This one is a GT Hatchback. It is very predictable on the road and
it may not walk off from everything, it will walk off from a lot of
things on the highway..
The car has 245,739 miles on it right now.. i got it when the odometer
(doesn't have hundred-thousands place). The tranny has about 260,000
on it.. and the motor has 45,000 since rebuild. Like someone else
pointed out, it's not modern inside.. oh well.. honestly, when people
give me crap about my car, it says a lot about them.. my car is
transportation, not my wee-wee. usually it's someone who probably has
never held any kind of tool in his or her hand (no pun intended!) at
any time and never will either. Anyone who has ever owned a 20R or
22R -engined vehicle gives the appropriate nod when they note the
absence of blue smoke coming from the tailpipe of a vehicle that
"should have been crushed years ago"..
Don't get me wrong... I'd allow someone to *give* me a newish car or
i'd purchase a broken one for next to nothing (like our 1999 ram 1500
van for $1000 + $500 to buy a new spindle for me to install), but i'm
not going to contribute (for as long as i am able to not contribute)
to the silly idea that everyone needs to be driving a new car and that
what i'm driving is unsafe merely due to its age. I have seen lots of
younger cars that were totally unsafe.. For instance, the
aforementioned van.. when i "test drove" it, i drove about 50 feet
before i parked the thing.. the outer wheel bearing on the driver's
side was completely destroyed and the inner race was riding halfway
down on the spindle.
The only time my car becomes a rolling death trap is when i drive at
unsafe speeds... but then any car could be considered such.
If it wasn't for an unfortunate encouter with a '76 MonteCarlo, It might
even be on the rod...
Sigh... I miss that car. Simple, elegant, handling was very precise and
it had a nervous engine, even for a car from that era. Those things were
nicely built, and way better than newer junk :)
If I could find one in a not-so-bad shape (I live in Canada), It might
be a really nice project to rebuild one...
You are the illogical reader that's blind to the big picture. The
Prius costs thousands of dollars more comparable non-hybrid autos its
size. If Congress forces such high fuel mileage ratings on the entire
fleet of new cars (large and small), the hybrid version of the Chevy
Silverado will cost thousands of dollars more the non-hybrid Chevy
The bottom line is this. Almost everyone is for lower cost energy
supplies with a smaller CO2 footprint. But, we will never get
something from nothing no matter how hard we wish upon a star with
federal government decrees. The Europeans and especially the Japanese
have been producing high fuel mileage cars for many years thanks to
sky high fuel taxes. In the short term, the most efficient means of
achieving a higher fuel mileage is to pass a large fuel tax and then
let the free market decide the rest. In the long term, the most
efficient means of lowering energy cost and CO2 footprint is basic
research on battery technology, solar, etc. paid for my the United
States federal government.
Blind, politically motivated, federal decrees requiring higher fuel
mileage will only decimate the American auto industry.
On Jul 30, 5:22 pm, email@example.com wrote:
actually it has been proven over and over that CO2 is not a big deal.
It is the sun that is the big deal and the thing that is the most
uncontrollable about "global warming"... elevated levels of CO2 have
been proven to follow higher temperatures instead of dictating higher
temperatures. C02 is less than *ONE PERCENT* of the total atmosphere
of the earth. Actually, God should go ahead and turn this place into
a fricking fireball with all the treachery that is occurring all the
I remember learning when i was about 9 years old from Mr. Wizard that
if you have a glass of ice water ... when the ice melts, the water is
not going to run out onto the table. it's just a fact of
*PHYSICS*. Try it sometime if you don't believe me. The ice caps
melting doesn't cause a rise in sea level. it's actually changes in
the land that cause the "rise" in sea level.
And as for "decimating the auto industry". The auto industry is in
cohoots with the government as well as the companies that refine oil
Someone said earlier in this thread, "a car is not a train..."..
Well try running a diesel train with a tranny connected to the
wheels. See what happens.. The efficiency of the train goes to shit
when directly geared to the wheels. They have tried it. And
perhaps a tiny fraction of pusher engines that are easier to keep
running than replace are still running direct drive. However.
Diesel-electric is the answer to this "gas mileage crisis" for right
now, anyway.. but as i've said earlier.. the companies and the gov't
will not let us have it because it means less dependence on not only
foreign oil but domestic production as well. Who's going to make
money if we're all getting 80mpg ? Well.. they'll increase it to
$7,00 a gallon and cut production even more than they already have.
