Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - Glaikit Wee Scunner {P}
Emits over one tonne less carbon dioxide ( in subtitles it then claims than a comparable diesel car).

Any one else find that hard to believe?
Autocar got 44mpg touring out of the Prius and 55mpg from a comparable diesel Focus.
--
I wasna fu but just had plenty.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - Collos25
The Daily Mail ran today a survey on the most eco friendly cars the prius came in at place 74 the winner was the Jeep Wrangler .The survey was a birth to death to give the true carbon footprint of the car some very suprising results
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - cheddar
As I have said before the Prius has a 50% higher carbon footprint at the point of manufacture than, say, a Corolla D4D or Focus TDCi both which are also more economical and are cheaper to buy. The Prius also presents greater challenges regarding end of life disposal.

Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - tyro
Andy / cheddar

Any web links for this information?
hybrid cars not as green as range-rover - Dalglish
tyro -

maybe this deserves a new subject thread - as per my heading here - see report in latest what-car magazine

www.whatcar.co.uk/news-special-report.aspx?NA=2225...2

shock horror - toyota prius is not as green as you might have thought
"... table of 96 cars sold in the UK, the Honda Civic Hybrid finished 73rd and the Toyota Prius 74th, even though they have some of the lowest CO2 emissions of any car and are usually regarded as the most environmentally friendly. Even 'gas guzzlers' such as the Range Rover Sport finished higher in the list. Top of the table was the Jeep Wrangler, closely followed by the Toyota Echo - the American version of the Yaris. ....."



hybrid cars not as green as range-rover - cheddar
To quote the What Car report:

"
In fact, some of the less fuel-efficient vehicles actually have extremely good 'dust to dust' energy consumption. Conversely some hybrids - at least the current hybrids - are inferior in total energy demands while offering high fuel-efficiency.

'This doesn't mean that hybrids, for example, are a bad choice. What it does mean, however, is that a modern hybrid uses less fuel and produces fewer tailpipe emissions, but costs society significantly more in overall energy costs.'

"
hybrid cars not as green as range-rover - madf
"'This doesn't mean that hybrids, for example, are a bad choice. What it does mean, however, is that a modern hybrid uses less fuel and produces fewer tailpipe emissions, but costs society significantly more in overall energy costs.'

Good for user country, bad for producer country?


IF Kyoto meant anything...
madf
hybrid cars not as green as range-rover - cheddar
Bad for disposer country too!
hybrid cars not as green as range-rover - Red Baron
"Good for user country, bad for producer country?"

And a whole lot worse than that for the country that has to dismantle the car.
hybrid cars not as green as range-rover - jase1
The problem is that the survey is based on some distinctly dodgy premises.

Yes, the Hyundai Accent might be capable of covering 150k miles in its lifetime (and they do in the US, as illustrated by WhatCar), but how many of them actually do? Most, due to the kind of people who buy them, are on the heap at less than 100k miles -- in the UK anyway.

Here's my point -- they're using the average miles each car covers over the course of its lifetime as a key component in their calculations. This is fundamentally flawed, because one of the reasons the Prius scores relatively badly is that these cars just aren't covering the miles -- the people who buy them on their "green" credentials simply aren't doing the coast-to-coast US mileages that other cars are (these same people will take the train over large distances, therefore the cars are being scrapped at a certain age with a certain number of miles on the clock), hence the Jeep's high standing because people are driving them over hundreds of thousands of miles.

So, that Accent in 6th place would be nowhere near 6th on British roads. And a survey that produces incomparable results based on market cannot be trusted, at all.

So, while I accept that the Prius isn't as green as it's being made out to be (absolutely not, although the technology does show potential -- remember that it's at the same effective stage as the petrol engine was back in the 1930s or earlier, and '30s cars were far from economical), this survey is based on flawed statistics and should be taken with a large pile of salt.
hybrid cars not as green as range-rover - tyro
Thanks, Dalglish.

Interesting.

But I think the most significant thing is that both Toyota and Volvo are doubtful about the assumptions on which CNW based its calculations.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - stunorthants
Now I can justify buying one! Yay cowboy boots!
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - madf
"this survey is based on flawed statistics "

No it's not.

If people only drive a Prius for 50k miles because it is u/s for long journeys, then it's an inefficient use of resources.

If they drive a Jeep for 500k miles, it's a more efficient use of original energy input.






madf
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - jase1
If people only drive a Prius for 50k miles because it
is u/s for long journeys, then it's an inefficient use of
resources.
If they drive a Jeep for 500k miles, it's a more
efficient use of original energy input.


That's true, but all it says is that Jeep *owners* are using their cars in a more green way than the Prius drivers -- somewhat ironic when you think about it.

