backtop


Print 71 comment(s) - last by DeepBlue1975.. on Jul 9 at 6:00 PM


2010 Toyota Prius

2010 Honda Insight

A pair of Japanese buyers check out the new 2010 Prius hybrid vehicle, the first hybrid to outsell all other vehicles in Japan.  (Source: BBC News)
Hybrids come in at number 1 and number 4 on Japan's sales charts

Consumers will tend to hold off their purchases if there is a new and significantly improved model coming soon. This is particularly true for electronics and automobiles. Word of the third generation Prius has been known as far back as 2006, and while the economic downturn played a significant role in cutting sales of the older Prius, the waiting game may have had a larger impact than previously thought.

Toyota had already decided to increase production of the Prius to 600,000 units per year in late May after seeing huge sales in Japan. The company has had to begin weekend production of the Prius in order to make a dent in demand. Increases in fuel economy and horsepower had led many to delay their purchases of the Prius until the 2010 model was available. However, many potential customers also switched to Honda's Insight hybrid, which topped the Japanese sales charts in April.

In the two months since, hybrids have continued their sales dominance, with the 2010 Toyota Prius and Honda Insight both posting strong sales.  The Toyota Prius seized the top spot in May, with sales of 10,915 cars.

This month, though, it set an even more impressive mark, becoming the first hybrid in Japan's history to outsell all other vehicles.  The Honda Insight's previous sales record had excluded popular mini-vehicles with engines of up to 660cc.  Those mini-vehicles were easily outsold by the Prius, thanks to sales of 22,292 units.

Honda continued to do well, with its Insight Hybrid coming in fourth place.  Honda's Fit, a fuel efficient traditional offering came in second place, with 13,016 vehicles sold.  The sales of Toyota and Honda's hybrids were helped by relatively high worldwide gas prices, which drove Japanese consumers to take fuel economy more seriously.  Japanese tax breaks have also helped convince users to switch to hybrids.

Hybrid vehicles have yet to crack the top of U.S. sales charts, but some believe it’s only a matter of time before a foreign hybrid like the Toyota Prius, or a domestic like the Ford Fusion pushes towards the top. 

All of this bodes well for those hoping of a restart of Toyota's $1.3 billion Prius assembly plant currently under construction in Blue Springs, Mississippi. Toyota has already spent over $300 million on the plant. The building shell itself is finished, but the tooling and production machinery will be installed at a later date. Parts suppliers have also halted building expansion and tooling operations until Toyota commits to a restart date.

The case for a restart is particularly strong since New United Motor Manufacturing Inc. (NUMMI) appears destined for a shutdown. The joint venture between Toyota and General Motors will cease to produce the Pontiac Vibe, which is based on Toyota's Matrix. It also produces the popular Toyota Corolla and Toyota's Tacoma truck, production which could shift to Blue Springs. Production of the Toyota Yaris hybrid is also a possibility.





Comments     Threshold


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

How surprising....
By captainBOB on 7/6/2009 4:15:23 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
In the U.S. the current top selling vehicles for June are the Ford F Series of trucks, with sales of 35,915 units.


A sedan or cheap car wouldn't be surprising but the F series? I live in Texas and every other vehicle on the road is a pickup truck but damn....

I know too many people that bought a pickup truck for no other reason than to show everyone else that their penises (or boobs) are bigger. Granted most who buy them will use them for what they're made for but all too often the truck beds of these things are as pristine as when they bought it.




RE: How surprising....
By bhieb on 7/6/2009 4:28:26 PM , Rating: 2
There are definitely a few that buy them to show off, but you cannot knock the utility of the F150. For MSRP of $28K you get a butt load of interior room for 5, plus the benefits of a bed. Sure the mileage is not great but 21hwy 15cty is not awful for a truck.

Now if you have Zero need for a truck ever, then chances are it would be hard to justify. However if you use one say 6 times a year, and want a spacious 4 door vehicle then they are by no means a bad choice. In fact I'd argue that they are much better than SUV's of any class, with regard to people and stuff hauling.

Ford has done a great job on that truck the non 4 door is just over 20K, and it is a hard justification to buy a similar priced car with all of the added functionality. Plus that price point is the "sweet" spot for what people want to spend anyway, so even a blind man can see it has a clear utilitarian advantage over any sedan. As far as "bang for the buck" it is a clear winner.


RE: How surprising....
By captainBOB on 7/6/2009 4:44:33 PM , Rating: 4
Hey, I didn't say that they were bad cars, on the contrary as you say they are a bang for the buck with what you can get. The problem here is the fact that in America the top selling car is a truck, which shows how seriously people are taking the whole gas issue, crying a river about gas prices whilst driving a Hummer.

The F150 has good mileage for a truck, but in stop and go traffic like it sometimes gets over here (especially I-45 late afternoon) its still much heavier than a car so your mileage will vary greatly. Its not just solely for commuting.