It's so sad to see everyone jumping on the bandwagon about "saving the
earth" when the very people dictating this "saving of the earth" are
still consuming at the same rate or even more than they were before
(Al MoFuking Gore)... anyone who preaches this shit to me i
immediately write off as a liberal sheep who really couldn't think his
or her way out of a wet paper bag. They really need a bullet through
the brain, post haste. There's a term for people like that... "USEFUL
it is easy to understand why Atlas Shrugged
By that reasoning, why don't close the garage door with the car engine
running and read a book. Don't worry about the CO. It will be less than
1% of the air when you are stone cold dead from CO poisoning.
And your brain power wouldn't go down one bit.
Why don't you do this? Get a big bowl. And put a small bowl inside the
big bowl upside down. Then put some ice on the top of the small bowl.
Does the water rise on the big bowl? Of course it does. Same thing with
the ice caps, because the ice is not floating in the water. The ice is
on land. For the ice not to effect the sea level, it has to be floating
in the ocean. It isn't.
Actually, the problem is the huge amount of torque required to get the
Just because trains work better with electric motors doesn't mean cars
will. Cars have the advantage that they are much smaller, requiring far
less torque to get going. Transmissions are able to handle this very well.
At least liberals are not stupid enough to think that when ice that is
on top of land melts, it doesn't cause the ocean to rise.
"Useless idiot" seems to describe you pretty well.
If brain power or clues were weight, Atlas wouldn't even feel you when
you climbed on.
on Wednesday 01 August 2007 10:39 am, someone posing as Lloyd took a rock
and etched into the cave:
Diesel is only "more expensive" in some areas because of Supply and Demand.
They don't make as much diesel so they can jack the price up, even though
it costs far less to produce.
In any case, take a look at diesel from coal.
Though I should learn more, from what I've read, we've got enough to last
the next 50 years or more without even bothering to import if we switched
some percentage of our cars/trucks to diesel and utilize our coal reserves.
The Camry is the best selling car in the U.S., right? Yet it costs a little
less, as much as, or more than a Prius, depending on the pkg. the Prius
comes with, & the model of the Camry. So... IMO, that theory sort of goes
down the drain...
Actually a base Camry costs a lot less than a Prius and is a much
roomier car with better performance (and decent fuel economy too). If
you are talking strictly economics, a Corolla is a much better buy. If
you are trying to impress your neighbors with your "green-ness" then
the Prius is the way to go. I don't agree with the Wall Street Journal
on this, but I think if you check the demographics of who is buying
Priuses (?), you will find that they are overwhelmingly purchased by
upper middle class Americans.
Or, if you care about the possibility of global warming, our balance of
trade and funding terrorists, the Prius is the way to go.
You have no evidence, whatever, to support the notion that people buy a
Prius to impress their neighbors. The people I know who bought a Prius
bought it for various reasons, primarily fuel economy and their conviction
that gas prices would probably rise dramatically over the course of time and
the vehicle would be cost effective. They're happy with them.
The fact that the unique-looking Prius sells well compared to the
ordinary-looking <pick a hybrid> is sometimes cited as "lookitme" green-ness
but that assertion overlooks the fact that the Prius absolutely gets better
fuel economy than any other gas-powered car available (its unique shape
offers about the lowest Cx on the road) and delivers 4 comfortable seats
doing it. So, the evidence that it's "lookitme" green-ness is also evidence
that people buying it care about fuel economy.
I'd be willing to bet a quarter that most new cars are purchased by upper
middle class Americans. They're the ones with the money. Since Prius
resale values are holding well, the used Priuses are going to be purchased
by upper middle class Americans, too.
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
See above... I listed the various possible permutations. If you get the
smallest pkg. on a Prius, is it still "a lot" less? (Guess it depends on
one's def. of "a lot".) Personally, if one doesn't need the space, I've
never seen the advantage of buying a base Camry over a loaded Corolla LE.
No, a Camry's not much roomier. Have you been inside a Prius? It's plenty
roomy. From the outside it looks small, but the design is such that the
interior is good-sized.
Pus even lower emissions than my present ('04) Corolla.
and their conviction
Depends upon how much gas prices rise &/or how long they stay up around
$3/gallon, how many miles a person drives each year, etc. But then there's
also the happiness factor.
I know 2 people with a Prius. One's a veterinarian & the other is a
retired classroom aide. I talked with the latter about her car, she *loves*
Plus IMO, it's just... cute. And is a hatchback, which can be very
How about plain ol' middle class Americans? I teach, so I've obviously
never been upper middle class. Yet have always bought my cars new, even
when in my 20's & making a very definitely low salary. I just buy
They're the ones with the money. Since Prius
Extremely well, acc. to the April car issue of CR (which IIRC, C.E. White
has little regard for; oh, well...) This, coupled with the rising gas
prices, are making me lean even more towards a Prius the next time around
for a new car.
the used Priuses are going to be purchased
A bottom price Camry is around 17k. A bottom price Prius is oover 20k.
