Prius C Among Top 8 for Fuel Economy in 2013

thanks for sharing. Very interesting

 

Interesting article.
I've never been wild about Honda's but the Z is a compelling alternative to a hybrid if you don't have to have the extra 10 mpg.

Interesting swipe at the Prius...
Toyota Prius

Finally, we come to the full-size Toyota Prius, which offers some real practical functionality as well as top ratings for fuel economy. It certainly won’t be winning any awards for speed or sex appeal, but a clever use of the lift-back design makes the car an admirable performer in everyday situations. It also boasts a combined rating of 50 miles per gallon.

 

I still don't get what the Honda cr-z should be great for? Is it suppose to be a sporty hybrid, due to it's 37mpg rating and 2seat setup, but It seems too underpowered to even be sporty (but I guess from reviews I read on it, it seems to have better handling? but who in a hybrid needs to go that fast for good/great handling?), and for a hybrid 2seater...37mpg is so meh compared to other hybrids out there...and everytime I see one...I can't get past how ridiculous it's body looks...but how'd it make the list? being a 2seater hybrid that can't break 40mpg?

If there was a sportier prius C with some more HP in exchange for 10mpg loss like the cr-z...I think the prius C sport would be better in my eyes...

 

Then you should probably stick with the Priussy.
For MY purposes, a car with bigger, better tires...30 percent more BWP, a real transmission, and MUCH better interior appointments are worth the 2 seats and 10-mpg.
But then....if I were a fan of Hondas, I'd be more of an S2000 kinda guy than an Insight fan.
As they say.....YMMV.

Actually....if it didn't have the Guppy front end I think that it would be a fairly well executed design.
Looks are very subjective, and while I personally think that the adult-sized Prius is a decent looking car (most don't) the Priussy just isn't for me.
Again.....YMMV!

Yeah....but if my Aunt had....

 

I bet the list would change with fuelly numbers instead of EPA numbers.

 

Your statements are pretty opinionated in itself, so meh

I'm just saying what market was Honda trying to market their CR-Z hybrid to, when


A) It doesn't do well in the MPG market for a hybrid to compete against other equally priced hybrid

B) It doesn't do well in the other nonhybrid market for it to compete against other equally priced nonhybrid cars that can get about or near it's mpg.

 

Ya - the CR-Z is interesting, my non-hybrid (but horrible problem ridden) 2013 altima was way bigger, more seats, more sporty (170HP in the 4cyl) and got 38mpg.....

 

My kid has a 13 Altima.
40-mpg lifetime-measured by her gauge.
WAAAAAY more fun to drive than my company G3.
She hasn't had any problems in 30k....but I'm dubious about this being a 250K car.
If I had to have a 5 pax car, it might make it to my short list but the segment is already JAMMED with other jellybean shaped, guppy mouthed, four and five door cars.
The Altima does have a CVT that almost makes you think that you're driving a for-real car though, and the extra 40 ponies that it has over the G3 (70 more than the Priussy) are fun to play with.

Opinions generally are.

 

Ya - I won't go into details - but in the 10 months I owned mine, I racked up 25k miles. It also spent 2 months or more in the shop.
They broke more than they fixed on EVERY occasion to the dealer (including hidden damage to paint, body etc) and in the end, my "make believe CVT" problem that they couldn't replicate multiple times resulted in a CVT that grenaded in the middle of traffic....
Lemon lawing it and dealing with nissan = the worst experience in my life.

Very happy that the C has proven at least thus far (8k miles, 3 months) to have 0 issues. At this same point of ownership with my Altima, I'd been to the dealer twice and had major tranny issues resulting in a stay in the shop of a month.

 

^ Hope you have better luck with the C-model!

From what I've heard, it's a pretty good car. BE CAREFUL with the Toyota dealers!!
From my experience, they're competent at fixing things, but they're also good at recommending unnecessary repairs and they write their repair orders with a VERY THICK PENCIL.....if you know what I mean.

 

I almost ended up with one. They are quite fun to drive, sexy, sporty, and perform a lot better on gas than a SI or Corolla S. My complaint that kept me from getting one was the horrendous blind spots! Other than that, it was a great car and I would say underrated. Sure it isn't a gas sipper like a C, but it's not intended to be. They're trying to bridge a gap that is difficult to meld...performance and efficiency. It can be done, but proponents of either side tend to dismiss it as "not good enough." I think they pulled it off quite well. BTW-when I test drove it I averaged 45 mpg. The EPA assumes you're using "normal" mode. ECO mode offers significantly higher figures. See fuelly: Honda CR-Z MPG Reports | Fuelly

 

What I got out of the article was the fact that the entire Prius lineup (C, Hatch, V) was on the list. I think this is high praise for the Toyota Hybrid Synergy Drive system.

As for the CR-Z, the price is on-par with the Prius C. It's the only hybrid with a manual transmission. That alone is worth consideration if the fact that it's a 2-seater isn't a deal breaker. On paper, it seems like a really fun car to drive for a single occupant commuter. I bet 40 mpg is achievable.

 

When I was in the market to purchase a hybrid vehicle, I did test drive the CR-Z. Very sporty little car, moreso than my C that's for sure.. But what killed it for me was in fact the mileage. Why buy a car for mileage (a hybrid) that doesn't do as well as other comprable hybrids? If all I take is a 0-60 hit, I'll live..

The fact that Toyota's hybrid Mini Van gets better mileage than Honda's hybrid 2-seater speaks volumes to the design. That, and throw in Toyota's outstanding standards for quality and their reputation and you just can't go wrong with the Toyota.

 

The liftback and C are the top fuel economy vehicles period (outside of EVs and plug-ins), so they pretty much win their categories automatically.


Rant - I'm annoyed how this is simply an extended vehicle description that the author decided the original Department of Energy list lacked. I'm also annoyed how the author is careful to note that this is by category, but he fails to list the categories as he describes each vehicle. The original Department of Energy list gives me a lot more useful information in one simple chart, at least the Author was nice enough to include a link to it.