Is the Toyota Prius being snubbed?

The Fusion Hybrid buzz comes from two things:

Firstly it's a well-engineered, efficient American car. It comfortably beats the Camry hybrid on fuel economy. It's positive news from an American company. You're Number 1!

Secondly, it's a normal (midsize sedan) car for normal people. So all those normal journalists who like normal cars write excitedly how normal it is. (I get that. I test drove an Insight and a Prius. The Insight felt normal. The Prius felt different.)

The problem for the Fusion is that it's an expensive midsize sedan.

People who can afford it can get a Prius with AT.
People who don't want normal get the Prius.
People who want the best economy buy the Prius.
People who want a hatchback buy the Prius.
People who can't afford it buy the Prius.
And people who still don't trust Ford buy the Prius.

 

True, they are extrapolating. The current Fusion is an updated version of the one we've had for many years, and the hybrid system is similar to the system that's in Escape hybrid. Nonetheless, my point was not about the Fusion hybrid but rather the Fusion in general: Ford can build cars that are more reliable than Toyotas, and there are survey results which show that.

What is your source for automotive data? CR isn't perfect, but I like them better than JD Power.

Good thing they can easily be turned off. I'm sure there's plenty of lame things about all vehicles.

 

Across the board - no, I do not believe that Ford can compete with Toyota on reliability. Can some Ford models compete? Sure. But IMO, it is premature to "extrapolate" reliability data from two different cars that Ford makes, but are used as the basis for the hybrid Fusion. Using said extrapolated data to claim that the hybrid version of the Fusion is as reliable as the non-hybrid Fusion is misleading, at best, and possibly, down right wrong.

By the way - one of the flaws with any survey (not just CR) is that generally, you are also evaluating (albeit, indirectly) people's expectations. That is - what may bother you, may not bother me...and the level of my annoyance is usually correlated to how much I pay for the car. If I buy a $60K Jaguar, I expect it to be perfect, or damn near perfect. If I buy a car for $20K, my expectations are not quite as high. By the way, I do own a Jag, and have had zero (0) problems with it in 60K miles. Yet, CR rates it as one of the "least relaiable". Mmmm...don't know what to tell you? Further, and applying the old VW Beetle principle - everything else being equal, the more complext the car is (such as a hybrid car), the more things to go wrong. My point with all this is that trying to meaure reliability from a survey is NOT as straight forward as you might think.

Many sources - from car magazine "longterm reviews", to web sites such as this where consumers complain about problems. For years, my beef with CR was that they ONLY tabulated the NUMBER of complaints in a specific category (ie engine, transmission, electrical, body, etc)...and did NOT take into account the severity of the complaint. Case in point - a vehicle with a burnt out light bulb would have the same "reliability" rating as a vehicle with a faulty alternator. My wife drives a Honda Odyssee. Got rave reviews and much better than average "reliability" ratings. I am now on my third (yes, 3rd) transmission. The first two were paid by Honda under warrenty. For years I had a running battle with the editor of CR about this - not all reliability issues are created equal. Unfortunatley, most Americans want their information condensed down to little colored circles. Stupid is, is stupid does.

Ultimately, the proof of reliability for me is whether people continue to buy a particular brand. I've been burnt by both GM and Chrysler...and I would never buy those brands again. If Toyota was not building a relaible car (maybe not always perfect, but better than most), they would eventually lose brand loyalty.

My point being - when people say they don't like the layout, the styling, or a particular feature...it's all personal taste.

 

Rebirth of the US auto ???

I have neither seen a Chevy Volt or an Opel Ampera yet on the road but Prius YES and this for 12 years already !

What a experiment!

 

Consumer Reports is probably the ONLY reliable source for automotive reliability data. They accept no advertising revenue and their reliability ratings are based on subscriber polls. Their initial ratings of vehicles do not take into account how much consumers "like" driving those vehicles, they place more weight on the safety and/or convenience features (not on driving fun). But their reliability ratings are totally objective.

The Fusion may be a great car, we'll see a couple of years from now.

 

I was open to looking at the Fusion, but my Prius was only $22k and a fusion hybrid was closer to $30k.

 

I would disagree. The CR "reliability" survey is just one source, and there are many issues regarding the validity of their findings/recommendations. I don't have problems with CR data, per se. Where I take issue is when your average consumer relies solely on this flawed survey summary, as if it was the Ten Commandments. It's not. In fact, far from it. I think Americans rely far too much on CR. It might be very valid data for a simple system, such as a toaster oven. But the model that may work for the reliability of a toaster oven does not necessarily work well for a much more complicted, and ever changing system, such as a car.

Some of the issues are:

(1) Statistical issues (ie, insufficient data) - A high response rate is the key to validity. Employee survey findings can be questioned when fewer than half of the employees respond. So how many people respond to a Consumer Reports survey? "Of over 4 million questionnaires sent this year, the magazine received responses regarding about 480,000 vehicles," according to Detroit News. If most people reported on two cars (because most families have two or more cars), that would put the response rate at a mere 6%. Even assuming one car per family - a highly dubious assumption - we have a taudry 12% response rate.