RE: How surprising....
By bhieb on 7/6/2009 5:36:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The problem here is the fact that in America the top selling car is a truck, which shows how seriously people are taking the whole gas issue


Or it could illustrate how the masses may not be so dumb aferall. They have spoken, and what they have chosen as the vehicle to have is the F150.

My point was not really against what you said, just that it should not be a surprise that it is the best seller since it logically makes more sense than a larger car. One could almost argue that it fiscally makes more sense as well. Depending on the mileage you drive and cost of gas, the MPG savings may get eaten up if you need to rent a truck more than a handful of times each year.

Guess I'm just disagreeing with the whole stigma that the yuppie driving the F150 is just showing off his ego, it does not pan out. Even said yuppie probably takes 4 buddies golfing a half dozen times a year. Try squeezing 4 of the large golf bags in a sedan. Granted he may not have thought of that when he bought it, but clearly it is not a bad choice either. Now the douche in his Bentley is a completely different story.

There is an undeserved stigma attached to trucks not actively hauling a ton of bricks daily. Just because 90% of them are not in use daily does not make them evil (not saying you implied this but others do). One does not need to use them all the time to enjoy the utility and spaciousness of one.

I drive a CTS-V now (I know talk about the Bentley douche), and do miss my F150 dearly sometimes. Fortunately I have access to several others in my immediate family nearby. What can I say I love the speed :)


RE: How surprising....
By Fireshade on 7/7/2009 12:53:16 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Even said yuppie probably takes 4 buddies golfing a half dozen times a year. Try squeezing 4 of the large golf bags in a sedan.

Sorry, but I don't think you know real yuppies ;)
Real yuppies would all drive their own car, so there's no squeezing 4 golf bags in any car :P
Driving their own car has great benefits in their time-scarce world (no waiting on the other).


RE: How surprising....
By Keeir on 7/6/2009 6:22:15 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
The F150 has good mileage for a truck, but in stop and go traffic like it sometimes gets over here (especially I-45 late afternoon) its still much heavier than a car so your mileage will vary greatly. Its not just solely for commuting.


No one really disagrees with that point, but however, its sorta of a cost issue. Moving from a F-150 to a "normal" V6 type sedan is only going to save a driver between 100-150 gallons of gas in a year. IE, not even 2 dollars a day at current gas prices. Even stepping down to a compact car will only save around 3 dollars a day.

People complaign about gas prices because the average american drives around 15,000 miles a year. In a "normal" 25 mpg car (nice milage) thats 600 gallons or so a year. When gas prices raise 1 dollar a gallon, even that "smart" consumer gets hit with an extra 600 dollar a year charge


RE: How surprising....
By mdogs444 on 7/6/2009 7:14:18 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
which shows how seriously people are taking the whole gas issue, crying a river about gas prices whilst driving a Hummer.

I don't see anyone who drives a Hummer complaining about gas prices - rather I see them complaining about people who can't afford a Hummer targeting them as the reason for gas prices.
quote:
The problem here is the fact that in America the top selling car is a truck

I don't see why that's a problem. That's part of the benefit of being a developed and wealthy country. If you can afford to purchase and drive a truck, I don't see any reason not to, nor do I see any reason why you think yo have the ability to tell them not to.

We all know that oil is not scarce, is not priced high because of actual demand, and to those of us who don't believe the Global Warming fear mongering, we don't see a reason to lower our usage of it. There are plenty of ways to make oil cheaper if that's what the real target was - including drilling out own. But lets be real here - politicians on the left do not want gasoline to be cheaper, but rather they want it more expensive in order to proceed with their social engineering dreams.


RE: How surprising....
By andrinoaa on 7/7/2009 6:01:18 AM , Rating: 3
If you can't see the problem, you are the problem.!! When are you yanks going to get real? For F#$%'s sake, an F150 is a good car? Most people who buy them for their usfulness? Give us a break. They are what they are - TRUCKS, not cars! NO OTHER people in the world NEED an F150, but hell americans all need them, lol.
Come on man. The running costs and purchasing cost I beleive. But what happens when oil goes up again? Another economic catastraphy waiting to happen? Stop pointing to the size of your penis.


RE: How surprising....
By mdogs444 on 7/7/2009 6:34:03 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Most people who buy them for their usfulness?

Who gives a s*** what they buy them for. Its their money, their choice. Get over it.
quote:
NO OTHER people in the world NEED an F150, but hell americans all need them, lol.

No. Rather no other people in the world can afford to drive an F-150 because their country is not as developed or wealthy, or their government taxes them to all hell so their gas prices make it unfeasible to buy what they want. Social engineering at its finest.
quote:
But what happens when oil goes up again? Another economic catastraphy waiting to happen?

When oil goes up? Get real. You don't think anyone buying SUV's and trucks right now do so knowing they may pay much more in the future? And in case you haven't noticed, the economic catastrophe was not caused by trucks or suv's, it was a complete byproduct. The price of oil is not related at all to how much oil there actually is available in the world - we're not running out anytime soon, and it will still be going beyond when we're dead and gone. Anyone trying to justify against that fact is clearly fear mongering for their "clean" objectives which really aren't so clean. Instead of worrying about the prices of gasoline going up $1, perhaps you should be worrying about peoples electric and heating bills doubling and tripling each month due to your "clean" endeavors - now THAT will cause a domestic economic catastrophe.


