBuddha on 7/18/2007 1:36:52 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, there are plenty of mid-sized sedans used as cabs in Vancouver (Buick Century, Impala, Malibu etc.) but one of the most common models around here is the Toyota Corolla.

Not a huge difference in city fuel efficiency compared to the Prius.


Think of it guys
By Nik00117 on 7/13/2007 3:47:38 PM , Rating: 2
This taxi has been through more wear and tore then a normal car. It is a new model therefore no one truly knows how its going act.

An example, the guy down at the garage who I bring my car to (A 1989 BMW 318I) has worked on this car so many times over the years he knows what to expect from it. Therefore fixing it, and understanding problems are easier.

Toyota has not had this privalege with its prius. Why? Well would you pay a team of drivers to drive a prius around in a circle for 24/7 for 2 years at various speeds?

Um if you do, you seriously go issues.

And the comments about toyota wants to make the good parts cheaper since it knows it don't need such a good part is flawed. For this very reason, why in the hell would you make a good product worse? Its like me building a computer, and knowing ah I don't gotta use those good screws which I already use I can go out and get worse screws. All be it chances are the screws may be a little bit cheaper why go through the energy of making a product worse? It simply doesn't make sense to me...




RE: Think of it guys
By Hoser McMoose on 7/13/2007 4:45:38 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
And the comments about toyota wants to make the good parts cheaper since it knows it don't need such a good part is flawed.

Actually it's not flawed at all. If they can make the thing cheaper without impacting reliability significantly then why wouldn't they want to do so?

There's an old saying that goes "Anyone can make a bridge that will stand, but it takes an engineer to make a bridge that will JUST stand." From an engineering standpoint there is no reason to waste money on over-designing a part, it just makes your product more expensive.

Now obviously they aren't going to go and completely change the design at this stage, anything Toyota learns from this vehicle is unlikely to ever find itself in the 2nd generation Prius. In fact, even the 3rd generation Prius might be too far along in the design phase to make big changes, though they might be able to tweak some things here and there.

Also it should be noted that getting this sort of feedback loop in a large engineering project is absolutely priceless! For Toyota a car like this is worth it's weight in gold. They should be able to get as more knowledge from this car then they could get from months of computer simulations! There's just no substituting for this kind of real-world extreme-case use.


RE: Think of it guys
By Nik00117 on 7/14/2007 2:20:29 AM , Rating: 2
Not really, imho they could just bump up the price by saying "Not only do we sell a good hybrid we sell one that lasts"

Me at a computer techy I would never make something of lesser quality, for any reason it simply doesn't make sense. Sure I might increase my profit margins by that faction, but what is it worth to make a computer less reliable?

Same with Toyota. I highly doubt they'd make this car worse on purpose, thats just imho dumb... I do understand where your coming from, but I don't think that there is much they can do anyways. Maybe buy slgithly cheaper values, or screws etc. But why do that? I'm sure their profit margin is already nice enough not to warrant that.

Old saying

If it ain't broken, don't fix it

YOu can also say

If it ain't broken don't break it.


RE: Think of it guys
By Strunf on 7/14/2007 7:14:06 AM , Rating: 3
Yeah besides it takes a long time to build a good reputation and just a mistake to blow it up. Frankly I don't see Toyota taking that risk for a few bucks.


RE: Think of it guys
By TomZ on 7/16/2007 8:28:16 AM , Rating: 1
Obviously you've not been watching the news. Toyota has had a really bad year in terms of quality - their number of recalls approximately doubled in 2006 to 2M vehicles. Google for "Toyota recalls" for more details.


RE: Think of it guys
By Hoser McMoose on 7/16/2007 5:48:52 PM , Rating: 2
So I take it you only sell stuff like HP's Non-stop servers, designed with 4-way redundant processors, redundant memory, multiple backup and hotswappable drives, power supplies, etc?

Sure they cost a million dollars, but that's got to be worth it for reliability, right?

Or do you make a trade-off between an acceptable level of reliability in favor of affordable cost? Personal computer motherboards, even with components from the best respected brands, meet only a VERY minimal level of reliability, so if you're selling PCs then you've already made that trade-off in favor of the lower cost components.