The problem is that the survey has made the classic "and therefore..." mistake to imply that a Jeep is greener than a Prius, which is absurd. If the Prius was driven for the same amount of miles as the Jeep then it would doubtless be as green if not greener than the Jeep. If the Prius is, as you say, u/s for long journeys -- irrelevant, it's still *capable* of going on the long journeys. If the owner of the car decides not to do the long journey in the Prius, this is a function of how green or otherwise the *owner* is, not the car.

If you are to make a fair comparison of which owner is greener, then you must take into account alternative ways of getting around into the equation, so the survey would in those circumstances be invalid because they have not done so. But they have used these results to imply the greenness of particular models, which is even less valid because the *choice* of the owner to travel fewer miles in one car than another is not a contributing factor in how green a design of car is.

Put it this way, if it transpired that the Mondeo diesel (45mpg) was being driven, dust-to-dust, 100K miles and the petrol one (35mpg) was being driven 250K in its lifetime (unrealistic figures but illustrative of the problem) would you conclude that the diesel was less green as a model than the petrol? Because this is the frankly absurd conclusion this survey is drawing repeatedly in its statistics.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - madf
>jase
You're drawing the wrong conclusions imo.

Capability is one thing: actual use is another. After all a bicycle is capable of travelling 1,000 mile journeys but....:-)


Theory is one thing but we live in a real world and if in a real world the average Prius lasts 50k miles and the average Jeep 200k, then that's how the life should be measured.

Energy efficiency is all real world actual experiences not what ifs ...
madf
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - Adam {P}
>>The Daily Mail ran today a survey on the most eco friendly cars the prius came in at place 74 the winner was the Jeep Wrangler .The survey was a birth to death to give the true carbon footprint of the car some very suprising results<<

If that's true, (bearing in mind you come out with a fair bit of rubbish), then that's one of the funniest things I've read this week.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - jase1
You are probably right in what you say. And if they said that the typical Prius is less green than the typical Jeep because Jeep owners use their vehicles more than Prius owners, then they'd be quite right it would seem.

However, as a mathematician it angers me when companies present statistics in such a way that they're implying something that the statistics do not support.

The statistics DO NOT SAY that the Prius is less green than the Jeep. They say that the typical usage of the Prius is less green than that of the Jeep. To suggest otherwise, as this survey does, is misrepresentation, and dangerous misrepresentation at that.

The typical Johnny-Sixpack is going to look at that and say, hey, my Jeep puts out less junk than a Prius would if I bought one of those instead, which of course is utter rubbish: if the same owner was to buy the Prius the chances are he'd use his vehicle just as much.

I have no problem with the survey per se: I have every problem with the "how green is your car" misrepresentation associated with it.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - madf
>jase
never mind
Toyota are killing the US makers in the States so the typical Johnny Sixpack has more brains than to belive what the papers may say. Iiirc it was the Daily Mail?
Doubt if read much in US..:-)

and If it was the wail, I place as much credence in its journalism as I do in the Daily Sport:-)
madf
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - Stuartli
>>then that's one of the funniest things I've read this week.>>

It wasn't the actual basis of the survey, which appears in Which Car? and is based on US research.

I've got the Mail in front of me and one of the comments from Art Spinella, executive of CNW Marketing Research which measured the environmentalimpact of cars from manufacture until scrapped - the so-called "carbon footprint" left by a vehicle, was:

"Why do hybrids show up so poorly? It's because of the manufacture, replacement and disposal of high energy-use items including the batteries, electric motors and lighter weight materials used in construction.

"Simpler vehicles, such as the Jeep Wrangler, use established technologies that need less energy in manufacture."

The report adds that fuel efficiency was "only a small part" of the total energy used in a vehicle's lifetime.

Now clearly there are variations on the theme but the general message seems clear enough, a point raised by Ben Adams, environmental spokesman for the Association of British Drivers, on the fact that top political figures ride around in the Lexus GS450h, Honda Civic Hybrids and the Prius.

He commented: "Politicians seem keener to make policitally correct gestures than to get the science right."


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - Dalglish
The Daily Mail ran today a survey on the most eco friendly cars the prius came in at place 74 the winner was
the Jeep Wrangler .The survey was a birth to death to give the true carbon footprint of the car some very
suprising results


andy bairstow needs to back up his statement. i do not believe anything someone posts attributed to a source unless they give you the reference to back up their source.
the daily mail did not run the survey.
the daily mail was reporting the story from "what car magazine" - see my post above timed at
[ hybrid cars not as green as range-rover - Dalglish Wed 4 Oct 06 14:09 ]

Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - P3t3r
I've done some calculations. I've done it on a Civic, both the hybrid and 1.8 petrol version.