RE: How surprising....
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 7/7/2009 7:42:47 AM , Rating: 6
I would have to agree with you there. These guys are all log rolling cause they all bought trucks during the profilgate times and are stuck with them. So they pat each other on the back and stroke each other's egos. Sort of dysfunctional lot here.

I see many trucks with one guy in it and the bed looking like it was never used driving in to Washington DC every morning. I guess they feel they need one since they might get some mulch for the garden patch twice a year and wouldn't want to mess up the carpet in the trunk of a sedan.

These guys are very short sighted. Regardless of the price of oil versus cost, the money goes to people who hate America (not the continent, Canadians, calm down), and I can't see bank rolling them with my gas dollars. So the fewer I send overseas, the better. I get nearly 40mpg in my car, and I am looking for one that does even better.

As to the mere $600 per year penalty, imagine that people in the US drive 2.6 trillion miles per year... oh wait, we do! And now imagine that each of those cars averages 19mpg, that's $342B we're spending each year on gas at $2.50 per gallon, and a large part of that is going to Venezuela and the Middle East. If gas goes up a dollar, that figure goes to $478B. But, at $2.50 per gallon, if we all got 25mpg, that figure goes down to $260B we send overseas. At 35mpg, it goes down to $185B. And as we all know, as demand goes down, prices follow.

So the very people who shout USA with their God-given right to drive trucks are the very people who undermine this country by sending US currency overseas to countries that hate the USA. And if you start quoting actual US dollars spent on foreign oil, remember it is a global market, and we are pushing up gas prices all over the world with our demand. Imagine if every car in the world got 35mpg. Oh wait, nearly all of them do except US cars - really it is much higher.

Well Bushy and his buddies got their money. <snap> No he didn't!


RE: How surprising....
By captainBOB on 7/7/2009 8:25:36 AM , Rating: 2
You hit a nail. More of our money is being leeched over to the Middle East who can bring our entire country to a halt just by embargoing oil shipments.

I'm not pinning the blame on trucks, every car contributes to this. This is America and you're entitled to do what you want (within legal limits of course) but it doesn't mean you should do whatever you want because you feel like it at the expense of the country.

Personally I believe global warming to be a steaming pile of bs. What I do believe that we are going to run out of oil, its a question of when, and for all the "we must break the foreign oil addiction" there is not much initiative from the people, many auto manufacturers and even the government to start doing so. Alternatives are there. Hydrogen based cars are almost ready for mainstream (BMW and Honda have models waiting for the green light) but they are not on the road yet, and they probably won't be until the last minute.


RE: How surprising....
By sxr7171 on 7/7/2009 9:21:19 AM , Rating: 2
Yes this is how it needs to be done.

Nuclear electricity -> electrolysis -> hydrogen. Done deal.

Look at France right now. If they went hydrogen, there would be no need for middle east oil.

We on the other still use fossil fuels for electricity. So we're screwed. I guess we could keep sourcing coal from China, everything we own came from there anyway.


RE: How surprising....
By mdogs444 on 7/7/2009 9:33:41 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
I guess we could keep sourcing coal from China

I suggest you read this article: http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0710/p02s01-usec.htm...

We have enough coal here to last centuries, but the supply isn't the reason we're importing. Its nothing more than legislation & regulation from Washington. If they (politicians) truly wanted the U.S. to be a self sustaining, energy independent nation right now, we could - coal, nuclear, shale oil, OCS & ANWR drilling, hydro - and we could do it all very cost effective and most likely lower the monthly energy costs for all Americans.

Its nothing besides social engineering and political posturing for the feel good environmentalist movement - pure emotion. None of what we're doing right (banning drilling, no nuclear nuclear expansion, punishing coal, pushing solar & wind as the saviors) now is logical or fiscally responsible, its just one of those things that make you go "hmmm".


RE: How surprising....
By bhieb on 7/7/2009 10:15:05 AM , Rating: 2
Ding we have a winner.

Most of these tree hugging morons don't realize the reason we import is a simple logic and Cost Benefit. It is always best to use other's resources when possible over your own (especially when you might not like said nations that much). Why in the world would we want to tap our natural reserves first? $2.65 for fuel is actually dirt cheap so why bother. Hell until it reaches $6 or so by today's prices I still would not recommend tapping ours. IMO $10 a gallon and we will jump all over tapping our own, until then why bother.

In northern TX I can tell you Natural Gas from shale WAS booming, until recently when low and behold prices dropped again. See folks the other side of the world saw our panic artificially kept prices up, as soon as we start tapping our own they mysteriously come back down. Demand has not dropped much since the $4 per gallon days. It was only that high so they could milk us for a bit, and that is fine it is their prerogative, however if it gets too high we can and will replace em.


