2013 Toyota Prius C doesn't get much love from Consumer Reports

CR has always seemed to me to do a poor job in reviewing cars and technology. Then again I don't read it, only when people post about it on blogs. Its not as if CR hires people that are good at evaluating cars.

Don't worry about the bad review. The old man at the end of the street that drives that SUV probably doesn't like the prius c either.

 

To be honest, I doubt the c3 would have really made much of a difference in the interior or the looks in general.

CR is like any other reviewer though, you take it with a grain of salt. CR is suppose to be the 'least' biased, however, one thing to note when you listen to reviews of a car... CR has only dealt with a limited number of hybrids, namely the expensive electrics, the leaf, the Volt, the Prius cars and Insight. Majority of their focus has been the traditional cars and expectations, hence I found some of the reviewer's comments to be not really worth listening to as it seems biased to a sports car expectation from an Econo car.

And while the small cars are suppose to be 'econo' as well, the fact his focus was on 'speed' and 'fun' based on the steering, it leads me to believe his comments were the expectation of a 'sporty' prius, which is still not so for the Prius c, and even more foolish expectation that it would be 'zippy' even though it is smaller and slightly lighter than the Prius.

Anyone with half a brain would see that the design of the Prius c, both in engine and aerodynamics, it is not going to be 'zippy'. Anyone with a brain who has driven the Prius or Prius v, knows the steering system has no feedback which is the "fun" factor that has NOTHING to do with the actual performance of a car.

The reviewer should have stuck with the facts, not putting in sports car or performance car expectations. A person looking for an econo car will not necessarily focus on how much of a vibration they get from the steering or 'pull' from it. If I was wanting that, I would be getting a car with less mpg and a more powerful engine.

When it comes down to it, it was not a really 'objective' review, using the wrong 'posts' to compare things.

 

+1
In what other industry would, "and note the use of fine plastics," be a selling point?

The driver does have to interact with the car's interior everyday, and the plastics appearance can affect whether it is livable. So does the ergonomics and seat comfort. I rate those last two as more important. I can also adjust my expectations based on the car's market. The C isn't competing with BMWs and Audis.

 

I use CR all the time for household items like appliances, paints, tools, foods, stuff like that. I've never really thought their auto testing was very good.

 

Their direct testing isn't anymore useful than any other auto review. The reliability data might be useful because of their sample size and time back it looks.

 

It sure looks like they might have got the numbers reversed.
I could maybe believe 48 city / 37 highway.

But, their 48 city driving would consist of extra hard acceleration between stops and nailing the brakes hard at stops.
Or, just driving in such a way, the EV icon never lights up..

And to get 37 highway, I think it could be done on an uphill course,
or by driving around 90 MPH.?.
Since we now know it can get 50 MPG at 70 MPH..
Xringer's Prius C - Page 5 - Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com

 

I read CR a lot. So long as they are transparent in why they pan something I'm fine with their opinion. Some I care about, some I do not.

In the case of cars, CR is always trying to push manufacturers to improve quality and performance. It just goes against their culture to praise a car whose main claim to fame is money savings. In that respect they miss the boat completely.

 

The problem is, CR's Reviewer comments are basically just bad in general. While I understand there shouldn't be praise, I find the 'fun' expectation to be stupid. I mean, I drive a Prius v and before that, I drove a Nissan Sentra GXE. I could do without the vibrating steering wheel. I don't consider a shaking steering wheel == fun for a drive.

Now if I were a certain gender and modified the steering wheel... Maybe...

 

It also takes me about 13 minutes to drive home from work (in the City) in my Ford Escape, but it gets 22 to 24 MPG.

The only thing I can think of, is CR mistakenly tested a Prius 'C' that had been modified for drag racing.

 

Again, it's mostly an baseline driving, where they drive it however they want, but it isn't necessary how people drive. And sometimes they drive like everyone drives like they are driving sports cars.

 

CR's downgrading of the Prius C was based completely on subjective assessments (cheap interior, noisy, etc) because the car did very well in quantifiable metrics that actually matter to consumers, such as crash test results, braking performance, speed in emergency manoeuvres, fuel economy, etc. It perfomed acceptably even in the acceleration tests, despite the fact that the car is designed to deliver stellar fuel economy, not sports car-like acceleration. Compared to the Honda Fit with an automatic, for example, which is CR's 2nd highest ratest car in the Prius C's class, the C was only 0.1s slower from 45-65 mph (7.3s vs 7.2s), which is the acceleration time that is probably the most important (among CR's acceleration tests) because it is the one that best represents passing performance and is therefore safety-related. I do not think CR considers fuel economy at all in their pseudo-scientific rating scheme, because the highest rated car in the C's class, the VW Golf, also has about the poorest fuel economy in the class when purchased with the less expensive gas engine (vs diesel)
When I first read the CR fuel economy figures for the Prius C, 37 mpg city and 43 mpg average, I thought there must have been a misprint, since I am averaging 57 mpg in mostly city driving, and get closer to 67mpg in city driving on weekends when my trip lengths increase. There are now 105 Prius C owners reporting fuel economy on fuelly.com, and only 2 are reporting mileage as bad or worse than the CR average of 43mpg. The average fuel consumption reported by owners is 52.1mpg, the most common mileage is 53mpg and the second most common is 56. The Fuelly average for the 2012 Fit, by way of comparison, is only 33, and that applies to a mix of automatics of manual transmission types. I subscribe to CR (I was given the suscription as a gift), so I spent a fair bit of time on their web site trying to understand the science behind their fuel economy test procedures. There did not appear to be any, so I sent them an email several days ago asking for more information, including the speed versus distance curves they use, average trip lengths, ambient temperatures on startup, etc., basically all of the things you would expect in serious fuel economy tests. I have not heard back from them yet. Judging from the comments of the guy on the video about how noisy the engine is and how it is necessary to run the engine at high revs to get any power, I suspect that they really flogged the car when they drove it, so they would get different results if they recalibrated the lead feet on their test drivers. The city gas mileage will be particularly sensitive to how hard the car is braked, because the hybrid system will be of little use if the deceleration rate requires extensive use of the hydraulic brakes (i.e. no regenerative braking)
From the test report on the PC posted on the CR website, it looks as though they calculated the fuel economy from their city and highway tests, and omitted the final 150 mile test they normally use when calculating the average mpg. The 150 mile test would have raised the 43mpg figure significantly. The regular Prius achieved its highest mileage in the 150 mile test.
CR needs to be more scientific in their car reviews. Rather than referring to an interior as "cheap", but should take the materials to a material test lab and test them for all of the properties that might matter to consumers, particularly those in hot sunny states, such as long term UV and heat resistance. Likewise, they should use a sound pressure level meter to measure interior noise levels, and quote the dbA in their reports instead of just saying the car was noisy. The CR reliability and frequency of repair statistics are pretty good, but only because they are based on suscriber survey results.