Hybrid emits 109g/km, petrol emits 149g/km of CO2. Looking at the figures, the performance it probably similar. This means...

40g less CO2 per km.
0.04kg/km
A tonne less of CO2 would need 25000km, which is 15,500 miles.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - cheddar
I've done some calculations. I've done it on a Civic,
both the hybrid and 1.8 petrol version.
Hybrid emits 109g/km, petrol emits 149g/km of CO2. Looking at
the figures, the performance it probably similar. This means...
40g less CO2 per km.
0.04kg/km
A tonne less of CO2 would need 25000km, which is 15,500
miles.


That is theoretical, in practice measured in MPG the Prius and Civic are worse than a modern 1.6 diesel. the comment from the What Car article ..........

"that a modern hybrid uses less fuel and produces fewer tailpipe emissions, but costs society significantly more in overall energy costs."

......... is half right, the hybrid does not use less fuel though does cost a lot more in carbon terms to manufacture and demands a greater cost in disposal terms.

Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - cheddar
From 4Car:

"
Like the Prius, this car (Civic Hybrid) isn't quite the cure for all automotive evils its supporters claim it to be. The official fuel economy figures may be impressive, for a start (54.3mpg in urban conditions and 65.7mpg on the extra-urban cycle) but in real life, they may well not match up, particularly if much driving is done on motorways or fast highways.

The Civic Hybrid runs in engine-only mode at high speeds and that tiny four-cylinder unit is going to struggle on the motorway, or when quicker acceleration is needed and economy will thus suffer. We experienced this with the Prius we ran here at 4Car for six months: in anything other than city driving (when it was excellent) its fuel economy was little or no better than our larger diesel-powered Peugeot 407 1.6 HDi estate, generally lagging a good 20mpg under the official figures. Similar findings have been reported by other hybrid owners, and demonstrated in a well-documented experiment by Road and Track magazine in the US, which did a coast-to-coast economy run with a Lexus RX400h hybrid and a similarly-powered diesel Mercedes-Benz ML-Class. The Merc used less fuel.
"
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - carl_a
Comparing one car against another is all well and good but the Prius is an auto and all the other cars quoted in this thread all seem to be manuals. It?s like comparing the RRP of one car to the discount price of another (lots of people guilty of that recently). I'm not saying that the Prius is a wonder car, its not, but it?s better than some of you are making out.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - Dalglish
.... I've done some calculations ..

>>

p3t3r:
how much have you allowed for recharging the batteries overnight from the national grid? (think of the carbon dioxide pumped out at drax power station while you are doing this).

Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - Honestjohn
This is Toyota's answer in the form of a press release today:-

RECYCLED RUBBISH?
CNW Marketing Research Inc. ? Study on Hybrid Efficiency

A number of UK publications have recently re-presented the results
of an
old study by a North American marketing research agency, CNW
Research Inc.
This study makes some surprising and uncorroborated claims about the
total
environmental impact of vehicles over the complete lifecycle (i.e.
production ? use ? recycling).

The media have picked up on one particularly eye catching claim,
namely
that the Jeep Cherokee is cleaner than a Toyota Prius hybrid saloon.
This
result runs contrary to all other research in the area.

The ?results? of the CNW study

As with any model, it is critical that the methodology is valid, the
assumptions are sound, and the data accurate. The CNW study makes
several
assumptions which undermine the conclusions arrived at. Without a
scientific peer review, it is impossible to comment on any of these
factors.

What is clear, however, is that the conclusions appear to be very
different
from the results of several other rigorous, scientifically-reviewed
studies
of the lifecycle impact of vehicles (e.g. Argonne National Laboratory,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology).

* Example 1: These studies conclude that the majority (80-85%) of the
total lifetime energy use of a vehicle comes from the driving stage,
with
the remainder coming from the remaining stages of a vehicle life,
whereas
the CNW study shows these percentages to be reversed.


*
* Example 2: Two Toyota models mentioned in the report, the Scion
xA and
xB sold only in the USA, are engineered with the same processes,
built on
the same assembly line, transported and shipped together, distributed
through the same dealer network, have the same engines and
transmissions,
are about the same weight (within 50 lbs.), and have very similar fuel
consumption ratings (one just over 35 mpg combined, the other just
below
35), yet the CNW study shows the lifetime energy use of these
vehicles to
be very different (53 per cent).

* Example 3: The CNW study states that hybrids require more lifetime
energy than even large SUVs. Toyota?s internal analysis does
conclude that
there is more energy required in the materials production stage for a
hybrid, but that this is overwhelmingly made up for in the driving
stage
(the 80-85% stage), causing the hybrid to have a significantly lower
lifetime energy use.