RE: How surprising....
By Nfarce on 7/8/09, Rating: -1
RE: How surprising....
By DeepBlue1975 on 7/9/2009 6:00:45 PM , Rating: 2
Absolutely BRILLIANT post.

There are so so many people ranting all the time about how they've got the right to do what suits them best and blah blah... But they forget that, in certain matters, what is good for each individual, is detrimental to the whole country or even the society at large.

It is as simple as you've pointed it out: a society consumes way too much of a certain good, so much of it that the local production falls short for covering the internal demand, that certain good has to be bought abroad, generating debt and a dependency on its foreign production.

In the long run, that's not desirable in any economy, and what a healthy economy could try to do is:
a- produce more of the said good locally to stop the foreign dependency (sometimes this is not possible, like it is with fuel)
b- tax that good to flatten its demand
c- massive R&D to find substitutes that can be locally produced / reduce the need
d- a combination among some or all of the above.

People forget that a country's government has to look after a whole society and a whole economy, and sometimes what's best for the country, can be not so desirable by some single individuals just because they feel they're not being properly spoiled or sponsored in their rights to behave like immature brats.


RE: How surprising....
By Spuke on 7/7/2009 11:53:35 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
When are you yanks going to get real? For F#$%'s sake, an F150 is a good car?
When are you a$$holes going to stay out of our business? Seriously, if we're doing that much to harm to the planet come on over and stop us from doing it? If it REALLY is that important or that critical, why aren't your respective countries banding together to force us to change? I see all of this head wagging and finger pointing and this "woe is us" if we don't change our ways. None of it is working!!!

We continue to put the Ford F-series on the top of our list for vehicles when it's time to buy a car. I own a 2006 Ford F250 diesel myself and my wife uses it as a daily driver. We bought it because we wanted it!! Internet a$$holes don't factor into our purchase decisions. Like I said, if it's that important to the future of the planet that we change our habits, then come on over and force us to change. Until that happens, we WILL continue going our own way.


RE: How surprising....
By Keeir on 7/7/2009 1:05:37 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
If you can't see the problem, you are the problem.!! When are you yanks going to get real? For F#$%'s sake, an F150 is a good car? Most people who buy them for their usfulness?


Great, yet another Holier than Thou European who probably has never once lived in the United States for an extended period of time.

Get over it folks. American cars are designed for the American lifestyle and the American Cost of Fuel.

If Europe had similar roads and similar fuel costs, they would choose the -same- cars. Period. End of Story.

But no, Europe has tiny little streets from before the Auto Age. Europe has sin taxes on gasoline which double to triple the price of gasoline from its actual price. So of course, many Europeans choose the smaller more efficient cars.

Right now, the "normal" price of gasoline without taxes is less than 2.50 per gallon. The cost difference movings from a Compact (Honda Civic) thats gets 30 mpg to a Full-Sized (US Honda Accord) that gets 25 mpg is all of $250 dollars a year. Less than a single dollar a day. The price to go all the way to that 20 mpg F-150? Only $625 dollars a year, less than 2 dollars a day .

Here's a great example. I like to go Biking on the Weekend. If I had a F-150, I could carry 4+ Bikes at the drop of the hat. Try doing that with any type of car. If would only take 5-6 trips a year to justify the extra expense of the fuel all year long.

Yes, I know, European gas prices are more than 5 dollars a gallon. Your governments tax and re-tax heavy/large cars out of existence. But you know, the reason they have to tax and re-tax and penalize the large cars in Europe? If they didn't Europeans would drive the Large Cars, just like Americans.



RE: How surprising....
By robertisaar on 7/6/2009 4:29:24 PM , Rating: 3
not that having the bed in good condition is a bad thing, but yes, in michigan, trucks are commuter vehicles more than anything else, rarely does someone actually stick anything in the bed other than groceries and trailers being rarer still...


RE: How surprising....
By TomZ on 7/6/09, Rating: 0
RE: How surprising....
By Alexstarfire on 7/7/2009 3:54:16 AM , Rating: 6
I think people should be smarter and more courteous, but we can't always get what we want.


RE: How surprising....
By Spuke on 7/7/2009 11:57:55 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think people should be smarter and more courteous, but we can't always get what we want.
We sure don't always get what we want and, quite frankly, I'm happy that America still does what it wants despite the one or two people criticizing us on the Internet. If choice makes me a dumba$$ then an IQ of 0 is what I desire most.


RE: How surprising....
By BladeVenom on 7/6/2009 7:17:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I know too many people that bought a pickup truck for no other reason than to show everyone else that their penises (or boobs) are bigger.

Actually guys buy big trucks to compensate for having a small penis.


RE: How surprising....
By mdogs444 on 7/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: How surprising....
By lco45 on 7/6/2009 7:36:33 PM , Rating: 2
Methinks you protesteth too much.

Luke


RE: How surprising....
By mdogs444 on 7/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: How surprising....
By martinw on 7/8/2009 3:50:00 AM , Rating: 2
LOL. Right over his head...


