My 2007 was close to 30K but I get the point, and with gas going to $4.00 a gal the prius looks better every day.

Yeap, very interesting how much has changed in a couple of years. Third year in the row for the Prius. A lot more positive press than their used to be.

hmmm that would make it about what?? three times, the Prius has been so honored?? was also best value for European cars back in 2005 or 06 i believe.

My waist is currently around 34". Don't consider that a waste either!

rah

He-he..., in CA, less than 2 years ago, I had to pay just over $35,000 for the one I wanted (black/gray leather,) and felt lucky to be able to get it. Got the call, had to run in with a check, and a week later it came off the boat.

I actually wish it came with some good quality "pleather," instead of the real thing (BMW does a pretty good job with this kind of material.)

It is nice to see that the Corvette is finally recognized as a great value for the money. It is one heck of a car. When the General wants to build a fine car, it can do so. Now if it can just put that kind of effort into some newer technology for its great trucks.

A month after I bought my car, CR had their April 2006 issue that looked at "hybrid hype". They didn't come out and say it, but if you work their numbers you realize they assumed gas prices of $2/gal for 2006, 2007 and 2008, then $3/gal for 2009 and finally $4/gal for 2010. Gas was about $2.20 or $2.30/gal when the article came out, IIRC, so although $4/gal sounded pretty high at the time, the overall estimates seemed overly low.

Pretty sure that was the same article that use the double depreciation (or faulty counting the depreciation) calculation for the Prius skewing the results. After noticing a pattern of strange data points in their hybrid comparisons over the years (such as their recent one comparing the Prius to a Chevy Cobalt), I tend to take their hybrid analyses with a grain of salt. To be fair, they were pretty critical of ethanol and as far as I know, no errors were later found in that article.

That's the one. My, it's already been 2 years since that was published. Jesus, I "waste" so much time on this site.

They did recant, but it was the usual small article. They seem to have changed their tune, however. How they only get 44 MPG is beyond me. My new commute is 60 mi round trip a with an elevation gain of 3000 ft between me and the office. I'm still getting about 49 MPG. Granted, on the way home I don't really burn any gas for the first 10 miles (that's where the elevation is lost/gained), but there's almost no city driving on this commute. It's pretty much all hwy and mountain driving.

I think that I'll be telecommuting most days soon, I can't afford to keep driving so much!