Just because you're not buying PC Chips crap doesn't mean that you aren't selling cheaper-but-less-reliable gear.


RE: Think of it guys
By Strunf on 7/14/2007 7:20:33 AM , Rating: 1
"Anyone can make a bridge that will stand, but it takes an engineer to make a bridge that will JUST stand."
That's not true if anyone could build a bridge then no one would spend thousands if not millions with engineers.
And an engineer doesn't make things to just stand, most things have a 50% margin under the worst case and some a lot more than that, this may even be decided by the law depending on what it is.


RE: Think of it guys
By Martin Blank on 7/15/2007 5:12:43 AM , Rating: 3
Anyone can build a bridge that will stand -- until it falls under the weight of design flaws. A bridge is simple to build in many cases: find a tree, cut it down, drag it to where you need it. It makes a bridge, but is it a good one?


RE: Think of it guys
By Hoser McMoose on 7/16/2007 5:41:48 PM , Rating: 2
The idea behind the quote was simply that engineering is about more then simply building something to do a stated task. The 'JUST' has a dual meaning of "standing but not being totally overbuilt" and also "standing and not causing other problems".

Anyone can build a bridge by simply tossing a covert in the middle and pilling a few thousand tons of rock and concrete overtop of things, it's not complicated. However such a design isn't going to last very long, it'll be expensive and it'll cause problems for whatever you're building the bridge over top of. A properly engineered solution can avoid these problems.

Same goes in cars. You can overbuild the crap out of component and it'll last, but it'll add weight and cost. If you can identify an overbuilt part and lighten and cheapen it without any meaningful loss in reliability, then that is good engineering.


RE: Think of it guys
By TomZ on 7/16/2007 5:59:03 PM , Rating: 2
Good post. I would just add that, good engineering also balances cost into the equation. So you don't overdesign/overbuild to where it negatively affects the profitability of the product. That's what's hard about engineering - designing a good-quality product that is also cost-efficient.


very nice!
By Screwballl on 7/13/2007 12:14:44 PM , Rating: 2
now they need to find a way to get these commercial and large vehicles (Suburbans, Yukons, Expeditions, Tundras, etc) to keep the power needed for heavy duty work but also get much better mileage.
I would settle for 20mpg from my 454 big block instead of 10.

This below is a step in the right direction but needs to be on a much larger scale to make a difference.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=7419

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=7379




RE: very nice!
By MDE on 7/13/2007 12:34:58 PM , Rating: 2
Settling for a 100% mileage improvement?


RE: very nice!
By Rickler on 7/13/2007 12:56:46 PM , Rating: 3
It's called a diesel engine.


RE: very nice!
By encia on 7/13/2007 7:08:46 PM , Rating: 2
Toyota and Hino already has DICE-Hybrid for the trucks segment.
http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.as...

This DICE-Hybrid is powered by the same Toyota-developed hybrid-power computer software and parallel/series hybrid (Synergy drive)system.

This system delivers 50 percent better fuel economy than conventionally powered trucks of equivalent capacity.


Prius taxi
By Rich Evans on 7/13/2007 7:45:18 PM , Rating: 5
There is a considerable amount of speculation and disinformation in these comments. As a Prius driver for over 3 years, let me assist. First, Toyota has been building the Prius since 1997. The earliest cars are still on the road in Japan with batteries still functioning at a high level. Second, the computerized battery management system keeps the battery mostly in the 40% to 60% state of charge in normal operating conditions. The amount of cycles the batteries can handle within this range is virtually unlimited. Third, this taxi is no anomaly. Andrew Grant also ran the previous version of the Prius from 2000 to 2003 in Vancouver and put over 200,000 miles on it as well with similar results. Toyota also purchased that vehicle to be examined by its engineers. Stated simply, the battery and hybrid system is designed to be a life-of-vehicle component. There are many resources and groups of Prius owners on the Internet to verify these statements.

The Prius A/C has no problems in hot city traffic. I've driven over 72,000 miles in Orlando's sultry climate. Yes, my mileage is lower in summer than winter by about 3 mpg. The converse is true in colder climates.