RE: How surprising....
By Accord99 on 7/6/2009 7:21:13 PM , Rating: 2
The F series has been America's best selling vehicle for almost 20 years, though the combined sales of the GMC/Chevrolet truck twins would probably place them first. The US loves their trucks.


RE: How surprising....
By Omega215D on 7/6/2009 11:13:14 PM , Rating: 2
A lot of the people in my area have pickups for their ATVs, dirt bikes and stuff from Home Depot as they also do their own home repairs.

The US loves its motocross.


RE: How surprising....
By walk2k on 7/6/2009 8:36:30 PM , Rating: 3
If you look at the whole top 10 list though, it and the Siverado are the only pickups, the rest of the list is dominated by small/compact cars like Camry, Accord, Civic, as well as the Escape SUV (most of which all have hybrid versions rolled into those numbers).


RE: How surprising....
By Keeir on 7/7/2009 4:35:58 AM , Rating: 3
Ummm... Although the I4 of the Accord and Camry are pretty efficient, I am not going to call them small cars. In fact, really only the Civic, Corolla, and Escape count as small cars. Fusion, Altima, and Malibu are definately midsized, and Accord, Camry, and Impala are Full-Sized. Non of the cars on the list are "small". IE, Honda sells its Fit. Toyota the Yaris, Chevy the Aveo, Ford the Focus, and Nissan the Sentra.


RE: How surprising....
By Spuke on 7/7/2009 12:01:18 PM , Rating: 2
The Escape is an SUV but most of the cars on the Top 10 are NOT small. But that's not surprising since Americans typically don't like small cars. BTW, the Escape is not on the top 10 list.

http://www.aiada.org/newsroom/newsDetails.asp?id=5...


RE: How surprising....
By Keeir on 7/7/2009 12:51:16 PM , Rating: 2
Top Ten varies from Month to Month and Escape occasionally cracks the ranks into the top 10 this year


Profitable? Hmmm
By DrKlahn on 7/6/2009 4:44:41 PM , Rating: 3
This $3000 profit factoid keeps making it into each of these articles with no mention of what the first battery changes under warranty are going to cost the manufacturer. Once this cost is included you are back to it being a loss.

A small diesel is far less complicated and returns similar mileage. But I guess it's not "green" enough to be hip with the environmentalists. Hybrids are image cars no less than the Ford truck mentioned in the article.




RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By randomposter on 7/6/2009 5:16:52 PM , Rating: 2
Why would you factor battery warranty replacement in to the total cost of the vehicle? That's the same as assuming that every single Chev Malibu will need the transmission replaced under warranty, or that every single VW Passat will need the entire suspension replaced under warranty. There's no evidence that I've seen predicting any of these outcomes.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By Lord 666 on 7/7/2009 8:06:54 AM , Rating: 2
Pre-paid warranties are considered expenses and put into the debit column. Accounting 101.

The reason why hybrid manufacturers do this is they have to cover this potential warranty expense since the battery is considered part of the emission system. Emission sytems are covered under warranty far longer than the suspension example you gave earlier.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By DrKlahn on 7/7/2009 11:08:30 AM , Rating: 1
Why? Because it is a guaranteed failure item within the warranty period that exceeds this "profit" that is being trumpeted. There is no prediction involved, it is going to happen. The specs I've seen from manufacturers are about 7 years for the battery. And hybrids will also be no better than a conventional car in regards to suspension components or transmissions. So you have all the normal maintenance with a second driveline and batteries added on top of it. And who's going to touch these used? $3k for the car and $5k for batteries?


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By mdogs444 on 7/7/2009 11:12:48 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
And who's going to touch these used? $3k for the car and $5k for batteries?

Ahh...the price of being green...means you won't have any green left.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By randomposter on 7/7/2009 12:34:00 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
The specs I've seen from manufacturers are about 7 years for the battery

Do me a favour and point me to these specs. Thanks.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By Keeir on 7/7/2009 3:44:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why? Because it is a guaranteed failure item within the warranty period that exceeds this "profit" that is being trumpeted. There is no prediction involved, it is going to happen. The specs I've seen from manufacturers are about 7 years for the battery. And hybrids will also be no better than a conventional car in regards to suspension components or transmissions. So you have all the normal maintenance with a second driveline and batteries added on top of it. And who's going to touch these used? $3k for the car and $5k for batteries?


So many wrongs...

#1. Prius uses a NiMH battery which retails for less than 3000 dollars now for its models.

#2. Hybrids have been on the road in the US for longer than 7 years now. I'd think if "failure within warrany period" was really that likely, we would start hearing about it. After all, if 100% of something will be failed by year 10, then certainly 25%+ should be failed by year 7.

I will grant the Chevy Volt, which uses Lithium Ion type batteries and wants to use a large part of its pack, may have much more issues. The Tesla Roadster certainly will with its low quality Lithium Cobalt batteries.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By martinw on 7/8/2009 3:58:40 AM , Rating: 3
DrKlahn - a few minutes googling would have shown you that after 10 years on the market, battery failures on a Prius are almost nonexistent. I guess false internet memes never die. Overall reliability for the Prius is in fact extremely high.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By walk2k on 7/6/2009 7:27:00 PM , Rating: 3
Not one single battery has been replaced under warranty that was due to wearing out.