(2) Car owner differences -
People who buy different car models may also maintain them differently.
What causes a person to buy a car might also cause them to change the trans fluid frequently, or not at all. This may result in different reliabilities. Matt Kennell also pointed out, "the sort of people who buy [brand] [may be] the same sort of people who are rigorous about preventive maintenance. This isn't too unreasonable to imagine, as it would be characteristic of the same personality type: someone who goes out and meticulously researches all the cars, and thus seems like he or she would be conscientious about maintenance."

A study on American Honda owners found that most cleaned their garage floors on a regular basis...they appeared to be meticulous about maintenance. Could that affect reliability? (Bob Meyer found this article, from 8/27/97, at the Detroit News).







A related issue: Those who select from a manufacturer may have different driving characteristics than those who select from another manufacturer! Some people drive their cars more aggressively than others, which may wear them out faster.

• John Greenstreet: "the CR survey may over/understate the reliability of certain cars because the people that own them are not homogeneous. ... many people will have a subconscious need to justify their purchase of a Japanese auto over of a domestic one, and they could do this by believing superior reliability is the reason they bought it. Because of cognitive dissonance, they would tend to overlook or downplay anything that would attack this mind-set. We do see many people who vehemently defend Japan's cars' reliability and smear that of others."

All car owners are not alike, and they can have personality traits that directly influence their choice of vehicle, their vehicle expectations, and how they subsequently treat and maintain their cars. Consumer Reports does not control for this kind of systematic error in their surveys. (As far as we know, nobody does, so it's more of a "heads up" than a criticism). Perhaps a statistical analysis one year could accompany the reviews with a footnote given when reviews are quoted.

(3) Lumping car siblings together - Note that CR has in recent years lumped together siblings sold under different labels to give the appearance of validity.

Different drivetrains have different reliabilities -- CR often lumps them all together. (Now they are also combining "corporate twins" to hide the anomalies of years past). Standard and Grand Caravans are listed in the same category, despite the very different repair histories of the two transmissions and the different engines. They separate some engines but lump the 3.0 V6 oil-leaker in with the more reliable 3.3 engine.

David Ta wrote: "I'd expect CR to point me to those unique problem(s) from different make-model-year combination. Those CR reliability reports, regardless how they were done, did not reveal those problems. For example, 6 months ago, I noticed a bunch of postings on [Japanese SUV] problem of blown head gasket, within the first 70k miles. I checked CR report on [vehicle] and compared to CAA report on the same make-model-year. Not surprisingly, CR reported a [best rating] under the "engine" category. And surprisingly CAA reported the same make-model-year a "much worse than average" two red-dots for that category."

Lloyd says that unreliable options or components are sometimes pointed out in the ratings. This is indeed true, with an emphasis on "sometimes." We have to trust Consumer Reports on that, which we'd rather not do, considering what they do not tell us. WhatCar? used to have a very consistent approach to this; and WhatCar? also used to point out what the manufacturer had done, or had not done, to solve the problem. (WhatCar? used actual repair records from vehicles leased in the UK.)


(4) CR sensitizing (biasing) consumers -

Will Mast said that Consumer Reports' harping on some cars may sensitize owners to existing issues. For example, people who never noticed "bad" shifting may suddenly "see" problems where none existed before; while those who experience similar issues on a "good" car will not see anything.

This is related to a common problem in psychology: people who volunteer normally have a high need for approval. Therefore, they may try to to bring their experience into line with what Consumers Reports seems to want. Consumers Union provides clear "demand characteristics" - we know what cars they believe are the best. The research on this topic indicates that people will change their perceptions to match what they think the experimenter (in this case Consumer Reports) wants.

We should note that these issues are certainly present in car reviewers, whether they work with CR or not. We've suggested blindfolding testers for the ride and noise evaluations, and covering up internal badging and identity cues (and blindfolding testers on their way to the cars) as ways to help avoid this bias. Yes, some cars will of course be clearly recognizable anyway; but the ride and noise would be thoroughly unbiased, if opinions were given before the blindfold came off, and eventually perhaps the other evaluations would become more fair. Consumers Guide says they're going to work on the second idea; we hope Consumer Reports will better them.
​

(5) CR does not define what a "serious" problem is -

People who are inclined to buy different brands may define "serious" differently. If you've never received a survey, ask a friend who subscribes to see theirs before they return it (if they return it). You will notice that Consumers' Reports really doesn't say what a "serious" problem is. I believe should define it or say "any" problem.
This was evident in reactions to the problem of sludge in the engines of many Toyotas - a problem which Toyota, to its credit, eventually admitted and acted on. The Corolland forums were full of people claiming the problem was not real but simply in the minds of those who claimed they had it; and if was real, it was the fault of owners and not Toyota. We doubt they'd feel the same way if, say, Neons were victims of sludge.