Finally, the mileage advantages do not somehow evaporate on long highway drives as some seem to expect. At 65 MPH, I can average 50 mpg or better in all but extreme weather conditions. The computer display shows many cycles of battery assist even with cruise control engaged. The cabin is extremely comfortable. I've owned a Camry in the past. I'm 6'2" and 230 pounds. The Prius is very comfortable. With its hatchback design, it shocked me to find out I could transport 8 foot long 2" x 4" lumber with all doors closed. While the exterior dimensions are smaller than the Camry, the interior space is roomy and very functional as compared to mid-size cars. In no way should the Prius be compared to subcompacts. I hope I have dispelled a few of the unfounded rumors floating hereabouts. Hybrids are going mainstream. It is time to give them your serious consideration. There are many thousands of us happy Prius drivers to offer you encouragement. Don't forget that Prius is ranked number 1 in owner satisfaction. Best wishes to all.




RE: Prius taxi
By bob661 on 7/15/2007 6:59:04 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the post and the recommendation. I personally am not in the market for a new vehicle and, when I am, it will be to replace my current truck with a diesel version (need more towing capacity). Also, my wife would like a fun car as she's only driven econo cars (me too until recently). It will be probably be quite a while before either of us buys another econo car.


By SiliconAddict on 7/14/2007 11:01:03 AM , Rating: 5
Toyota has been doing this shit since they shipped the first Prius. They have been in constant contact with its owners. Up here in Minnesota I know two people who routinely where contacted by Toyota in the winter to see how their Prius ran in negative temps. Get this through your thick tick thick head. Toyota is taking the car back not because they want to know why it’s survived this long. Only retard trolls would spin it this way.
It’s called research. It’s called being a responsible car company. Toyota is taking the first Prius to put on this many miles and stripping it down to see where the wear points are. What has held up well? What hasn’t? What needs some refinement and what just works.




Question
By ksherman on 7/13/2007 1:27:33 PM , Rating: 1
Why is this entire news post in metric (with the odd Imperial reference)? I could understand if this were from Europe or any where else in the world. But this car was used in New York. I know this is also a stupid question, but I just found it pretty bizzare.




RE: Question
By ksherman on 7/13/2007 1:29:08 PM , Rating: 2
My mistake, shoot me in the foot... I didn't obviously read very carefully. The New York portion of the story flowed into my brain and jumbled everything up. Ignore me :)


By Hoser McMoose on 7/13/2007 5:15:55 PM , Rating: 2
The usage pattern of taxis is a pretty natural fit to hybrid vehicles like the Prius. It's HEAVY driving use (as noted in this article) so fuel and maintenance costs are much more important then upfront costs, and it's all city driving in stop-and-go traffic where the hybrid drives really shine. As long as they can keep the car as reliable as a conventional ICE car (which Toyota apparently has in this case at least) then it's a bit of a no-brainer! Cheaper for the cab companies, less imports of fuel, better for the environment, all in all a win-win situation. This is one of two situations where we're likely to see hybrid vehicle use rapidly start to displace conventional vehicles, although I'm sure some cab drivers will be rather hesitant to give up their big V8 engine RWD Crown Vics.

The other situation where hybrids are a bit of a natural fit are city buses. These are probably actually even better uses of hybrid drive technology. If anything they are even more stop-and-go designs and their fuel use is HUGE! It's no surprise therefore that some of the most cutting-edge hybrid designs are actually not coming from Toyota, Honda and Ford but rather from companies like Orion (formerly part of DaimlerChrysler, not sure who owns them today) and Allison Transmission (formerly part of GM, now owned by Onex, makes the hybrid drive systems for New Flyer buses).




By saechaka on 7/13/2007 10:39:18 PM , Rating: 2
i'm at 99,500 miles in 2 1/2 yrs of driving. i'm wondering if toyota will buy mine back, since i've been wanting to upgrade. anyways, for all you naysayers, this car is for real. i love it and get great gas mileage. low 50's in summer, high 40's in winter and high 40's in the freeways.




400 km wow
By KamiXkaze on 7/15/2007 12:42:10 AM , Rating: 2
It's good to here something positive about these Prius for a change. More than likely Toyota will give that man a new Prius while they study his 04.

