ABC news report on Hybrids tonight

I guess I didn't express my point with my little joke clearly. I was trying to point out that although a Buick might be a decent car it has an image problem of being an old fart's car.
And if I already own a Prius and am getting 48mpg on average why would I want to go to a Buick dealer to test drive a car that gets 35mpg at the most. Sell my car which gets better mileage and take a loss due to depreciation and buy a new car that is less efficient? How does that make financial sense?

 

This story was actually not quite as negative as I thought it would be. Maybe ABC doesn't want to lose its Toyota advertising. The few times in my life that I have actually had personal knowledge of the events surrounding a news story I have been appalled at the inaccuracy of the stories. If you think this story was inaccurate or misleading just think about the rest of the news, the things you don't have personnel knowledge of.

The journalists who prepare these stories for ABC et al do not know or care about facts and objectivity. They care about having the story completed in time, having a story that might "grab our attention" and help their ratings, and a story that won't get them sued or lose any advertisers. They also like stories that support their own political point of view, in this case "big companies are bad" and "people who whine about things are good".

Now that I've finished whining about ABC I would also say this story will have no lasting effect. A few days from now no one will remember it.

 

When I saw my first Prius at a dealership in Sept '04 the dealer said that 44mpg was more common. I had seen a Consumer Report on the Prius about that time that said 44 was normal so I wasn't shocked.

Personally I feel that the sticker is optimistic for just about any car, regardless of make or model.

 

I definitely see Buicks as old people cars. One set of my grandparents had one for a very long time (they also don't/didn't drive much due to their ages). It had a very smooth, comfortable ride and the interior was very plush. But definitely for the grandparents set.

My other grandpa, now an 80-year old man, had a Buick for awhile, as well as a Cadillac. He gave my dad the Caddy (yes I give him a lot of flack for it when he drives it once a week), and my dad also drives a late model used Honda Civic he got at a good price from some family friends. He uses the Civic when he has a lot of driving to do around town and needs the better mpgs (he's also in real estate, like me).

G'pa #2 got rid of the Buick a couple years back and drives a Honda Pilot now.


eta: I completely forgot to watch/tape the ABC news report last night. I ended up having to help out w/my baby niece for a few exhausting hours and by the time I got home I'd completely forgotten everything that transpired during the day. How'd it go??

 

Myabe one of these people very disappointed in their mileage would like to sell me their Prius

And I wonder where in the midwest you are, Malorn, where there are no waiting lists? Might be interested in that, perhaps. I am in the Indy area.

 

My congratulations to everyone who realized that the media (in this case ABC News) report the "news" inaccurately. I don't think that there is some conspiracy behind what gets reported nor behind what doesn't get reported. All mediums are just guilty of Omission. The information that doesn't get reported often contains the rest of the story, so we shouldn't be surprised by this report. They have reduced the information age to sound bites. The fact that ABC actually sent out a camera crew and showed film of the Prius in action (anyone notice there were no Insights?) meant this story had some "meat". Trust me TV face time for a product is too valuable for any company to object to the content of the report, however inaccurate. Also trust me that ABC wants feedback on its report, however biased. It means someone was watching their news program! The word "hybrid" is just the latest sound bite without the rest of the story.

The Prius may, or may not, get the EPA mileage, but who really cares when we are still getting better mileage than all but one other car (Insight) no matter how, where, or what season they are driven. We could argue the numbers ad nauseum, but the owner trading in a Prius for an Escape hybrid is Not someone interested in mileage. Suppose the Prius did only get 35 mpg, would you trade it for something that, at best, gets 28 mpg only on the highway and say you did it for the mileage? There is some other reason behind a remark like that.

I am sure there are any number of good reasons why someone would decide to trade for something other than a Prius, but they better not single out disapointment over mileage as one of them because it's only downhill from there.

 

You are right, they have just grown tired of punching GM. Time to move on to the 'new' top gun.

