Prius 2010 vs Lexus CT200h

great write up, thanks! sounds disappointing from my perspective. i was really hoping for a quieter more comfortible prius, without all the other stuff. not interested in sporty driving or a smaller vehicle.

 

Good review.

BTW, guys, i love my Ecopia EP100...a bit quieter than my stock Toyos!

 

As you mentioned, it seems a joystick / mouse pointer would be quite distracting to use in car. It's not a laptop, it's a car.

 

Haven't had a chance to read the review but I had a free test drive of the HS 250h for a week and it had the force feedback mouse-like controller. At first, I thought it was a terrible idea, would suck and that the LCD should be a touchscreen, as a backup.

But, after I got used to it, I actually felt it wasn't too bad.

 

The remote touch control will come to future generation Prius, as features found in Lexus eventually trickle down to Toyota so better get used to this idea.

 

thing to note is that in Europe, performance dampers are only in Sport model CT200h.

Also - what is the price of Prius vs CT200h in Germany? In Croatia, CT200h is excellently priced, very similar to Prius price.

So unless you need more space, CT200h is definitely better choice since it solves biggest Prius problem - materials.

 

The Prius solves the biggest CT's problems - efficiency and practicality.

 

Too bad you could not take it to a longer test in narrow and winding roads, it has double wishbone rear suspension and other testers said handling is way much better. In fact Lexus guys say it is one of its strong features.
Much more factory settings can be modified by user, including tachometer (you can set it to always off).
SPORT mode is different from Prius POWER mode, apart from changing throttle mapping, in SPORT mode steering is tuned to more "firm", stability and traction controls are tuned to be less intrusive.
Front seats are way better.
The CT is about 40 kg heavier and with CD of 0.28-0.29, yet the fuel consumption is about the same (at least in the Euro test cycle), I wonder if it has some "evolutionary" improvements to the drive train in order to achieve this.

Giora.

 

This has been a recent talking point for some of my more knowledgeable passengers. "Why does the Prius look so awful" they ask? "Ah well, it's because of aerodynamics to make the car much more fuel efficient I would answer". "So how come the Auris HSD and the Lexus ct200h are just as fuel efficient but they look 'normal' "they reply. And do you know, I have no idea.

Is the Prius shape just a gimmick? Sure it might have a very low drag coefficient but is it actually needed because the Auris HSD gets better fuel economy and the Lexus ct200h only a mile per gallon worse and both of those cars don't look 'weird' (in the eyes of my passengers).

 

The following theory keeps sneaking to my mind:

Auto manufacturers are smart.
Auris HSD and Lexus CT200h are meant mainly to Europe.
O.K. they say, let's tune them to be optimal for the Euro test cycle...

Same with safety. Manufacturers aim to the safety tests! does this means the cars are more safe? probably yes, but mainly in the aspects tested...

Giora.

 

Handling may be a tiny bit better, but it is far, far, far from being anywhere near sports car territory! Slalom testing does not really reflect what Lexus claims. Road feel? Nope. Firmer steering does not always mean more road feel nor better handling. Braking? Not any better. Definitely not acceleration...where the CT is the same or a bit slower than Prius.

Remember, Prius with 17" rims have brushless steering motor that allows for significantly quicker steering ratio!! Maybe that is why Pakitt did not notice much difference!

Stability control less intrusive? That may be the ONLY thing that separates the CT from the Prius in the slalom. I would bet that this part (VSC less intrusive) is what makes the biggest difference in handling over a Prius, and not the double wishbone nor Sport mode. Personally, if i wanted a little handler, then i would pick something else...not one that takes over 10 seconds to get to 60 mph.

European cycle is notorious for being inaccurate! Just ask VW TDI owners! US EPA ratings from 2008 are very accurate to the average driver. And according to EPA, there is an 8 mpg difference b/w CT and Prius.

CT looks normal...because it blends in with any hatchback. Nothing revolutionary about it...nor does its shape give it any special aerodynamic features.

Prius gets 0.25 Cd.
Ct200h gets 0.29 Cd.

BTW, more and more cars are achieving around 0.29 Cd...see 2012 Mercedes C class. But, it is exceedingly hard to achieve Cd as low as the Prius.

In the end, the CT still is an average looking car, with very average handling, piss poor acceleration, and very impractical...and good (but not great) efficiency.

Goes back to what i wrote earlier: The Prius solves the biggest CT's problems - efficiency and practicality.

 

Grummpy,
Which of the anwers to your question you liked best?

 

I always thought that the MPG test cycle that the US agency used is more accurate/realistic than the one used in EU/Aus. The CT is rated at 42mpg (5.6l/100km), whereas the Prius is at 50mpg (4.7l/100km) in the US, a big difference of 8mpg! Who knows what the Auris gets if tested on US' soil? The Auris may even be around 42 to 44 mpg mark...

 

Do the higher trim levels have usual Lexus gadgets like power/memory seats, mirrors, and steering wheel? Also auto dimming and heated mirrors?

With what you said about the power and handling of the CT (marginally better than Prius at best) and the smaller interior volume, the CT does not look like a winner. Also, if you go with the highest trim level package (there are 5 in the US), the price is close to $40k. For about $2k more you could get a HS250h. You'll sacrifice some MPG but you get a LOT more car.

You can get a stripped down version of the CT for about $30k. But it's a Lexus and the great majority of people buying a Lexus will want typical Lexus trim which means the highest level trim package in the CT. I think they screwed the pooch on the CT and I don't think they'll sell many of them. I know I would definitely pay $2k more for a loaded HS than a loaded CT.