 

IIRC, the numbers for the gen3 are 34 city/ 55 highway.

If you want to improve fuel economy, you have to willing to drive for it. Aggressive driving is going to return piss poor mileage in any car. I think if I crossed paths with a CR tester on the road, I'd be shaking my head or saying unflattering things about them. Like I do whenever impatience leads a driver to speed up to a light or cutting people off.

I go the Cleanmpg for economy reviews on new models. Gives me something to shoot for, and not wondering Wth did they do to get mid 30's in a Prius in the city. The only time I came close to numbers like that with the gen2 was doing 70+ on the interstate.

 

IMO, It seems like a lot of hot rod fans, (guys who like to watch car races etc)
have a larger input to car reviews than they should have.
(I like watching motorcycle races).

Since I see cars as transportation machines, and I'm not a rich man,
I find my car reviews on websites where the reviews come from owners.
I also find that sites that promote eco-driving have the kind of reviews
that are more informative in my areas of interest.

Because of the Ford Fusion hybrid road trip that Wayne had on the CleanMPG,
I really wanted to buy one for my wife. But, she's a Toyota gal..

 

Consumer Reports 'Can't Recommend the Prius c' | Hybrid Cars

Isn't getting the Prius drivetrain for less than the Prius price the whole point of the C?

I don't understand...

 

We

Well, the tester can not understand why a sub $20,000 hybrid does not come with a stitched leather dashboard.

 

Fortunately for Toyota there are many people who don't care about this persons opinion. They are enjoying their new C and are smiling as they bypass gas stations.

 

Harshly spun, and negative review. Obviously will upset Prius c owners, and supporters.

It's objectively interesting to me how language can be chosen to spin something either positive or negative.

I think many of the negatives the review points out are valid.
But the positives of the vehicle are also spun negatively.

For example, the full color Multi-Information Display is presented using the sarcastic phraseology of being "One Neat Feature" and then only one single capability of the entire display is revealed, as if that's ALL it did.

Also the MPG are quickly called impressive, but then immediately negatively compared to the ONLY non-plug in vehicle that can compete, which is the regular Prius, and the "lower highway mileage" is stressed. You can choose to accentuate the lower highway mileage as compared to about it's only competition, which is within it's own family, OR you can do as Toyota does, and accentuate the positive, which is having the highest city MPG's of any non-plug in vehicle.

This is definently a review striving to paint the Prius c, in as negative a light as possible. Some of the assertations I think fair, some fair, but painted in too negative a light. Some almost hillariously.

I personally found it funny when he say's some of the spread out radio controls can be a reach....then reachs for them? Uh? That didn't look like too much of a reach to me. Isn't that about where radio controls are on any vehicle that doesn't have the controls built into the steering wheel? It's not like you need one of those nursing home "grabbers" to reach the controls. The reach looks pretty normal to me.

Also he say's it takes" work to maintain highway speeds on hills", well welcome to the world of almost ANY and ALL 4 cylinder sub-compact vehicles.

The reviewer seems anxious to point out any negative he can think off, including stressing the perception that the materials used are basic and "cheap". Well again, in this segment, full plastic or primarily plastic interiors are the rule, not the exception. My experience is that there are a lot of positives to durability, and maintanence with full plastic dash's. But that's a separate debate. The review takes every opportunity to attach the adjective "cheap" to almost every aspect of The Prius c.

This ignores the benefits of the HSD...which is NOT cheap. The underselling of the full color M.I.D. . And if you notice, while pointing out how "cheap" the ammenities are...comparing them to a Yaris, the luxury of a automatic climate control, which is a rare plus in this segment, is quickly glossed over as being "an unusual feature in this class".

I happen to agree about the rear seat head rests, why Toyota did not use integrated head rests, like in The Honda Fit and instead used those mammoth sight blockers?

I think it's fair to compare the benefits of the Prius c, in relationship to purchasing a similarly costing used Prius. I think it's fair to point out it's weaknesses in comparison to other subcompact hatch backs. Which it does have.

But it almost seems this reviewer had his mind made up, that The Prius c was nothing more than a expensive HSD equipped Yaris, and had so much disdain for the Yaris, that positives about the vehicle were given little light, while negatives were routinely accentuated.

 

Didn't we already have a posting on this?

Edit - Ah yes, thread 2013 Toyota Prius C doesn't get much love from Consumer Reports | PriusChat

 

Cars.com calls out Consumer Reports over Toyota Prius C verdict