What I don't like about the Prius Prime

...I wanna 6 kWhr Prime v wagon

 

they could probably bury 8 in the v without affecting storage.

 

Or you can have MPGe from gasoline; Today's photos of fuel average. | PriusChat

 

Extremely unlikely. Possibly in Japan, as a high cost option. Won't happen in North America.

 

Already an option on the PiP in Japan. Then next year's Mirai is supposed to get the PTD(the P is for power, don't say plug), but the Chademo EVSE needed for it to power your house might be nearly $10k.

So, if we get a high power inverter(my Matrix had a low power 110v, single outlet one) on the Prime, expect it to be like a nav system. Much cheaper to go aftermarket than factory.

 

What do you mean by this, no solar panel on roof of car?
I'd rather do solar charging from home panel but maybe it could be tied in

 

I wasn't aware that the Matrix had a low power outlet. What was its output? I think that the outlet available in Japan isn't very large, maybe under 1000 watts.

 

i think it's a prime option in japan.

 

Don't recall. It wasn't much, maybe enough for a laptop.

 

I guess we don't know the whole story yet, but my understanding is that there is no battery in the center console (though there might be some other components there); they're all either under the seat or in the trunk. Reading back through comments here the assessment seems to be that Toyota just didn't want that center seat occupied for some reason, not that they actually needed that space for anything. Whatever the reason, I'd agree they're not going to change it for this 2017 car, so it's going to have to compete as is.

 

occupying the middle seat would have required more structural bracing underneath, so with a fifth person and the extra steal, mpg's wouldn't have matched the lift back.
also the charger is under there, but i'm not sure how it affects it. maybe there's no room for cushioning and springs.
they put a bigger charger in, so it would charge in the same amount of time as the pip.

i'm not saying it couldn't be done, just don't know all the engineering it would have taken.
from my point of view, it just wasn't a priority when laying out the new tgna chassis.

 

Yep, that's the main point. Starting with a new platform and a relatively clean sheet of paper, Toyota still neglected to design for plug-in models.

Those guys just hate the grid unless it's being used for hydrogen cracking/refactoring. There's obviously something broken in their brains on this topic. I hope they snap out of it before too much longer.

 

no biggie, i'm looking forward to bolt. i hope gm doesn't screw the pooch.

 

I can't accept the explanation that a person sitting in the middle seat would have structural ramifications. Shame on Toyota if that is true. The new global platform is alleged to be the design for many variations of Toyota vehicles. The Prius can't be the heaviest and/or with the greatest load capacity.

The best explanation I have heard is the added weight would require Toyota to move up to the next higher rated tire. (I am not the author of that theory) the person that suggested it, quoted load rating for various size tires. It sounded very plausible to me.

 

Both explanations end with the same result; lower MPG. The weight one is probably the simplest one the convey to consumers.

 

it's obvious to me that toyota did not design the chassis with batteries and charger in mind, and everything is an afterthought.
a toyota exec said they thought people would like a 4 seater, and if it doesn't work out, they can go back to 5 without much trouble. so i'm really confused at this point.

 

i think the issue is making a hybrid and phev out of the same vehicle. a better alternative might be a completely different vehicle, but that would require a belief in the future of that vehicle.

 

Yes, quite easy, especially if this ridiculous compromise in utility was just to goose EPA-reported MPG/AER. The idea that the structure is cut so close to the bone that hauling a charger and extra batteries means they need to eliminate a passenger is hardly confidence-inspiring. I don't believe it, of course, and here's why:

It's comments like these that put the lie to the whole "required for structural reasons" argument. This 4-seater nonsense is nothing but a stylistic affectation, and I think it both pretentious and ill-considered. People can keep defending it as reasonable, but in real life this is going to cost the Prime market points, because in real life it means less value for money, a concern that hangs over the entire Prime proposition.

I think the Toyota folks have seriously misjudged what the Prime brings (or should bring) to the party. It's clear from the spokesdroids that Toyota perceives the Prime as being more about "cachet" than EV-ness, and I have trouble seeing how such silliness can bring even a shred of extra prestige to the Prius line. The sub-Volt bump in AER didn't disappoint me much, and indeed was outweighed by 50-state availability. What has annoyed me is the slathering on of "premium" touches consistent with the "gold-plated Prius" tone of the unveiling, making a competitive price seem unlikely, combined with the failure to maintain the PiP's advantages of uncompromised passenger and cargo space. The center console in the rear would bug me a lot less if the trunk hadn't also been hit with that raised floor.