$30,000 for a PRIUS?

Sounds more like the free market to me.

Merritt

two of my friends who are hard core republicans own priuses. They do it for the technology. Their other cars are sports cars (Porsche and BMW M5).

The economics are good--to Toyota.

People will pay heavily to be "seen". There's no reason Toyota should leave those dollars on the table.

Oh-hum, someone else who can't be fagged to Google for the many past discussions on this subject.

(GIVES THE DIM GIT A SIDEWAYS HARD STARE) Sonny, you sum kinda bush-huggin' conservytive? Or mebbe yo commie-lovin' folks don't hold with market choice? Or they ain't yet figgered higher tech 'n' puttin' down them dumb ole Ford-GM-drivin' Joenses?

Basically you gave us a chance to kick a troll in the teeth. Ta.

There aren't any. Not only would buyers have to keep the things far longer than people normally hang onto their cars in order to amortize the expense (not even accounting for the expense of the eventual battery replacement), but according to what I've read in the car magazines, Toyota is selling the things at below cost. The Prius is all smoke and mirrors, economically speaking.

(That being said, I think they're technically interesting even if they don't get the advertised mileage, and I like the way they look.)

That's EGG-ZACTLY what's going on.

It's revealing that the Prius is selling so much better than Honda's hybrid models. Now why would that be, one wonders? The answer is that the Prius is disctinctive, while Honda's hybrids look identical to their non-hybrid counterparts. Therefore, one can't make nearly as visible a statement by driving a Honda hybrid.

It's characteristic of liberals to crave approval, particularly the approval of their peers. That's why, for example, so much was (and is) made by the Left of what people in other countries think of the U.S....even though it's perfectly obvious that those people give scarcely a passing thought to what we might think of them. And it's why liberals love bumper stickers so much: they want to be seen having the "correct" opinions and positions. Similarly, libbos seek the approval of their peer group's hive-mind by driving Priuses.

It's kind of pathetic when you think about it.

Geoff

Toyota is not selling the Prius below cost. Not only does it not make economic sense, there are laws in the U.S. that prohibit dumping.

I do not recall seeing any advertising by Toyota that claims that the Prius will save owners money. Toyota's advertising around the Hybrid Synergy Drive seems to focus more on the "green" aspects of the system.

Pathetic is someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. The reason why the Prius is selling so well is the the Accord Hybrid does not get great gas mileage. It is a performance vehicle with good gas mileage, not great. The original civic hybrid did not get great gas mileage either. The Insight was incredibly uncomfortable. The new Civic is Honda's first hybrid with a significant gas advantage though it is still not as efficient as a Prius. It hasn't been out long and people probably haven't found it yet and it is likely in short supply just like regular Civics which are selling like hotcakes. The Prius is selling well because it happened to be the right hybrid at the right time, not because it is distinctive. Personally I think it is ugly and uncomfortable.

Gee, I wasn't aware I had to be a "liberal" in order to give a one-fingered salute to the Saudis and Hugo Chavez.

Not all Republicans interpret "Conservative" as "Reactionary." But not to worry, you are far from alone.

I thought dumping was selling something in a foreign market for less (given the exchange rate) than it was sold for in the do- mestic market, not selling it at less than cost. Losing money on a car would make sense if it were offset by some greater good, like, say, the car's being a "halo" model that would create consumer interest in the marque at large.

Fair enough. Then again, buying an expensive car in order to save money on fuel isn't unknown. In the early-to-mid 1980s, for example,

70-odd percent of the cars Mercedes sold in the U.S. were diesels, due to the high gasoline prices of the time. Saving money on fuel was the buyers' motivation, not stretching a gallon of fuel in order to spend less time sitting in line at filling stations. There _were_ no lines at gas stations that time around, like there were during the '73-'74 fuel crunch. People can be funny that way, keeping conflicting priorities in different pockets, so to speak.

Geoff

No, pathetic is someone who chooses piss-poor examples to make his point. The Accord Hybrid isn't supposed to get phenomenal mileage; it's a fairly large car to being with, and it's intended to get rel- atively good mileage for the level of performance that it offers -- not great mileage in an absolute sense.

The 2003 Civic Hybrid supposedly got 47/48 hwy./city[*]. _Motor Trend_ got 46.1 to 48.2 with the one they tested.[**]

While not _quite_ as good as the Prius's claimed mileage, that's significantly better than most conventional economy cars, unless one considers minimalist, hair-shirt little shitboxes like the Geo Metro or that little 3-cylinder thing Toyota used to sell under another name back in the early '90s.