 

And with regards to comparing Prius with Insight, one also has to realize that the Insight is in fact a two-seater commuter car. The Prius makes more sense as a family car, seating 4-5 people and having a sizeable hatch/trunk cargo area. Considering Insight gets just a few mpgs more than the Prius (in EPA estimates of course) IMO that's really not too great of additioanl mileage considering Prius' additional size/interior room.

 

North and West and that is all I should say. Make a few calls or check on line and I think you will find a few.

 

Malorn, are you a Buick salesperson or work for Buick?
I'm asking because I think your report of Buick owners "always" getting above EPA highway mileage numbers is probably full of it...I mean that sounds like something a Buick salesperson would say. Even if it's true that Buick owners are reporting better than EPA highway mileage that doesn't mean squat by itself if the average of city/hwy comes out to 21.09mpg--that number courtesy of MSN's ConsumerReports shorttakes of the Buick LaCrosse. In that review, the CXL's 3.8L V6 is even described as being "thirsty" and "sounding coarse."
To opt for the more preferred engine then pushes the cost of the car to the low $30,000 range, they say where better cars exist.
The price range for the Lucerne: $26,265 - $35,265, 18city/28hwy EPA numbers. Again, where does the Buick have appeal to a potential Prius shopper or more unlikely, a current Prius owner? It costs more, sucks more gas, pollutes more, and has a stodgy image. Granted those cars have more space, a cushier ride, and more power, but I don't think people interested in the Prius are as interested in those qualities as much as cost, fuel economy, and emissions--not to mention that I think that Toyota still holds the edge in quality satisfaction over any American auto makers. Anyways, it seems like you're asking people to come look at cars that are of an entirely different ilk.

 

You are right with that statement.

My current average on the Prius is 54.5 mpg (this tank)
My current average on the Insight is 51.2 mpg (this tank) with a lifetime mpg of 55.4.

The Insight is practical for some as a little commuter scooter - but the Prius is more practical as a daily, family, grocery-getting driver.

as far as ever considering a Buick...notta chance.

 

Agreed. Omission is the #1 reason why the public never hears "the whole story." Selective omission is the #1 strategy network news organizations like ABC use to twist reality into a better story that attempts to garner more viewer attention. Real reality is just too boring.

It's not just about meeting the deadline and making the story sound good. Every network news stringer out there wants more face time, wants to uncover the next Watergate, etc. because they want to sprint their way up the proverbial industry ladder where better earnings and job security exist. "Fair and balanced" journalism often fall victim to these desires.

That said, I do admit that this particular story was much less lop-sided than I anticipated, although I do take issue with particular statements like, "Hybrid cars were supposed to be the answer to high gas prices..." The main problem with the reporting was it was somewhat fair but still imbalanced. The reporter placed a greater focus on the single complaintant than the reality that he had unrealistic expectations. Selective omission in action.

I disagree. This is a common myth in the advertising industry. "Yes, Virginia, there is such a thing as bad publicity."

I'm sure ABC does like feedback, but not in large quantities and certainly not from biased parties who are opposed to the stance of the report. The viewer has to play a game to figure out how and where to submit their observations. It isn't well-advertised for a reason - large corporations just don't allocate the manpower to carefully sift through the token suggestion box. Most suggestions, comments, or concerns will likely never make it to the very busy people who have any level of control over the issue. Moreover, oragnizations like ABC News will certainly not, at the demand of your feedback, revise their original report and say they were wrong. That flies in the face of their self-promoted credibility.

Yes, this sounds negative and pessimistic. Rest assured, however, it approximates reality more so than anything you'll find on TV.

 

Yep.. once everyone gets the message, they won't tune in and listen anymore... looses ratings..... so they have to find another juicy story to stir the mud.

 

The drivers who manage to get no better than 35 MPG driving their Prius would be lucky to get 15 MPG driving a Lucerne or a Lacrosse.

 

To BRANDON

I don't know how to cut quotes into this message but to respond:

Point 2. Yes bad publicity is undesirable, however I wrote my response with the ABC report in mind which wasn't "bad" publicty. It wasn't good either as you pointed out.