True, at least on paper. Per EPA interior room rating:
Passenger Volume - 96 cubic feet
Luggage Volume - 16 cubic feet
Passenger Volume - 101 cubic feet
Luggage Volume - 15 cubic feet
From Consumer Reports:
Front shoulder room, in. 55.0
Front leg room, in. 40.5
Front head room, in. 4.0
Rear shoulder room, in. 52.5
Rear fore-aft room, in. 30.0
Rear head room, in. 2.0
Luggage capacity 3+1
Max. load, lb. 825
Front shoulder room, in. 57.0
Front leg room, in. 42.0
Front head room, in. 3.0
Rear shoulder room, in. 56.0
Rear fore-aft room, in. 29.0
Rear head room, in. 3.0
Luggage capacity 2+2
Max. load, lb. 900
Despite the specs, I find the Prius tight. It seems like a narrow, coffin
like space with poor headroom, and no rear view.
A Prius is a Japanese manufacturers car - so if you buy a Prius you are
starting out 15K in the hole as far as a balance of trade is concerned.
Well buying one for fuel economy may be the stated reason, but do you really
think this can be economically justified?
Good. But how about cradle to grave affect on the enviroment? Don't you
wonder about the enviromental costs of the batteries? As for buying a Prius
to save money on gas - how many miles do you have to drive to make up the
$3K+ higher cost?
Most people who buy new cars love them. I find that the less rational the
purchase, the more owners love it. I know several Prius owners. They all
love them. My Son loves his Mustang. My Sister loves her 10 year old Civic.
A station wagon would be even more convient. The Prius has relatively
limited luggage room for a hatch back. I bet you I can put more in the rear
of a Fusion. Cute is in the eye of the beholder. I at least find the Prius
interesting looking. Not ugly, more unique. I think the looks will age well.
I think the Prius is a very interesting car. But economically it is an
irrational purchase. But so are lots of other car purchases. It is even more
irrational to pay a lot for a used Prius. Sooner or later the battery pack
will need to be replaced. Do you want to be holding the bag when this
happens? If your goal is minmal operating cost, then a 2 year old Focus is a
much better idea than a used Prius. Since you truct CR, they give the Focus
exactly the same level of recommendation as the Prius, and a used Focus can
be picked up for a fraction of the cost of a used Prius.
As pointed out to Mike Hunter - more than once - & not just by moi, the
battery has a 8 year/100K mile warranty. I have kept only one car for as
long as 8 years (& that was back in '76 - '84) - I usually keep my cars for
6 years, & have never hit 100K miles. If I eventually get a Prius, having
to fork out $ to replace the battery won't be worrying to me, at all.
Simply because the chances of it happening will be next to nil.
Yeah, it was in '04, hence the purchase of my 4th-in-a-row Corolla. But I
seriously looked into the Prius - test drove one (had to go 100 miles one
way, just to find one on a dealer's lot back then!) and did all of the
math - & really wanted one. But it would've cost - factoring in
everything - about $5K over the loaded Corolla, so I reluctantly dropped the
idea. Plus there was a minimum wait time of 5 months at that point, & I had
promised the buyer of my old Corolla that I'd sell it by "x" date - in 2
months, not 5 or more. So... may splurge a bit & treat myself to one next
then a 2 year old Focus is a
Here's the 2004 Toyota Prius Green Report (life cycle assessment):
(you'll need to download the Japanese fonts for your PDF reader in
order to read it, but the entire document is written in English.)
Over the lifespan of the Prius, when compared to a comparable mid-
sized gasoline vehicle, the Prius comes out ahead in the life cycle
assessment (LCA) for airborne emissions for CO2, NOx, SOx, HC, but
actually does worse for PM (thanks to the material and vehicle
production stages). Lifespan is given as 10 years use/100,000km. The
CO2 break-even point for the 2004 Prius compared to this unnamed
gasoline vehicle is given at 20,000km. (more CO2 is emitted during
Prius production, but the Prius makes up for it over it's driven
The batteries are easily recycled, so not an environmental issue. (or
do you really believe the FUD about the Sudbury facility?)
Sorry, I don't have data on the Ford Escape hybrid/Mercury Mariner
hybrid, for the relevant other group...
There is payment on some number of patents that might be infringing,
but there is no outright re-use of anything that belongs to Toyota.
The original Ford design work was done by Volvo, and acquired with that
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5
The Volvo company that does a lot of hybrids makes trucks and is not
owned by Ford.
Ford and Toyota apparently will have a long relationship on hybrids:
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.