There are many, many more flaws, which you can read for yourself: Statistical problems of Consumer Reports auto ratings



But my MAIN point was - it is misleading (at best), and perhaps wrong at worst, for CR to extrapolate "reliability" data from the non-hybrid Fusion, to the hybrid version. While many systems are common to both vehicles, many other systems are not. That goes to the point #3 (above).

 

Just because they accept no advertising revenue does not mean that they are not biased or that the individual employees do not have a point of view. I have a neighbor who refuses to acknowledge that the Prius has any value and only US-made muscle cars are real cars...and guess what? He accepts no advertising money from anyone.

3PriusMike

 

For me form should follow function, and counter intuitive controls should not be added without some benefit. The prius joy stick seems to be different for the sake of being different. I'm guessing the poor layout is why Toyota added that nasty reverse beep. With the 'B' function, perhaps a 3 position rocker for eco, normal, power (so that we could keep the power setting when the car is turned off). Park could be forward position, neutral left, Reverse right, drive back - with 'B' to the right from drive. Keep an ev button, but give it an led when it is on.

I like the exterior styling, form does follow function with a slippery .25 cd. The interior look leaves me cold. It is a mater of taste. I really like the way audi does their interiors. On instrumentation, I would like a normal analog speedometer, along with the ability to display engine rpm.


I would have been satisfied with the ford sound system. You can look at the threads about the nav and stereo to find other who share my opinion about the overpriced antiquated nav, and the included jbl speakers. Its not that big of a deal though, I'll have aftermarket hu, amp and speakers installed.

As I said I picked the Prius, but there are plenty of reasons for the press to choose the ford hybrid.

 

I hope the Fusion does well in sales. I hope it inspires Ford to come out with further hybrid vehicles (small and large). I hope it inspires competition amongst all car companies to come up with stylish cars that get great gas mileage. I hope it inspires Toyota to remain the industry leader in this technology and further motivates them to come up with innovative ideas to push the technological envelope.

In short, we all will win with good competition.

 

Perhaps? For years I use to own a saab, and they always put the ignition key in the center consul (between the front seats). Most people thought it was very odd and made no sense. But actually, saab did that for two reasons - (1) Safety issue (ie, in an accident, there would be no chance that your knee, or other body parts could be impalled on keys, and (2) Security - Much harder to break into the ignition (hot wire) on a Sabb, than it is when the ignition swith is encased in plastic on the steering coulmn, as with all other cars. But most consumers never understood the logic of whay Saab did what they did.

I doubt it. I'm sure someone in their marketing or legal department advised them that the older Prius buyer would like this feature, as it does give a sense of added safety. Albeit, false safety. But as long as it can be diabled in software, it's no big issue. Most car designs are driven by who the manufacturer thinks is their demographic market. I think the Prius has a very wide spectrum of buyers. I have been hard pressed to stereotype the typical Prius buyer, other than to say it's NOT the same guy who buys a big Ford pickup truck, with a cab on the back.

Good idea. You know, one of the features my college age kids (and their friends) like about the inside of the Prius...is exactly the blue shift knob. I have not heard a single negative comment about the looks and layout from this group of 20-something consumers.

But I'll bet the average American consumer prefers the more traditional sedan styling of the Fusion. Personally, i like having a hatch-back. I always enjoyed that feature when I had a saab...but most Americans like the trunk look.

RE: the nav system. All I know is that it does what I want it to do. Does it have, or not have certain features that other do? Probably.


RE: sound system

I use to be an audiophile in another life, and it is impossible to design a car system that will emulate anything close to what you get from a good home system...simply because of all the other noises that you get when driving. For my taste, the JBLs are more than adequate. Besides, I'm more interested in WHAT (content) I hear, than whether it has deep bass, or perfectly flat response. Having XM/Serius is womderful for it's diversity of musical content.

 

The 2010 Prius is a very good car and very, very good on gas. The 04-09 Prius is a good* car (* but quite unfriendly to tall people).

I would like to have a hybrid 4 door hatchback that can also tow up to about 1,500 lbs. Might need a 2.2L gas engine for that which would knock fuel economy down to maybe 40 MPG combined. A lot of people might buy something like this.

 

Maybe some of the nuts out there will manufacture a "Priusgate", and the media will drive itself into a frenzy over big bad Toyota.

I was at my Toyota dealer today, and they said you don't have to make any recall changes on your gas pedal or floor mats if you don't want to. Any changes can be made over the lifetime of the car by any owner for free. I will make no changes--a shorter gas pedal makes no sense for a short driver. And my OE mats are anchored securely.

My impression is this is all a bunch of political BS, and I didn't get any disagreement from the dealer.

My hope is it will keep Prius prices down--my wife will need a car in a year or two.

 

For SOME tall people who are either very picky or have odd bodies.

At 6'3" I have zero complaints about my car's interior room/arrangement.