There are also basic factual errors in the report, for example CNW
claim
that the hybrid batteries are not recycled.

In truth Toyota and sister brand Lexus have a comprehensive battery
recycling programme in place and has been recycling Nickel-Metal
Hydride
(NiMH) batteries since the RAV4 Electric Vehicle was introduced in
1998.
Every part of the battery, from the precious metals to the plastic,
plates,
steel case, and the wiring, is recycled. To ensure that batteries
come
back to Toyota, each battery has a phone number on it to call for
recycling
information.

Toyota and other environmentally conscious car makers have been
using life
cycle assessment for many years to evaluate various advanced vehicle
technologies. Toyota, along with many others, believes that the
best way
to judge the environmental impact of a vehicle is to do a full
evaluation
of all the inputs and outputs in every stage of its life. The
lifetime
energy use is just one of the many things to look at.

The environment and the role of the car in CO2 emissions are rightly
a very
important subject for debate. Toyota welcomes such debate. However,
the
debate is not helped by sensationalistic reporting of an
uncorroborated and
unrepresentative piece of marketing research carried out in North
America.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - cheddar
>> there is more energy required in the materials production stage for a hybrid, but that this is overwhelmingly made up for in the driving stage (the 80-85% stage), causing the hybrid to have a significantly lower lifetime energy use.


In theory, i.e. at Toyota's claimed MPG, though it seems not in practice.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - Bagpuss
The truth, as ever, is somewhere in between. I think it's choice of Toyota to complain about sensationalist reporting given the hyped up marketing for their hybrid models in the USA.

I know several people in the USA who drive hybrids, Honda Civic and Toyota Prius. Some claim they are more economical than the cars they replaced, others are disappointed with the economy. One woman I know is particularly delighted with the fuel consumption, but then explained to me how she has adjusted her driving style to get as much range as possible out of the electric motor without the engine cutting in. Presumably if she had adjusted her driving in the Taurus she previously had she would also have seen an improvement in economy, but there is no "incentive" to do that with a normal petrol driven car.

The problem I generally have with fuel economy claims for hybrids, I just don't see how a petrol engined hybrid can possibly be any more economical than a non-hybrid powered by the same engine. There are some efficiency gains from the regenerative braking but this method of generating energy is inefficient and probably just offsets the extra weight of the batteries, motors and electronics.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - KMO
If a non-hybrid had the same engine it would be much less powerful. The Prius has peak output of about 110bhp, which is respectable for a car its size, and gives 0-62 in 10.9s. But the engine is an Atkinson-cycle 1.5 litre unit tuned for efficiency and rev-limited to 5000; it only outputs 76bhp or so on its own; not adequate for a large family automatic. The hybrid system is there to boost peak power to adequate levels, and make that more-efficient engine viable.

Oh, and the hybrid system also saves energy on low speed cruise - if you're bumbling along at 30, rather than running the engine continuously in a low-power, low-efficiency state, it'll run half the time at higher-power, higher-efficiency charging the battery, and half the time with the engine off on electric. A net win.

You can approach it the other way; the Lexus RX400h for example uses the same engine as the RX330, and the hybrid system there is used to boost power; they claim 4.0-litre V6 performance from a 3.3-litre 4-cylinder engine, with 4-cylinder economy.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - jase1
"* Example 2: Two Toyota models mentioned in the report, the Scion
xA and
xB sold only in the USA, are engineered with the same processes,
built on
the same assembly line, transported and shipped together, distributed
through the same dealer network, have the same engines and
transmissions,
are about the same weight (within 50 lbs.), and have very similar fuel
consumption ratings (one just over 35 mpg combined, the other just
below
35), yet the CNW study shows the lifetime energy use of these
vehicles to
be very different (53 per cent)."

Precisely.

This shows just how unscientific the methodology in the report is.

The full report, for anyone who is interested, is here : cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/Dust%20Zip%2...p . It helps to read the report rather than the sensationalist headlines. It's interesting to note also that WhatCar have not included cars not sold in the UK, and that in fact the Jeep Wrangler is not, in fact near the top of the survey -- that prize goes to the aforementioned Toyota xB. So well done WhatCar/Daily Mail for misrepresenting the report.

The only significant difference between the two vehicles listed above is the mileage each one is being tested against.

So, the xA is less "green" than the xB because it's bought by a different clientele.

CNW's wooly response:

'Factory costs are higher for more complex cars. That can be the difference between an xA and an xB. More components, more cost.'

But how does that explain this example? The xA and xB appear to be different packaging around the same car.