Some are defective, like any product, but the vast amount of them that have been replaced were due to accidents.

In Canada a taxi driver had one of the early Priuses (Priii?) with over 180,000 miles on it, no battery problems.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By matt0401 on 7/6/2009 11:29:51 PM , Rating: 3
I've read a story about a taxi driver in Washington doing 450,000 or so miles on a 2nd gen Prius until the battery started to degrade. (Read: degrade, not outright die)

I honestly think more non-hybrid vehicles need their transmissions or engines replaced than hybrid vehicles needing their batteries replaced.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By Lord 666 on 7/7/2009 8:20:30 AM , Rating: 2
Good point about accidents and hybrids. Due to the potential higher expense of repair or increased situations of being totalled out, no one has studied the insurance price difference between an 09 TDI and '10 Prius.

Even with the turbo, my insurance on the 06 TDI is lower than the 02 V6 Accord it replaced. There are other variables (mostly safety features), but having only 100hp has some impact as well. Conversely, Allstate charges $70 more per year because the navigation is built-in with my TDI.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By mdogs444 on 7/7/2009 8:28:59 AM , Rating: 2
My insurance dropped $120 every 6 months going from an 07 Accord V6 coupe to an 08 Tahoe LTZ. They said the Accord was classified under the sports car grouping. Anyway, not trying to figure out all the reasons why it dropped, just found it funny when I got my bill.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By Spuke on 7/7/2009 12:48:04 PM , Rating: 2
My Solstice GXP was $10 lower per month than my previous 04 Sentra Spec V. Go figure.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By sxr7171 on 7/7/2009 9:29:23 AM , Rating: 2
Why extra charge for navi?

Anyway it's not about horsepower, but it's about torque with those diesels.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By Lord 666 on 7/7/2009 9:56:16 AM , Rating: 2
Guess Allstate figures its a theft risk or potential accident risk. Since the navi is an optionable item on the manufacter sticker, theft/damage is covered under auto insurance. Car insurance does not cover the little portable units. Debated about getting the car without navi and ran both VIN (otherwise identical options) numbers against insurance with the difference being $70 per year.

Glad I got the navi built-in; just the other my car got busted into and lost an ipod from 2004. My neighbor got his portable GPS stolen as well. This is the very reason why I went with the unit built-in as work in NYC and have to routinely drive in. Didn't think the theft would happen in my own neighborhood.

Agreed about the overall power influencing the insurance cost, but don't forget that torque is function of HP; HP = Torque * RPM / 5,252. For the 2006 Jetta TDI, it was 100hp/177lbs. The 2009's are 140hp/236lb. Thats a massive increase, shaving 3 seconds off of the 0-60 but with same the fuel economy not to mention being much cleaner. Would be interested in seeing how the insurance numbers of the 09 TDI compare against the latest version of the Prius let alone comparing to my current car.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By usbseawolf2000 on 7/7/2009 10:44:58 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
A small diesel is far less complicated and returns similar mileage. But I guess it's not "green" enough to be hip with the environmentalists. Hybrids are image cars


Any iconic vehicle can be accused of being an image car. Corvette is an example. Beetle is another one. Prius is also another one.

Modern Diesel has more mechanical moving parts (Turbo, multi-gears transmission, etc...) and complicated emission components. However, Prius is very simple mechanically with about 10 moving parts including the two electric motors (without ICE). Prius has an electric transmission so there are no extra moving parts. It doesn't have belts, starter or alternator. Very simple.

There is a reason why hybrids are considered green car. It is very simple really. The emission they output are very low compared to non-hybrids including Diesels. See the comparison: http://priuschat.com/forums/gen-iii-2010-prius-mai...

Before anyone mention about the debunked misinformation from CNW Marketing Research, Prius has HV battery pack with 23 lbs Nickel. To put it into perspective, steel contains 6% Nickel. Therefore 3,000 lbs steel has 180 lbs Nickel.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By Spuke on 7/7/2009 12:58:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
However, Prius is very simple mechanically with about 10 moving parts including the two electric motors (without ICE). Prius has an electric transmission so there are no extra moving parts.
LOL! 10 moving parts huh? It STILL has a gas engine that operates like any every other gas engine with a bit more than "10 moving parts". The transmission is a planetary gear CVT not an "electric transmission". Actually the Prius' transaxle is quite complicated as it manages the generator motor and the gas engine.

There's nothing simple about combining multiple powerplants in a car.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By usbseawolf2000 on 7/7/2009 2:07:15 PM , Rating: 2
Right, planetary gear set with two electric motors makes up the eCVT. Those are the only moving parts. Do you know how many moving parts in your car transmission? FYI, I said "without ICE"; ICE stands for internal combustion engine.

