Are car magazine editors idiots?

[iaowings]

GM is starting to sound like big tobacco back in the nineties.

I am waiting for them to come out and say.
Well I don’t believe in pollution and if I don’t believe in it then none of our cars pollute and that makes us the cleanest company out there.

Or

Yes you have scientific proof of pollution but can you substantiate it with real proof.

The last one was (basically what was said I cant remember the words exactly other than it was funny) said by one of the big tobacco guys in court except he was talking about cancer. Just substitute pollution with cancer.

[cwerdna]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(larkinmj @ Apr 7 2007, 09:34 PM) [snapback]419700[/snapback]</div>

Not all car magazine editors are idiots. After all, Motor Trend did name the Prius 2004 Car of the Year.
[/b]

Car and Driver also named the Prius one of their 10Best cars before.
http://www.caranddriver.com/bestcars/7582/...yota-prius.html

[Tempus]

Some are some aren't.

Read this Article from 2004 by Patrick Bedard and tell me if he 'gets it' or not.

[malibucarl]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tempus @ Apr 8 2007, 08:19 PM) [snapback]419994[/snapback]</div>

Some are some aren't.

Read this Article from 2004 by Patrick Bedard and tell me if he 'gets it' or not.
[/b]

Hi,
Very glad to see he recovered from that horrible accident at Indianapolis.
Carl

[LazyBear]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(turbonick @ Apr 4 2007, 08:26 PM) [snapback]417892[/snapback]</div>

I just bought a Prius Saturday. I can't believe how much fun it is to drive! Anyway, every article I've read in the magazines or on the net have talked about not coming close to the MPG that's advertised. I kept reading about editors not being able to get more than 40 MPG and how disappointed they were. I've driven the car for 300 miles now and have averaged 53.8 MPG. I don't know how to pulse burn or anything like that. I just drive normally, and lawfully. What's their problem? Seems like anyone can get 50 MPG. Is there some conspiracy or something?
[/b]

I was never able to get anything better than 47 on a lucky day. More like 41-42 average. And I actually did try to get better.

[JimN]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tempus @ Apr 8 2007, 07:19 PM) [snapback]419994[/snapback]</div>

Some are some aren't.

Read this Article from 2004 by Patrick Bedard and tell me if he 'gets it' or not.
[/b]

Very good article. We must add "genius gizmo" to the hybrid parts list.

[SunnyvalePrius]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Apr 5 2007, 07:32 AM) [snapback]418154[/snapback]</div>

I don't want anything from you. I am just here to remind some of you on occasion that Toyota is not an American company and they are assisting in the transfer of American jobs overseas.
[/b]

What exactly do you think made the US economy so successful in the first place?

[a] An attitude of buying inferior products to protect jobs, or

[b] A belief in the power of a free market economy to efficiently choose how resources are allocated by having consumers buy whatever products they like and ruthlessly let those businesses that don't satisfy consumers die, reallocating their resources, including workers, to more successful businesses.

Choice [b] is very painful for the workers who work for the failed businesses, at least in the short to medium term. Some will end up with living standards far below what they had and expected because as times change, their abilities are worth a lot less to the economy. But that is more than balanced out in the longer term by the ruthlessly efficient allocation of resources, giving most people in the country a higher standard of living, and the longer in the future you look, the greater that benefit is.

When US jobs are lost, those workers are freed up for other jobs. The US unemployment rate was 4.4% in March. In Germany and France, there are stricter restrictions to protect jobs and keep existing jobs from going away. In March, Germany's unemployment rate was 9.2% and France's was similar. And those are considered good numbers for France and Germany.

If a US manufacturing job goes overseas, the primary beneficiary of the lower wages paid to that worker is the US consumer. Competition between overseas companies and workers mean the difference in wages translate to lower prices and/or higher quality for the US consumer.

So saving US jobs by buying from the big three just transfers wealth from US consumers to a small fraction of US workers, at the expense of overall efficiency.

[geeky teacher]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(R1200GS @ Apr 5 2007, 03:06 PM) [snapback]418345[/snapback]</div>

living in chicago, cold weather. barely ever driving anywhere and when we do its short time. we've been avg 38mpg.
we're driving to louisville this weekend and i'm excited to see how she does.
[/b]

Keep us posted. Check out the Chicagoland Prius Group in the PriusChat communities.
-fellow ChiTown area commuter

[JimN]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sunnyvale Prius @ Apr 10 2007, 11:05 PM) [snapback]421314[/snapback]</div>

If a US manufacturing job goes overseas, the primary beneficiary of the lower wages paid to that worker is the US consumer. Competition between overseas companies and workers mean the difference in wages translate to lower prices and/or higher quality for the US consumer.

So saving US jobs by buying from the big three just transfers wealth from US consumers to a small fraction of US workers, at the expense of overall efficiency.
[/b]

I don't see much price dropping as a result of cheaper overseas labor. I believe it is more common to see increased profits. Nike sneakers are made in a Vietnamese sweat shop so why aren't they dirt cheap?