Unless CNW can back their claims up with the reasons *why* car A is less efficient than car B, these results cannot be trusted.


Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - jase1


Here's an interesting link: www.hybridcars.com/dust-to-dust-energy-costs.html

Indeed, CNW confirm what I was saying earlier, Art Spinella from CNW: "If you can drive the Prius 200,000 miles, and do the same levels of costs and repairs, the cost per mile obviously comes down dramatically."

In summary then, What Car and The Daily Mail need shooting for this report. They have conveniently left out the two US-only vehicles at the top of the table in order to go to print with the sensationalist headline that a 4x4 is the most green car in the survey. The survey relies on total miles driven, and it is noteworthy that each of the top three cars in the report are those with more-or-less the highest overall mileages in their respective sectors (the top 2 are the best two in the compact class; the Wrangler in 3rd is set at 207K miles where the highest mileage in its sector is 209K miles).

From the report : "One thing is clear. The typical hybrid small vehicle such as the Prius is driven far fewer miles each year than a comparably sized budget car. And for good reason. Like Upper Premium Sports cars, these are generally secondary vehicles in a household OR they are driven in restricted or short range environments such as college campuses or retirement neighborhoods. "

So it is not, as suggested earlier that these cars are "u/s" for travelling distances; it's that they are second vehicles to start with.

However, the crux of the reason the hybrids are less green is that they are scrapped early because of expensive parts. This is the most interesting part of the whole report; on the basis of this fact, hybrids at the current time are a bad bet from an ecological perspective.

However, I still question the validity of the report as it is taking owner patterns far too much into account.

The thing is, let's assume for a moment that this report is totally valid for drivers in the USA. Now look at the report figures:

First owners typically keeping their cars for 15 years. Does this ring true in the UK?

Cars lasting *on average* 15 years plus. Does this ring true in the UK? (Rust!!)

Little cars like Hyundai Accents averaging 150K miles over their lifetimes. Does this ring true in the UK?

The fact is, these figures simply don't apply in a European environment. Therefore we'd need an equivalent British or at least European survey before we could draw conclusions -- as this survey is as much about driving patterns as empirical cost data, the survey is irrelevant in the UK for the reasons above.

This last point draws into sharp focus WhatCar/Daily Mail's decision to only include cars sold in the UK (and the US Focus is different to the UK one anyway, natch). One can only conclude that this was done for political reasons. How can you take a US-centred survey, cut out the US cars and present it in this way? Staggering.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - jase1
> First owners typically keeping their cars for 15 years. Does this ring true in the UK?

sorry 5 years. But even so, how many UK new-car owners keep their vehicles for this long?
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - cheddar
The lifetime of the average car would only be relevant if the hybrid was actually more economical than a conventional vehicle so the extra cost in production and disposal of the hybrid were offset by the savings in use.


Take the 4Car example I quoted above they say of the Prius that in anything other than city driving, where they say it was excellent, its fuel economy was little or no better than their larger Peugeot 407 1.6 HDi estate and generally lagged a good 20mpg under the official MPG figures. If the comparison had been with a similarly sized car, say a Focus with the same 1.6 diesel as the 407, the difference would have been more marked.

They go on to quote Road and Track magazine in the US who did a coast-to-coast economy run with a Lexus RX400h hybrid and a diesel Mercedes-Benz ML-Class. The Merc used less fuel.


Therefore despite impressive claims it is clear that in practical use the hybrids are no more economical therefore however long the average lifetime of a new vehicle, hybrid related costs at the point of manufacture and disposal will never be offset.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - Vin {P}
"these are generally secondary vehicles in a household"

In which case, every single kWh of energy used in their manufacture is a waste. It's be better to drive the first car further.

V
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - IanJohnson
Prius, like the low energy light bulb - is green gone mad.

Would like to see the comparison of whole life costs on low energy bulbs compared to standard bulbs - and the margin the stores charge on them!
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - tr7v8
> First owners typically keeping their cars for 15 years. Does
this ring true in the UK?
sorry 5 years. But even so, how many UK new-car owners
keep their vehicles for this long?

One owner keeping it is irrelavent when you're talking whole life costs. As for rust their aren't many cars now that won't last 15 years, in todays terms thats cars around 1990, plenty running around down here.
The Prius has a what? 7-8 year battery life so for a 15 year life it will have gone through 2 sets of batteries. It also has massively complex electronics, bearing in mind ECU etc. failure frequently scraps non-hybrids before mechanical or rust failure what are the chances of all of that still running in 10 years or so?
Finally the biggest flaw in my book is that most Prius's (Priuii?)! are driven relatively gently, has anyone here ever seen one driven remotely quickly, or been overtaken by one on the motorway...... That's what most of the road tests came to the conclusion, driven NORMALLY they are no more economical than a diesel of similar size. And given their massive complexity & build & disposal costs that makes them a greater polluter, anyone buying one is just deluding themselves!
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - madf
The reality is quite simple:
IF every car produced in the world used the Toyota system, its cost would double, the waiting time for product would treble and all the supposed svings would vanish.