KxK




By rcreyes on 7/17/2007 2:50:18 PM , Rating: 2
I once read an article saying it is really fortunate that Toyota and Honda came out with hybrids, because their stellar quality and reliability prevents the reputation of hybrids from becoming tarnished in the American public's mind. I agree wholeheartedly. Porsche and other German automakers are delaying the introduction of their own hybrid systems because they have realized just how complicated the technology is. I just hope by the time they get their crap out, the American public has already accepted hybrids as reliable (at least from Japanese automakers).




depends on what compare it to
By Pirks on 7/13/07, Rating: -1
By SilthDraeth on 7/13/2007 12:14:06 PM , Rating: 2
True points, but a Yaris taxi isn't exactly ideal. The larger car is a good point in the case of a Taxi, because it can hold more cargo etc. I have seen people call a taxi to take 3 grocery carts full of food home, plus 3 kids. You would be hard pressed to do that in a Yaris.


RE: depends on what compare it to
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 7/13/2007 12:15:58 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
so yeah, for a large car prius is a wonder in mileage, but compared to yaris with manual stick - nothing special, same or almost same fuel economy for triple the price of yaris.


I'm not quite sure I understand your point. The Prius has roughly the same interior/cargo dimensions as a Toyota Camry.

The Yaris is a subcompact. Not even close to being a reasonable comparison.


RE: depends on what compare it to
By dubldwn on 7/13/2007 1:02:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Prius has roughly the same interior/cargo dimensions as a Toyota Camry.

Not sure if you've gone through this exercise, but if you compare the "interior dimensions" (front/rear head/leg room) of all midsize and compact cars they're surprisingly uniform, although the Prius shines in rear leg room, which is great for taxis. The length, width, and weight of the Prius are modest, however, and in line with other compacts, not midsize cars.


RE: depends on what compare it to
By dubldwn on 7/13/2007 1:32:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Yaris is a subcompact. Not even close to being a reasonable comparison.

Using the same logic, I agree regarding comparing the Prius to the Yaris.


RE: depends on what compare it to
By pnyffeler on 7/13/2007 1:45:38 PM , Rating: 2
Forget the Yaris. What about a Honda Fit ? They get great gas mileage, are quite roomy, and have lots of storage space.


RE: depends on what compare it to
By azrael201 on 7/13/2007 2:46:22 PM , Rating: 2
Honda Fit is inferior to Yaris


RE: depends on what compare it to
By Pirks on 7/13/07, Rating: 0
By Hoser McMoose on 7/13/2007 4:29:21 PM , Rating: 2
The Fit is somewhat larger then the Yaris but gets slightly worse mileage. According to the new EPA figures it's 8.1 and 6.5L/100km (city/highway) for the Yaris vs. 8.4 and 6.9L/100km for the Honda Fit.

Both great little commuter and/or single person cars, though I'm not sure how good either would make as a taxi. Also both are rated for higher fuel consumption then the Prius' 4.9 and 5.2L/100km. The difference in fuel efficiency in city driving is still pretty large even though the Prius is a larger vehicle then either the Yaris or the Fit.


RE: depends on what compare it to
By GoatMonkey on 7/13/2007 3:10:04 PM , Rating: 2
We've gone through a similar conversation before. There is not really another car that you can use as a direct comparison to the Prius.

If all you are looking at is money, throw out comfort and other differences, then you're probably right that a Yaris would make better economic sense. It just takes too long to recover the difference in the initial price from any small difference in fuel economy.

Your case would make more sense when comparing the Hybrid Civic to the regular Civic. I think Clark Howard was talking about this, and economically he thinks the regular Civic is a better buy.


RE: depends on what compare it to
By Pirks on 7/13/07, Rating: -1
RE: depends on what compare it to
By HammerZ on 7/15/2007 3:13:07 AM , Rating: 2
Please share your view on your expectations of how the Yaris will perform as a taxi. The answer should address your original point.


RE: depends on what compare it to
By Pirks on 7/16/07, Rating: 0
Stupid question (maybe)
By DeepBlue1975 on 7/13/07, Rating: -1
RE: Stupid question (maybe)
By dubldwn on 7/13/2007 1:15:30 PM , Rating: 2