It is an electric transmission because the eCVT multiplies torque by tapping into the electric motor. Traditional transmission changes mechanical ratio to multiply torque. They work fundamentally different.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By Spuke on 7/7/2009 2:38:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Right, planetary gear set with two electric motors makes up the eCVT. Those are the only moving parts. Do you know how many moving parts in your car transmission?
You obviously don't as a planetary CVT has more parts than a standard manual or even an automatic transmission.

quote:
It is an electric transmission because the eCVT multiplies torque by tapping into the electric motor.
It is NOT an electric transmission as no transmission "taps" into any motor. All transmissions multiply torque, that is their primary function and purpose. You don't know what you are talking about. It's called an eCVT because that's what the marketing department decided it should be called.

There's there's two things that are relatively unique to this transmission.
1. It uses gears instead of belts (belts are typical)
2. It connects to both an electric motor and a gas engine.

This is not top secret info and you could probably find this and more on priuschat.com.


RE: Profitable? Hmmm
By usbseawolf2000 on 7/7/2009 8:07:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
planetary CVT has more parts than a standard manual or even an automatic transmission.

Dude, I am a regular poster on PriusChat. I hope you find out the truth for your own sake. Automatic transmission has multiple planetary gear-sets. eCVT use just one set to connect ICE, MG1 and MG2. See my post with visual comparison with various transmission types including GM's 2-Mode:

http://priuschat.com/forums/gen-iii-2010-prius-mai...

These should help also:

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/automatic-transmissi...
http://prius.ecrostech.com/original/Understanding/...
http://eahart.com/prius/psd/
quote:
It is NOT an electric transmission as no transmission "taps" into any motor.

Once you come to a full understanding inner working of eCVT you'll come to realize my statement is correct. eCVT multiplies torque by utilizing huge torque electric motor. MG2 is also known as "torquer" for a reason. "Continuous Variable" torque is achieved by controlling the amount of electricity generated or consumed, making it a true hybrid. That makes it an electric transmission, not just a marketing term.

Play with the simulator I provided above. A light bulb should come on. Enjoy!


By RobotReda on 7/6/2009 4:56:01 PM , Rating: 2
The DT article claiming 3100$ profit was actually full of balogna. Just a cherry-picked and twisted section of a Nikkei report (As pointed-out by Suntan in the comment section).

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=15002...

Nikkei report:

quote:
Toyota appears to have earned gross profits of around ¥100 billion yen (US$1 billion) on its sales of second-generation Prius hybrids last year. Toyota’s gross profit margin on the sales of the next-generation 2010 Prius are projected to be in the single digits in the first year.


Single digit profit margins for toyota.

quote:
The gross profit earned on the Insight is still low when factoring in the large R&D costs involved in its development. However, the profit margin on its hybrid operations has risen to the level where Honda can count on it to generate the fourth-largest revenue stream behind its luxury, midsize and small car operations.


What Suntan has to say:
quote:
So now you have the source article saying that Honda’s continued efforts at refining and improving on its hybrid design will now bring it solidly into last place as far as its automobile sales are concerned (I guess the Honda Hybrid guys can finally can stop taking heat from the lawn mower engine guys about profits at the annual picnic at least…) and you have Toyota figures that benefit from the horridly overpriced Lexus hybrids as well as old figures of the previous Prius that didn’t have to price match the new Insight, further they expect the new Prius to have single digit profit margins! Then you have a Dailytech article twisting it into saying that hybrids are a “cash cow.”

…Color me unimpressed with the integrity of the Dailytech article.

Now before this devolves into yet another 200 post bicker-fest about American automakers, I don’t think anyone here is about to disagree that US makers are sucking wind and that they are not doing well. This is not the argument I am making. I have issue with the horrid sensationalism that goes on around here each day. Just because one is doing bad, doesn’t mean that the other is “raking in the bucks.”

I would be thrown out of a project approval meeting if I proposed a project that was only going to receive 15% ROI, much less 15% gross margins. Now the auto industry is in a much worse situation than the industry I am in, but the fact remains that 15% gross margin is not a cash cow in any industry.




By andrinoaa on 7/7/2009 6:07:32 AM , Rating: 2
I guess thats why the world economy is f@#$%d. GREED GREED GREED.
In my books ANY profit is a good profit. Toyota are obviously devoted to long term objectives. In case you haven't noticed , they ARE working!


By mdogs444 on 7/7/2009 6:27:10 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
GREED GREED GREED.

Get over it.
quote:
Toyota are obviously devoted to long term objectives. In case you haven't noticed , they ARE working!

They are? You do realize that they too posted their first operating loss in 70 years and started rolling out massive amounts of large trucks and suv's (Tundra, Sequoia) when gas prices were skyrocketing.

Just because a company makes a hybrid that sells well overseas does not translate to being a great success right now in the U.S. I'm not saying they aren't in a better position than the other big auto makers, but to classify them as "working" is completely dishonest.


By sxr7171 on 7/7/2009 9:37:08 AM , Rating: 2
If Toyota is "not working" then what are GM and Chrysler doing?