[*] [**]

The Insight was a special case, an extremely bare-bones conveyance that appealed to a market almost as "fringe" as the people who leased those GM EV-1 electric cars.

I'm sure those factors play a part. But I think the desire to be seen does as well -- and disproportionately so.

The looks aren't for everyone. Like the new Civic (which I also find attractive), it seems to have been deliberately designed to appeal to the sort of people who are exceptionally open to new things. It looks like something Captain Picard would drive.

I've only ridden in a first-generation Prius, and even then, only around town (Berekeley, as it happened; one would expect that). I found it comfortable to sit in (roomy, nice seats), with a com- fortable ride, and apparently well put together and using a high quality of materials. The styling was a bit comic-bookish for my tastes, though, and it was painted an odd pale-green color.

Geoff

According to this article

selling an imported product below cost falls under dumping. I am by no means an expert on import laws and tarriffs, but I doubt that Toyota would want the negative publicity that would arise if they were selling an imported product below cost, especially since Ford's hybrid propulsion system is supplied by Aisin, which is controlled by Toyota and GM's hybrid system is not yet a commercial success.

Good point!

---------------------------------------- My last fill translated to 49.9 mpg. The previous fill translated to 55.7 mpg. Batteries got a clean bill of health. May need brake work sometime soon. Maybe somewhere around 85 thousand miles for it's first time. I'm happy.

mark_

my echo uses the same engine as the prius and i get 40+ mpg. the economics overall are questionable. but if you like it, it's great the prius is an interesting car but i'd hate to have a problem and need to take it to a robber dealer. at 110,000 miles i've changed a wheel bearing, period. no brakes, no nothing but tires, oils and filters. sammm

Economics worked in my favor. Armed with $1200 for my trade-in and cash up front, I drove off free and clear. Man, was I lucky to even get the $1200. I promised my wife I would try my hardest to avoid such rapid depreciation in the future.

mark_

There was a rumor regarding the first generation Prius that they were being sold below cost. My dealer said it was BS but who knows. Cost can be manipulated all kinds of ways. Do you put all your research and development into your calculation of cost immediately or do you capitalize it over 10 years or more...... that is why those types of issues are hardly ever resolved and eventually there is a compromise settlement.

Pathetic is failing to list the real reason why the Prius out sold the old Civic hybrid. EPA gas mileage. Here is an old review when the new Prius had just come out.

Nothing to do with people wanting a distinctive car. Once you want a hybrid for high gas mileage you are likely to buy the one with highest gas mileage. Pure and simple.

The notion that any automaker will set pricing for their product below cost is idle speculation from people who have little or no knowledge about business in general or automakers in particular. Unfortunately, a lot of those people making those speculation are media types with a large audience of people who do not know whether the speculator know what he or she is talking about or not.

I am not an accountant, but I believe that under generally accepted accounting principles, research & development is not considered a capital expense that can be depreciated over time. My guess is that R&D is considered overhead, which is why companies publish overall R&D budgets as opposed to R&D by product.

In 2004, Daimler-Chrysler and Ford both spent more on R&D than Toyota, yet I have not heard anyone accuse them of pricing their products below cost.

On top of that, the shape of the Prius is a result of engineering needs, AFAICT as owner of one (the Mk2, 2005).

First, head room is very good. But this is common in later-model cars from several marques. It raises the roofline over front and rear seats.

Second, streamlining. The best shape for a car, I read way back (when the idea was considered laughable), was a banana set up as an arch running on wheels recessed into its tips. Look around: note how cars are now approximating to this. And a chopped-off rear is good for streamlining (discovered by accident, according to one story, during WW2 when a Royal Navy ship damaged in action had her stern patched with a flat plate, to get her home for full repairs -- she did markedly better mpg on that journey). These give the Prius its overall "arched" ("hunchbacked") form.

Third, that main battery. This eats a big block of space, behind the rear seats. For anything like useful boot (US:trunk) space, the rear roofline had to be raised. (But expect the size of that battery to shrink.)

I'd rather drive a car based on sound engineering and functional needs than one based on style. Truly there are far grosser cars running around the roads. Consider the butt-ugly Megane, frex.

That explanation seems to be popular, but when you look at the more practical aspects of the car:

Prius vs. Civic hybrid:

Prius has more interior room Prius has a hatchback for better cargo room (Civic hybrid loses the fold down back seats found in other Civics) Prius gets better fuel economy

Honda's other hybrids are the Insight and Accord hybrid. The Insight is too small for most people, and the Accord hybrid is not so appealing for those looking for maximum fuel economy, since it is more performance oriented than economy oriented.