Why?
Well Ic engines are made mainly of cheap metals: iron and aluminium.
Batteries are made of rare and expensive materials where supplies and current usage are limited. A move to electric vehicles/hybrids would expand demand by a factor of (I guess here) 5 to 20 or more..
Results: material costs through the roof/shortages/huge investments to bring on new supplies (if they can be found and are economical.. note the caveats)..

It's rather like the "the world has huge reserves of oil so we will never run out " arguments - perfectly true but the costs of extraction meand that the days of cheap ($10 per barrel - as in 19998-99) oil have gone...

So hybrid cars are great in theory and built in small numbers: build them in large numbers and raw material supplies an dcosts become a MAJOR issue (and with a 8 year battery life, recycling is not going to help...in the next 20 years)


madf
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - KMO
> The Prius has a what? 7-8 year battery life so for a 15 year life it will have gone through 2 sets of batteries.

False. The Prius batteries, like the rest of the hybrid system, is warrantied for 8 years, and but is expected to last the life of the car. It's not designed as a consumable part any more than the engine is.

> It also has massively complex electronics, bearing in mind ECU etc. failure frequently scraps non-hybrids before mechanical or rust failure what are the chances of all of that still running in 10 years or so?

Not actually significantly more so than any other modern car with ECU. The program might be more sophisticated, but I see no reason why the underlying physical computers would be more prone to failure with age.

Now, I have heard of expensive Prius failures - the transaxle needing to be replaced. So far these have all been under warranty, but replacing it late in life would be expensive. (The transaxle is an all-in-one, non dealer-servicable unit comprising the two electric motors and power-split device; it replaces the transmission and starter motor of a normal car). However, it's not clear yet how much more likely this is to go 10 years in than a conventional automatic transmission, which is much more mechanically complex

> driven NORMALLY they are no more economical than a diesel of similar size.

But these would be manual diesels, I assume? There are still not very many diesel automatics around, and they are markedly less efficient than manuals, as far as I'm aware. And that's assuming you're happy with the pollution and tractor noise of a diesel. Not to mention all the inadequacies of a conventional automatic gearbox.

My Prius has a lifetime average of 52mpg on mixed driving (most of the time bumbling around town, but a few long runs). I really don't think there are many similar-sized, hatchback automatics that can do that. If there are please enlighten me.

But I would agree that if you're happy with a manual, don't care about the noise and pollution, mainly do motorway runs, and aren't interested in the Prius for any other reason, such as its changeless transmission and silent running, then a diesel would probably be just as good a choice, and cheaper.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - tr7v8
False. The Prius batteries, like the rest of the hybrid system,
is warrantied for 8 years, and but is expected to last
the life of the car. It's not designed as a consumable
part any more than the engine is.

No it seems that it has a design lfe of 10,000 cycles, never seen a petrol engine with a design life as low as that!
Not actually significantly more so than any other modern car with
ECU. The program might be more sophisticated, but I see no
reason why the underlying physical computers would be more prone to
failure with age.

Fair few issues in the US with failing electronics with cars around the 5 year old mark, what happens when these cars are 10-12 years old, their value will mean customers still having to use Toyota!
Now, I have heard of expensive Prius failures - the transaxle
needing to be replaced. So far these have all been under
warranty, but replacing it late in life would be expensive. (The
transaxle is an all-in-one, non dealer-servicable unit comprising the two electric
motors and power-split device; it replaces the transmission and starter motor
of a normal car). However, it's not clear yet how much
more likely this is to go 10 years in than a
conventional automatic transmission, which is much more mechanically complex

Err I can't see the transaxle with motors etc. being the same price as an auto box.
> driven NORMALLY they are no more economical than a diesel
of similar size.
My Prius has a lifetime average of 52mpg on mixed driving
(most of the time bumbling around town, but a few long
runs). I really don't think there are many similar-sized, hatchback automatics
that can do that. If there are please enlighten me.

So your driving is biased towards the Prius then?
But I would agree that if you're happy with a manual,
don't care about the noise and pollution, mainly do motorway runs,
and aren't interested in the Prius for any other reason, such
as its changeless transmission and silent running, then a diesel would
probably be just as good a choice, and cheaper.