"not not working"?


By mdogs444 on 7/7/2009 11:10:03 AM , Rating: 2
What about
quote:
I'm not saying they aren't in a better position than the other big auto makers
was so hard to understand?


By Keeir on 7/7/2009 4:21:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
In my books ANY profit is a good profit.


Depends. Do you mean, economic profit? Yes, thats a good profit. Or do you mean, any profit?

In the long run, its in everyone's best interest for companies and individuals to try to make the most profit possible. IE create the most value added possible using the least work possible. Thats how people's lives get better.

That said, the Prius is obviously a tremedous investment that far outreachs the actual dollars of the program.


By martinw on 7/8/2009 4:09:43 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The DT article claiming 3100$ profit was actually full of balogna.


I don't know the full context here, but my guess would be that the previous generation Prius was generating that level of profit ($3100) because the initial R+D costs have been sunk by now and no longer factor in. On the other hand the new 2010 model is incurring its R+D costs now, so will have lower net profits this year, but next year profits should rise as those costs drop out. As backing evidence I refer to the bolded part of the quoted sentence here:

Toyota’s gross profit margin on the sales of the next-generation 2010 Prius are projected to be in the single digits in the first year.

Disclaimer: I am not an accountant, and certainly not familiar with Japanese accounting practices.


<no subject>
By Scabies on 7/6/2009 3:32:28 PM , Rating: 1
from the caption:
quote:
A pair of Japanese buyers check out the new 2010 Prius hybrid vehicle, the first hybrid to outsell all other vehicles in Japan.


one of these buyers may or may not be about 12




RE: <no subject>
By kelmerp on 7/6/2009 3:44:16 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe it's one of those generous inclusions, like when you say "John and Mary are pregnant."


RE: <no subject>
By DonkeyRhubarb on 7/6/2009 3:49:24 PM , Rating: 2
John's pregnant????? :O


RE: <no subject>
By DonkeyRhubarb on 7/6/2009 8:57:41 PM , Rating: 2
What dry s**t actually rated me down? Get a sense of humour will you.


RE: <no subject>
By sxr7171 on 7/7/2009 9:31:11 AM , Rating: 2
They rated you back up, but now they'll rate you down.


Lets put this in perspective
By tmouse on 7/7/2009 8:09:48 AM , Rating: 2
Ok ; people are still extrapolating this information too much. The 150 is the best selling MODEL note the word MODEL. It does not mean everyone is getting 150's or any other truck. Sales of new cars and trucks in the US are probably somewhere between 15 to 16 million units per year. According to the BTS for 2007 sales splits of new vehicles was around 50% for cars and trucks and has been for a number of years. For cars the split is pretty equal between small , mid and large cars, with small cars being higher in high gas price years and mid size cars in the other years. For the trucks, which include SUV's the breakdown is around 30% for midsized SUV's and 25% each for large pickups and SUV's. Now this information is for 2007 the latest year information has been published but the numbers have not changed dramatically for the 4 previous years and I seriously doubt it changed dramatically in the one and a half after (especially considering the current economy and gas prices in 2008). The information is available on the Bureau of Transportation Statistics web site which is part of The Research and Innovative Technology Administration.




RE: Lets put this in perspective
By sxr7171 on 7/7/2009 9:40:51 AM , Rating: 1
So 50% of people need a huge truck to commute alone to work?

Or is it that 50% of people need to overpower everyone else with their big ass truck during the commute going 45 in the left lane on a wide open highway as they tend to do? Then some other jackass in a big truck does the same thing in the right lane. You can't see shit behind this pair of wasteful morons.

This isn't a sidewalk, there's no need to drive "side by side".


RE: Lets put this in perspective
By tmouse on 7/7/2009 1:04:19 PM , Rating: 2
I realize I should have attached this to the 150 thread. The 50% trucks include all SUV's as well and there is no distinguishing between commercial and personal buyers in that statistic. So for the 150 if we assume 16 million cars sold and 50% trucks with 25% being large pickups that's around 2 million, if the 150 keeps selling 36K units per month that would give them about 21% of the large pickup market or 2.7% of all new vehicles sold, very good for a single model but keep in mind it is skewed a bit since all uses for vehicles are not equal and many commercial buyers will have to buy a pickup or a van.


RE: Lets put this in perspective
By Spuke on 7/7/2009 1:06:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So 50% of people need a huge truck to commute alone to work?
Are you REALLY that stupid? Or are you just messing with people?


Saw a 2010 prius in the flesh today
By corduroygt on 7/6/2009 8:10:47 PM , Rating: 2
I have to admit, it's much much better looking than the last generation.
I'd still prefer a diesel though, it's cheaper than regular gas here, and diesels are manly, while hybrids are not.




By Omega215D on 7/6/2009 11:15:24 PM , Rating: 2
VW: But this baby hauls!! it's like vroom, vroooom, vroooooom. What's your hybrid sound like?

Guy: haaaawwwww.

VW: that's cool...


"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki