Car and Driver Reviews the 2015 Prius c

In the same vein, the Gen3 Prius is 'unrelated' to the Gen2.

 

Caranddriver can't understand the Prius c is NOT a sports car. It is an great stylish, fuel efficient car that gets you from point a to b

 

None of the many versions of the Prius fits the C&D automotive market segment focus - the sports car segment. Even in my affluent area the sports car segment is a minority niche market - the most popular being the used BMW 3-series. I don't think its worth it for Toyota to expand the Prius line into the sports car segment - it is just too small of a market segment to justify their mission of expanding the hybrid segment's market share. Given that Scion handles Toyota's sports car segment market - it would be up to Scion to integrate hybrid tech into its line up. I suppose Scion could add a few super caps and upgrade its power plant/motor to get its hybrid platform to perform like a sports cars ( Honda has a hybrid sports car - but it isn't very popular ) but it would likely burn a boat load of gas or electricity like every other sports car out there ...

Very fast cars waste most of their energy accelerating to hi speed and then fighting aerodynamic drag - IMHO the most affordable way to get a hybrid like fuel efficiency with sports car performance is for a car design to address this two factors : (1) reduce aerodynamic drag by reducing the frontal surface area to a motorcycle-like surface area and (2) reducing the curb weight to something under 1500 pounds.

The big market segments in my area and in the USA overall is Pickup Truck, Sports Utility Vehicle/Crossover, and mini-van. The Prius v may end up morphing into the mini-van segment. The Prius power plant is not design with a high amount of reserve horsepower and towing power so a Pickup Truck version of the Prius isn't likely. A light duty Sports Utility Vehicle-Crossover version of the Prius is possible but it might eat into the market share of the all electric Rav 4 in California ...

 

And yet they prize Mazda which with exception of MX-5 sports car are not.

Is there anything wrong with small economical car being fun to drive?

 

Depends, the more economical, the less fun to drive they are.
Manual shift may be more interesting to drive with, but they deliver less MPG than a proper CVT.

 

That's because Mazda says 'vrooom vrooom' a lot

 

No i don't think anyone is confused there. They seem to really like the honda fit in the econobox segment. Its not a sports car either, but the honda does some things that makes it more fun to drive.

+1

No and the new president wants toyota to start making more exciting cars. He loves to drive.

 

2 gen Insight included?

 

No they like the fit in the prius c class, the accord in the camry class, and mazda 3 in between. They did not like the gen II insight, but that was also underpowered. I think they would have liked the fit hybrid much better, but honda doesn't sell it in the US. For car and driver the difference between 36 mpg fit and the 50 mpg prius c doesn't matter much. They do care more about the driving dynamics, dash, and drivers seat. I don't think the reviewer did a good job in this review though.

If you want a prius c or a corolla, you probably don't care about most car reviews. These are the consumer reports type cars, not cars for motortrend or car and driver. Now why CR is so anti prius C, that is a problem. They like the fit better too, but they seem terribly biased against the prius c, and review it much more harshly than car and driver.

 

Zoom-zoom actually... That aside they are fun to drive.
Our Gen3 is also fun to drive, after some minor suspension mods. Makes you wonder why Toyota didn't make it that way from the start

 

Might as well ask why Toyota stopped making the MR2 and Supra?
They might offer suspension tweaks on the Camry and Corolla, but you have to go to Scion to get a Celica descendent. Of they real performance car there, I think the Subaru looks better.

 

The current Toyota GT86 is badged Scion for the same reason, i believe.
Toyota is suppose to deliver cars to a broad market. Scion to the "active". Lexus to the "premium".
It might have worked well for some time...

 

Yes, I believe when Car and Driver said The Prius c isn't related to the regular Prius they meant the platform from which The Prius c is based which is The Yaris.
They should of been more specific with that phrase.

I don't really care about the review. I think of course they totally miss what The Prius c is suppose to be about.

But whenever I evaluate anything, I try to keep in mind the source.
I don't think there IS anyway Car and Driver likes The Prius c, because they are "Car and Driver". By that I mean, they are going to be hard pressed to like small compact vehicles period, and even when they do they are going to be applying "Hot Hatch" criteria to their evaluation. Which means they are going to be looking at acceleration times, overall power. Which isn't The Prius c's calling card.

Which is why the fact that The Prius c has Hybrid Synergy Drive and get's 50 mpg, get's nearly a sweep it under the rug type of mention, where all the other criteria from interior design to engine power is presented as paramount to ownership enjoyment.

Toyota has built the vehicle they wanted. As the regular Prius is evolving, with the upcoming Gen 4, I'd expect evolution from the Prius c, with time. Whether or not you agree or disagree with the negatives Car and Driver perceives? I think is really unimportant. I don't think anyone buys The Prius c looking for great torque, engine power or acceleration. I think the exterior and interior, is pretty equal or surpasses a lot of entry level compact hatch offerings. But that's just me. A big reason I passed on The Prius c, was at the time I thought it looked and felt too much like The Honda Fit that I was moving from.

I speculate, that The Gen 4 Prius will raise the bar. But I also speculate it will raise the price. By that, I mean while right now there isn't a huge gap between buying a well equipped Prius c and a regular Prius Two...I expect that gap to grow.

I personally LIKE driving smaller cars. Which is fortunate for me, because simultaneously they are usually cheaper. So I'm glad The Prius c exists. Who knows? Someday in the future I might move "backwards?" down the ladder and end up in a future incarnation of The Prius c. All the things Car and Driver criticizes aren't that important to me.

My biggest disappointment when The Prius c was released, was the gas mileage. As the smallest Prius, I was expecting a baseline EPA reported improvement, of hopefully +5 or even +10 over the regular Prius. The EPA numbers are nearly a wash. Which isn't bad, it's just the area I was most disappointed, and another reason I chose a Standard Prius over a Prius c.

I would expect this area to improve as well. Especially if any of the rumors about the upcoming improvement in gas mileage with the Gen 4 turn out to be true.

 

Scion was supposed to target younger buyers since Toyota had gotten a bit of an old man's car rep in the US.
Upon introduction, all the little xB's I saw driving around didn't have single driver under 40, though. Toyota probably could have avoided that by offering the Echo hatch in the states. I think Scion started getting the younger buyer with the tC. With the FR-S, I'm guessing Toyota has decided to use it as their performance brand here.

 

Yeah, that's sort of the net effect of fragile bumpers masquerading as part of outsize grills.
Grills should be shrinking to the extent consistent with adequate air intake, not growing.

 

I think Car and Driver basically takes cars and heads out to some local backroads to see how it handles the curves and up and downs. If they like it, they praise it, if they don't, they won't.

I drove a 2014 Accord 4 cyl sedan EX-L rental over the 50 mph speed limit mountain pass, highway 17 last weekend and it is everything Car and Driver says the Accord is.

 

Mostly agree... with some comments:
- the counter on C is dead on, and Gen3... Mostly optimistic.
- C does much worse when Gen3 when temps drop
- at 60MPH speedo on C is dead on, and on Gen3 ~1MPH optimistic. Not sure about calculated distance, similar?

With that in mind I am getting 60 MPG in C with OEM FuelMax and 57.6 in Gen3 on Savers, indicated. So it would be safe to assume that real life MPG of C is better by at least 5%.

 

What I find esp frustrating that it didn't cost much for Toyota to make C handle better. Mine is much better now than it was out of dealership, with very minor changes:
- rear sway bar
- alignment (was toed in too much from the factory)
- camber kit.
Total cost $177.

It is not at the point where you'd take it to local auto-X, but at least it would not be embarrassment if you do.

If "fun to drive" was all about 0-60 times, everyone would be riding a superbike.

 

You "get it" cyclo. It wouldn't take much for Toyota to retune the Camry and Corolla and Prius to be more like Mazda or Honda. But ever since the 70's, Toyota has mostly not gotten that. But for those of use that appreciate it, we have always realized that Toyota has far more customers than they do. For me, the only reason I haven't crossed over is dealerships and prices. I can undercut Accord prices all day long at Toyota dealerships, Mazda as well but not as often. Mazda's new offerings are stellar, except maybe for the weirdness still baked in.

While I do love the new Camry design and feel, if you drive a new Accord afterwards, it's still not a contest. Same with the Mazda 3 versus Corolla, more so. When I drive the Prius, I try to forget about car love.

 

Actually I get higher MPG highway then city. I have gotten 70 MPG highway and average 58 MPG highway.