Err isn't the pollution what we're talking about in that it's whole life pollution is much greater?
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - Glaikit Wee Scunner {P}
Thanks for all the replies to my original post. A lot to think about.

The Prius is being held up as a shining example of advanced technology in the TV ad. It is no use then saying that you can only fairly compare it with, uncommon, automatic diesel hatchbacks.
It has to compete with what most of us drive i.e. manuals.

52mpg is impressive but does not reflect the more typical, poorer, overall mpg figures found in road tests.

--
I wasna fu but just had plenty.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - KMO
> No it seems that it has a design lfe of 10,000 cycles, never seen a petrol engine with a design life as low as that!

Where did this "10,000 cycles" number come from, and how are you converting that to miles/years? And what number are you getting?

> Fair few issues in the US with failing electronics with cars around the 5 year old mark

More than any other car? I've no real evidence either way. You certainly see failure reports on owners' discussion forums, but then you see the same for any car. Hard to quantify without a scientific survey. At this stage the Prius is too niche to show up on the various big Top Gear/whatever surveys, alas.

> Err I can't see the transaxle with motors etc. being the same price as an auto box.

Exactly, it's expensive. That's why I'm suggesting it's going to be the most likely cause of writing-off due to uneconomic repair costs, rather than the battery, which most people seem to assume. It's the only thing that really troubles me. But again we've no real idea of typical time before failure. I've heard early failure reports (within the first 2 years), but not older ones. The Prius has been around longest in Japan (1997), but what with the language barrier, you don't come across much info from there. At least I don't need to worry about it until the 8-year warranty is up.

> So your driving is biased towards the Prius then?

Well, yes, that's why I chose it. People generally tend to choose cars that suit their needs, do they not?

> Err isn't the pollution what we're talking about in that it's whole life pollution is much greater?

That's what's not clear. The report is bogus, possibly deliberately. If I'd chosen a Jeep Wrangler instead, I would hardly drive it 3 times further than my Prius to give it a better cost per mile!

I did see Toyota's own calculations on lifetime energy cost for the Prius (but I can't find them now). They agreed that the manufacturing energy use was higher, but I don't think that it was by quite as much as 50%. But that cost is only a fraction of the lifetime use, maybe 25%, so was a net win.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - tr7v8
Where did this "10,000 cycles" number come from, and how are
you converting that to miles/years? And what number are you getting?

Panasonic's own figures on the Prius battery, which is NIMH so given a fair amount of experience I'd say this was the top end of what can be acheived, for normal industrial use 1000 cycles is the max.! Found on a Google for battery type.
> Fair few issues in the US with failing electronics with
cars around the 5 year old mark

>>
More than any other car? I've no real evidence either way.
You certainly see failure reports on owners' discussion forums, but then
you see the same for any car. Hard to quantify without
a scientific survey. At this stage the Prius is too niche
to show up on the various big Top Gear/whatever surveys, alas.

Various websites on a quick google. Various owners reporting problems so certainly not perfect electronics as Toyota may have people believe. And without the electronics it isn't going anywhere. Unlike say an AIrbag ECU in another car. And for how long are those electronics going to be available. They are also high voltage, high current electrical speed controllers, more heat etc. so more likely to fail than a small signal controller.
> Err I can't see the transaxle with motors etc. being
the same price as an auto box.
Exactly, it's expensive. That's why I'm suggesting it's going to be
the most likely cause of writing-off due to uneconomic repair costs,
rather than the battery, which most people seem to assume. It's
the only thing that really troubles me. But again we've no
real idea of typical time before failure. I've heard early failure
reports (within the first 2 years), but not older ones. The
Prius has been around longest in Japan (1997), but what with
the language barrier, you don't come across much info from there.
At least I don't need to worry about it until the
8-year warranty is up.
> So your driving is biased towards the Prius then?
Well, yes, that's why I chose it. People generally tend to
choose cars that suit their needs, do they not?

True but I bet a lot of prospective owners don't realise that it may not fit their normal pattern of useage!
That's what's not clear. The report is bogus, possibly deliberately. If
I'd chosen a Jeep Wrangler instead, I would hardly drive it
3 times further than my Prius to give it a better
cost per mile!

But by driving it a 1/3rd of the miles you're polluting more than you think? ;-)
I did see Toyota's own calculations on lifetime energy cost for
the Prius (but I can't find them now). They agreed that
the manufacturing energy use was higher, but I don't think that
it was by quite as much as 50%. But that cost
is only a fraction of the lifetime use, maybe 25%, so
was a net win.

Bearing in mind that Toyota's own overall fuel figures assume that the fuel consumption will be better than most people achieve I think that these could be flawed.

Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - jase1
One owner keeping it is irrelavent when you're talking whole life
costs.