Point 3. Our feedback/comments to ABC fall on deaf ears and they certainly will NOT change a report based on feedback. Ratings is a numbers game, it matters not whether good or bad numbers. The networks must get a rise out of their viewers to get some sort of response. If all of their programing is mush they get no response and they truly wonder if there is anyone out there! But they do want as many comments as they can handle, if only to count them.

 

Just click "REPLY at the bottom of BRANDON's message, then delete the parts you don't want.

 

Here, here slortz, my sentiments exactly. Malorns posts seem to be a bit biased, and full of it.

 

Either he's schizophrenic and argueing within himself which way to go... or he's full of it and he's simply "trolling" for customers!

Maybe we should start a new thread and take a poll!

 

I’m away from Winnipeg but really felt the need to respond to this.

It’s my understanding that most Chevy dealers provide online inventory lookup of new and used vehicles. Care to provide a URL?

 

My parents have a 2003 Buick LeSabre with the 3.8 V6. They purchased it summer of 2004 as a lease return with around 16,000km on it. Overall I think it’s a fine car, if I had a choice of an Avalon or a LeSabre I’d probably lean towards the LeSabre.

I like driving the car and it appears to be easy to work on. About the only thing I insisted on as a condition of purchase for them, to have the transaxle serviced. The dealer thought I was “crazy†but this is the same dealer who sold me my lemon GMC Sierra pickup.

I’m away from Winnipeg for about a month, but was able to look up the Transport Canada fuel economy rating for that car:

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/transportation/tool...?id=3040&attr=8

According to Transport Canada, my parents LeSabre is supposed to get 12 l/100km city and 7.4 l/100km highway. To convert to MPG Imperial gallon, 24 city and 38 highway.

It never gets anywhere near the city fuel economy in Winnipeg city driving. In late Spring and early fall when the A/C isn’t used, it will usually average about 15 l/100km, almost 19 MPG. In winter at -40, more like 20 l/100km, about 14 MPG.

On the highway, a few times it got 7 l/100km or 40 MPG. If I recall I took them on a nice scenic drive through NW Ontario where the posted speed limits are 80 km/h. It will usually get around 8 l/100km or 35 MPG on the highway, at the posted 100km/h here in Manitoba.

I do believe I got the worst winter fuel economy of any Prius driver last winter: 9.8 l/100km or 28 MPG, about twice what my parent’s Buick was getting. This was during an extended stretch of -40 city driving and horrible traffic. Due to several back-to-back blizzards the streets were a mess and Snow Routing was in effect, so my usually 12-15 minute commute became 45 minutes of stop-n-inch hell.

I have an online subscription to Consumer Reports, so I was able to look up the details from that May, 2004 issue with the Prius. They got 35 city and 50 highway, in MPG U.S. gallons. Yeah, pretty bad city fuel economy.

In that same test, a 2.2 litre Chevy Malibu got 16 city and 38 highway. A 2.4 litre Mitsubishi Galant got 16 city and 32 highway. A 2.5 litre Susuki Verona got 14 city and 30 highway. A 2.4 litre Dodge Stratus got 14 city and 32 highway.

I’ll say this about Consumer Reports, their city fuel economy must be a very demanding test. The results were quite bad for all their tested cars. I did some more searching, though quickly as I soon have to get back to work:

A Cadillac SRX with the 4.6 litre V8 got 11 city and 24 highway. A Lexus GX470 with 4.7 litre V8 got 11 city and 21 highway. A Nissan Pathfinder Armada with 5.6 litre V8 got 9 city and 19 highway. And a Dodge Durango with the Hemi got 8 city and 19 highway

So on the surface it appears CR is more of a “real world worst case†fuel economy test, and the EPA/Transport Canada is more of a “wishful thinking for most†test. I’m actually looking forward to returning to Winnipeg in January, cold and all. I hate driving rental cars.