Another negative article

[kenmac]

Hi folks,
Here is another example of negative news articles.
]http://carsguide.news.com.au/news/story_pa...22,00.html[web]


kenmac

[Batavier]

Well, it's not really negative. It's just a bit one sided.
Comparing the Prius with a Corolla

Besides, using the reasoning in the article, why ever would one buy any other car than the cheapest car available? Why are they different cars on the market? What a silly journalist. :wink:

EDIT:
Besides here in the Netherlands the Prius has some huge tax advantages, making it even cheaper than a rather luxureous Corolla Verso (by EUR 100 or so). When the tax advantage is not used the Prius is some EUR 7600 more expensive and then it's indeed hard to 'beat' the price by just fuel cost savings. But I'm not sure if I'd choose a Corolla Verso over a Prius even with such a price difference. Maybe an Avensis would be tempting...

[KMO]

Are the European and US "Corolla" actually the same car?

It's not obviously the case given the pictures I've seen, and I know Toyota's US range is generally very different.

Even if they were similar, the US one is a saloon, rather than a hatchback. Toyota GB's site indicates that a saloon is theoretically available in Britain, but I've never seen one.

[Tigkoly]

No the Euro and American Corolla are different.
I like the fact that they used a Corolla with manual transmission, no air conditioning, and no anti-lock brakes for the price compare. The Corolla Ultima would be the class/range that is equal to the prius and it is priced at just over $30K. So that makes the Prius about $7k more than the traditional car. If the Aussies have any sort of tax break then there is the difference.

[DaveG]

Lol. Some "reporters" just have to try and make a name for themselves by peeing in the pool

They fail to see the gas milage as a plus over buying an old-fashioned car. I still absolutely LOVE having the most advanced vehicle on the road. Everyone else might as well be driving stone-age cars from the Flintstones 8)

The fact of the matter is that if the Prius wasn't available, I would've paid the same price to buy a car that had about the same feature set, but no hybrid technology. So I spent the same money on the hybrid and got everything I wanted and more!

Dave

[KMO]

The Australian Corolla is the same as the European one. The Merkins get a different one for their peculiar taste in cars it seems.

Oddly, Australia gets the Camry saloon as well as the MPV version of the Avensis. (The Camry was dropped in Europe a few years back because no-one bought it; it was replaced by the Avensis saloon).

[TonyPSchaefer]

"If you really wanted to do something wacky and burn thousands, you could probably ask Honda to sell you one of its dud Insight three-doors of which there are probably still a few hiding (cringing) in the warehouse. They cost a mere $48,900."

<sarcasm>
I wouldn't call that one-sided. Sounds fair, balanced, and completely unbiased to me! They report, you decide.
</sarcasm>

[jchu]

Originally posted by DaveG
They fail to see the gas milage as a plus over buying an old-fashioned car. ..   Everyone else might as well be driving stone-age cars from the Flintstones 8)

Dave

Actually, the way I remember it, rather than burning dino based gasoline, Fred Flinstone also used an alternative energy source, Foot Power 8) I guess that the braking helped deal with the calluses.

[TonyPSchaefer]

I just had the opportunity to talk with a co-worker visiting from Australia. I printed this article and showed it to him. He indicated that many people in Australia are extremely protective of their "8-cylinder monsters" and reluctant to try anything new. After all, Mad Max would have been a completely different movie had they all been driving around in hybrids. :-)

He was not shocked at all by the negativity of the article but was a little surprised of the blatant disregard for the technology. That's just one Aussie's opinion, but it helps put the negative spin on the article into light.

[kingofgix]

I have read a number of articles that try make the basic point that the fuel savings that can be achieved in a hybrid is not sufficient to offset the extra cost of the hybrid components, and thus buying a hybrid is a bad decision. The downfall of this argument is, how many people buy any NEW car based on the fact that they think it will provide them with the lowest possible transporation cost? The answer is...virtually no one.

If all people cared about was net cost over the life of the vehicle, the roads would be clogged with Geo Metros, VW diesels, Honda Civics, and a few Hybrids.

In fact, very few people buy a particular car because they believe it represents the cheapest possible form of tranportation. Therefore, reviewing cars from the perspective that the only reason for choosing car A over car B is total life cycle cost is ludicrous. The reasons for choosing a particular car are many, and they all need to be taken into consideration. Reasons to buy a Hybrid might include:
-very low life cycle cost (maybe not the absolute lowest, but darn close)
-very low emmisions/environemntal impact
-very low fuel consumption for the size/weight of the vehicle
-high tech, unique features. In the case of the Prius, the interior layout and high tech features truly separate the car from a Carolla or Camry. It may not be every bodies cup of tea, but it is truly a unique car
-high build quality
-good safety rating
-you like the way the drivetrain functions, the CVT, the electric/ICE interface.

I'm tired of reading the same old financially based gripes about Hybrid technology. What other cars get reviewed on that basis? Have you ever seen a car review that said for instance "the BMW 5 series, while outstanding vehicles in every sense, should not be considered for purchase by anyone because a Toyota Camry gets better gas mileage and costs less."