If it's irrelevant, how come the survey is using it in their calculations then?
As for rust their aren't many cars now that won't
last 15 years, in todays terms thats cars around 1990, plenty
running around down here.


"Plenty" does not equal "average". If the average lifespan of a car in the US is 15 years, that means that there are "plenty" lasting 20 or 25. That is not the case here.
The Prius has a what? 7-8 year battery life so for
a 15 year life it will have gone through 2 sets
of batteries. It also has massively complex electronics, bearing in mind
ECU etc. failure frequently scraps non-hybrids before mechanical or rust failure
what are the chances of all of that still running in
10 years or so?


At no point have I defended the Prius per se. In fact, i agree with their conclusion that Priuses are nowhere near as ecologically-sound as made out (although it must be said that they are far, far better in inner-cities than a diesel -- the reverse is true on the motorways).

My beef with this is in the presentation. You don't take a US survey, with US-specific variables, take out the US-only vehicles then try to imply that the 4x4 left at the top is the greenest car you can buy. Give me one good reason why the Daily Mail isn't guilty of gross misrepresentation here. I've a good mind to write to the editor quite frankly.
Finally the biggest flaw in my book is that most Prius's
(Priuii?)! are driven relatively gently, has anyone here ever seen one
driven remotely quickly, or been overtaken by one on the motorway......
That's what most of the road tests came to the conclusion,
driven NORMALLY they are no more economical than a diesel of
similar size. And given their massive complexity & build & disposal
costs that makes them a greater polluter, anyone buying one is
just deluding themselves!


Absolutely. Another post hit the nail on the head: instead of buying a guzzler and a Prius to "save the world" as a second car, don't buy the Prius in the first place, get more use out of the guzzler. Better still, don't buy the guzzler either, just have one efficient car and run into the ground.

Of course, all this talk of green-ness misses the point anyway. Recycled chip-fat in an old diesel car is the greenest form of transport out there today in terms of overall CO2 production, by far. It's just a pity that it probably isn't scaleable enough for the whole of the population to use it.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - madf
"Give me one good reason why the Daily Mail isn't guilty of gross misrepresentation here. I've a good mind to write to the editor quite frankly"

I read the DM occasionally.
I would say gross misrepresentation is an example of their better journalism

..the worst consists of lies and rubbish but that is my opinion and of course I may be wrong and journalists are the scum ..sorry salt of the earth and:__)))))))
madf
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - cheddar
I heard actress (perhaps one should say 'actor' these days irrespective of gender) Brenda Blethwyn (spellin'?) on radio 5Live just now saying she is planing on changing her Jag for a hybrid, the interviewer did well in saying to her that it was just the kind of thing to say in an interview though he expected that she would not go through with it, she reposnded by saying her neighbour was arranging a test drive for her. I feel like I should find her agent's details and e-mail her a link to this thread.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - tyro
The thought of driving a Prius quite appeals to me. The main drawback is that everyone would think I was a complete eco-poser.

Probably just me, but any celeb who drives one of the things goes down in my estimation.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - quizman
"Give me one good reason why the Daily Mail isn't guilty
of gross misrepresentation here. I've a good mind to write to
the editor quite frankly"
I read the DM occasionally.
I would say gross misrepresentation is an example of their better
journalism
..the worst consists of lies and rubbish but that
is my opinion and of course I may be wrong and
journalists are the scum ..sorry salt of the earth and:__)))))))
madf



You have had two goes slagging off the Daily Mail. If you don't like it why don't you buy the Guardian or the Mirror instead.
Most people know that all this eco stuff is nonsence, my Passat will do more mpg than the Prius or the Lexus that Dave is running.
I read in the Daily Mail (so it must be wrong) that the Romans made wine here 2000 years ago, so climate changes every now and then. We are worrying too much, relax and enjoy yourselves.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - John S
What annoys me more is that the ad appears to link CO2 with causing illness, which just isn't true.

JS
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - KMO
I haven't seen the ad, but if they're talking about that, they're referring to the reduced CO, HC, NOx and particulate emissions. Most people concentrate on the mpg and CO2 advantage (or not), but it's also very clean on all other emissions, especially compared to a diesel. That was as much a design aim as the CO2. It'll comes in easily under the proposed future Euro V emissions.
Toyota Prius TV Ad Claims - blue_haddock
I had one briefly whilst working for toyota - i got no where near the stated MPG figures whilst finding the engine had to be worked hard to get any kind of performance out if it.

I would rather spend £15k on a top spec diesel corolla/focus etc than £17k for a base prius and would imagine it would cause less overall harm to the environment.
 

Ask Honest John

Value my car