 

I don't understand how anyone driving the CT cannot be impressed by the seats, great driving position, and the better ride, and fail to acknowledge those, given that those are its main distinguishing features from a Prius. At this point, the only thing standing between me and the CT is an earthquake and the lack of a plug in version. Therefore, I'm finding some of the reactions to the CT puzzling. Even more puzzling than the bad mouthing of the hybrids of other car companies. That prompted me to think about the past history of Prius. With apologies for post length, here's my take on that history, as a non-gearhead but tech oriented average car buyer.

From the beginning, the 2 major questions about the Prius have always been (1) yeah, yeah, thats all great, but how much more am I going to have to pay for it than a regular car, and (2) what kind of compromises am I going to have to make in terms of drivability and comfort (I'll ignore the do I have to plug it in question).

2002 (my first test drive) - Version 1 or 1.5. Critics called it a really expensive, unattractive version of a Corolla compact sedan. Seemed good enough to me, and bland but not ugly. Definitely an economy car look and feel though. No gov't incentives then, and couldn't get a reasonable lease. Version 2 was on the way, so I waited.

2004 - Version 2. Totally unique car. Great mileage and great interior design that felt near midsize on the inside, even though it was compact on the outside. Absolutely great tech at a a relatively cheap price, that was not available on any other similarly priced cars at the time and made up for the so-called hybrid premium. Comfort seemed good enough for an economy car, which is what it still looked and felt like, other than the great tech. I was not crazy about the looks and my wife asked me "why'd they have to make it so dorky looking?" With the gov't incentive, there was not much, if an, hybrid premium. I really enjoyed it, but the highway handling and seats were awful. Taking it on long trips was uncomfortable and tiring. In short, there were in fact a lot of compromises you had to make to drive this car. Traded for Camry Hybrid in 2007 and waited for Gen III.

2010 - Version 3. Yeah! Much sportier looks while still maintaining the same basic shape. Real car seats that are bearable over long distances. Can actually drive in a straight line on the highway, even in cross winds, without having to work too hard. If you have the Five, you get smooth and tight steering. 1,000% better for long trips. Humungous rear legroom and they fixed the lack of rear headroom. Despite being more roomy, they made it feel more compact in the front, by adding the bridged console. I was a defender at first, but would now call that a major design mistake. All in all, feels like a real car now, rather than an econo box, with very few compromises in comfort and handling.

However, the seats are not very adjustable, and they didn't position the steering wheel close enough to the driver. If you raise the seat, you lose the bucket effect, since there's no way to raise the front portion. The seat bottom is not well padded and the adjustable lumbar support is OK but not great (feels awkwardly arranged, at least for my average body type). Even though the wheel now telescopes as much as other steering wheels from Toyota, there is no way to get it close enough to be truly comfortable. Also, they put the lower arms of the steering wheel in exactly the wrong place to be comfortable when resting your hands in the lower holding positions. Finally, and most importantly, the ride still sucks. I understand and appreciate why they don't use better, but heavier, suspension components, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. Admittedly, the low profile tires on the Five may make this problem a little worse, but they also contribute a lot to the improved highway stability.

In short, there is still a huge difference in comfort between my Camry and my Prius, so there is in fact still a large compromise being made anytime I choose to drive the Prius over the Camry. Despite the 10 MPG difference, I would always choose the Camry for a long trip. Because I've grown increasingly weary of the vibrations and jars I get driving on bad inner city streets, I was very interested in seeing how well the CT would succeed in softening the ride, without sacrificing the improved handling.

CT - My first test drive was a revelation. Those seats are fantastic (and yes, they have good lumbar support). The vibrations have largely been eliminated. The ride is still a bit firm and bumpy, but I don't see how you can have the low profile tires and sharper handling without at least a little sacrifice in ride softness. Perhaps the gearheads, or people who have driven more and better cars than I have, can enlighten me. Just as importantly, the low center of gravity in this car just feels better. Both you and the car feel absolutely planted while driving, there is no sense at all that either you or the car are being flung about. Even my wife, who didn't like the compactness of the CT, very much appreciated the seats and the planted ride feel. It also solves various other small issues I have with my American Prius, by adding things like dual zone AC, hdd nav with better screen, fully automatic headlights, and daytime running lights. Personally, I also felt the outside mirrors and rear visibility were also much better.

The only drawback is that CT is a compact, and feels like it in front, unlike the Prius. They may have made a mistake by having such a wide console. It is interesting that the CT is the same width as the Prius but feels so compact side to side. I suspect the lowering of the driver position may have a lot to do with this. However, the CT is by no means claustrophobic. And if you don't need that extra room in back then you won't miss the cargo space. In short, other than compactness, which some people don't care about and may even prefer, what's not to like about the CT compared to the Prius? CT is very successful at what it was trying to do, i.e., make a compact luxury hybrid with near Prius MPG and the least amount of compromise to luxury that we have yet seen on a small, hatchback hybrid.

 

Yes, the CT can be had with lots of Lexus extras like rain sensing wipers, memory driving seat positions (passenger seat not as adjustable though), auto tilting and heated outside mirrors, and the fancy stitched leather dash and steering wheel. You can also get Prius extras like PCS and LED headlights (but good luck finding any model, let alone a fully loaded one).

The HS250 is definitely not a better car than the CT, other than size. And it is a sedan. And by most people's opinions, kind of ugly or at best exceedingly plain (especially compared to an is250). Dash is also kind of ugly. Ride and handling are not at all impressive. I'd pick the much better value hycam over the poor seling HS250 every time. Yes, CT is slightly underpowered, but no more so than the Prius.

Predictions about CT not selling well are kind of silly now that it is completely sold out and there are waiting lists. Some of that is earthquake related, but there is no doubt that CT is a hit and selling far better than Lexus hoped for, both here and in Europe. This is in part due to gas prices, but mostly because they did a great job designing it and hitting their target audience.

 

This is what i wrote 2.5 months ago: