Edmunds InsideLine Publishes False Statements

[jhinton]

Originally Posted by Dave_PH

I was going to tell you that if you didn't like the Edmunds review you should NEVER look at what Top Gear has to say. These are reviewers who prefer gold plater Lamborghini's and Mercades with jet engines attached but check out their Prius Review.

Toyota Prius New Car Review - Car Reviews - Top Gear

???? From you're posted link:

"Verdict 4/5 stars

Proof that you don't need to drive a wacky little Noddy car to save the planet. The Prius is very practical, versatile and has excellent road manners... so treat it like a normal five-door hatch which is extremely cost effective to run. "

And:

"Despite its extremely complicated hybrid technology, the Prius still has Toyota's typical rock-solid reliability. Even the earlier 2001- 2004 model has proved to be hassle-free. That said, only buy a car from a Toyota dealership and ensure it comes with a full Toyota service history to make sure you're buying the best."

How is this anything but a good review?

[orracle]

Originally Posted by DeadPhish

I'm guessing that Edmunds is hurting financially in this down automotive with a relatively low number of 'hits' as people pull back from auto buying thus auto buying research. The article last week by The Mechanic brought out a raft of trolls and haters.

Now this one... Fit vs Prius
2008 Honda Fit vs. 2008 Toyota Prius Hybrid.*


In response I sent this following email to Mr Oldham the Editor in Chief who has a standing request for comments on InsideLine.

Mr Oldham

Ok you asked for comments.

I will assume that as Editor in Chief that you are actually in charge and oversee the writings of your staff. I guess that you must have been on vacation this week when the "Fit vs Prius" comparo was put up on IL. The other option is that you knowingly allow your staff to publish trash that is at best grossly erroneous, at worst intentionally inflammatory to generate hits on the Edmunds website, thus to generate more income.

The Fit vs Prius article by Chris Walton could have served a good purpose and generated solid commentary until the 2nd paragraph. At that point the article is factually flawed and the entire analysis is rendered questionable at best.

Quoting:
"You could save $8,425 right now by buying a $15,420 Honda Fit instead of the $23,845 Toyota Prius. Of course, if the price of gasoline goes higher, then the Prius with its EPA combined estimate of 46 mpg will pay you back for your investment sooner than you'd expect. Then again, the Fit with its EPA combined estimate of 30 mpg doesn't carry the same penalty of higher financing charges, insurance costs and taxes as the more expensive Prius, plus the Toyota will be needing a new $2,585 battery pack when the odometer shows 100,000-150,000 miles."
Unquote:

What idiot wrote this paragraph? High school writers, I'm guessing you've allowed a summer intern to write this piece, can check facts better than the alleged Editor who allowed his byline to be misused here.

Since you are the Editor in Chief and presumably in charge of your underlings would you like to provide the data that your staff used to support the last sentence in the quoted paragraph? Methinks that you will search long and hard to find such data, ending soon in an epic failure.

The conclusion is that you, Mr Oldham as Editor in Chief, allowed your staff to make up unsubstantiated statements based on no data whatsoever. If that's the case then it appears that Edmunds is intentionally slipping away from a being a respected fact-based automotive source towards being a sensasionalistic 'yellow rag' of a website.

Oh you missed my point? Let me make it clearer......

Allow me to refer you to the recent BusinessWeek article which addressed this specific concern about the battery packs. BusinessWeek as opposed to Edmunds seems to have attempted to do some real research as opposed to what your summer staff didn't do.

BTW I don't disagree with the final conclusion of the article. It has never been an issue that a lesser vehicle at a signficantly lesser price is a 'better buy' than a larger vehicle with more features - no matter what the fuel savings might be. If your summer staff hadn't poisoned the article by making a fallacious statment from the outset it would have generate some serious discussion.

Unfortunately you, you are responsible (?) I assume, have allowed Edmunds degenerate into a common rag. In what was supposedly a factual comparison you've intentionally published a fallacious opinion.

Bob Fogarty

ATTA BOY! We need more people to point out the Emperor's new clothes.

[KieferSkunk]

Originally Posted by Dave_PH

I was going to tell you that if you didn't like the Edmunds review you should NEVER look at what Top Gear has to say. These are reviewers who prefer gold plater Lamborghini's and Mercades with jet engines attached but check out their Prius Review.

Toyota Prius New Car Review - Car Reviews - Top Gear

That Top Gear review seems full of contradictions. 3-star rating on build quality, yet it says "This is a very well-built car - just not quite as robust as other Toyota models". And they fell victim to the same syndrome I've seen other review sites fall to: "It doesn't perform like a sports car". Well, DUH! The Prius isn't DESIGNED to be a jackrabbit off the start! It's designed to get you from point A to point B using as little gas as possible! :P

If reviewers would start paying attention to what the car was actually DESIGNED for, maybe people would see the Prius as more than a novelty. These reviewers also need to realize that the majority of people who are interested in getting those nice, sporty cars that can do 0-60 in 5 seconds live in areas where they're unlikely to get up to those kinds of speeds very often (traffic slog), and/or where accelerating like that would be considered reckless driving. I'm perfectly happy with my 10+ second 0-60 time, thank you - because I know how to drive safely and effectively where I live, I'm still doing freeway speeds by the time I get on the freeway anyway. :P

[zcat3]

Other than the fact that the Prius and the Fit really aren't of the same class of car, and the battery concern appears to be false, my biggest problem with this type of analysis is that they never seem to take into account residual value. I would guess a 3 year old Fit with 50,000 miles would get maybe 50 - 60% of original value at retail if in excellent condition, whereas the Prius might get 75 - 80% of original value. Once that is accounted for the Prius is cheaper to own and is still a nicer car.

[Manksgloob]

Originally Posted by jhinton

How is this anything but a good review?

Indeed it is a good review. I read the article, expecting it to mirror Jeremy Clarkson's view on the TV program of Top Gear...then I realized the article probably wasn't written by him.

This is what Jeremy actually had to say:

YouTube - Top Gear-Toyota Prius Hybrid

[Dave_PH]

I think it's a great review and worth a lot from a source I wouldn't expect a Prius to get fair consideration from

Originally Posted by jhinton

???? From you're posted link:

"Verdict 4/5 stars

Proof that you don't need to drive a wacky little Noddy car to save the planet. The Prius is very practical, versatile and has excellent road manners... so treat it like a normal five-door hatch which is extremely cost effective to run. "

And:

"Despite its extremely complicated hybrid technology, the Prius still has Toyota's typical rock-solid reliability. Even the earlier 2001- 2004 model has proved to be hassle-free. That said, only buy a car from a Toyota dealership and ensure it comes with a full Toyota service history to make sure you're buying the best."

How is this anything but a good review?

[Dave_PH]

Originally Posted by Manksgloob

Indeed it is a good review. I read the article, expecting it to mirror Jeremy Clarkson's view on the TV program of Top Gear...then I realized the article probably wasn't written by him.

This is what Jeremy actually had to say:
YouTube - Top Gear-Toyota Prius Hybrid

At least you didn't show this one....Billy Bob and the Prius

[NeoPrius]

I have one question: What kind of idiot calculates investment return on a car? A car is not an investment. If it were, it would be a lousy one. It's a tool. Some people can afford nicer tools than others. Some tools run off of elbow grease, some plug in, some use batteries, others use air or internal combustion engines. No one calculates "investment return" (what a joke) on those. They just look at the job they want to accomplish and select the appropriate tool.

[Dave_PH]

Originally Posted by NeoPrius

I have one question: What kind of idiot calculates investment return on a car? A car is not an investment. If it were, it would be a lousy one. It's a tool. Some people can afford nicer tools than others. Some tools run off of elbow grease, some plug in, some use batteries, others use air or internal combustion engines. No one calculates "investment return" (what a joke) on those. They just look at the job they want to accomplish and select the appropriate tool.

How about 'cost of ownership'?

[zcat3]

Clarkson has a reasonable point re: gas mileage as the brits have the diesel available to them that can get very good fuel efficiency at a reasonable price. If we hade to pay over $30,000 for a Prius here and could get a Volkswagon Diesel that got 50 MPG for $20,000, then the Prius would be in a different light in the U.S. Not sure what Prius he was driving that took over 13 seconds to get to 60 though.