Toyota read this - what's my prime thought?

Maybe they could run 'em out the sides !!


.

 

Come on... People were crying for more EV range all over the PriusChat, converting to Volt etc. There were only a small sample of us adding "if increased EV range does not sacrifice interior space".

See: Toyota listened... They made a Japanese version of Volt.

Not buying it, since the 5th seat, larger cargo space and lower price tag (in my country) made me choose PiP over Volt.

Even happier with my PiP, now that I've seen, what Toyota did with their new PP.

 

Same number of seats, unless your feet fit in a cupholder. The 2 in back offer more leg, head, and foot space too.

Range was a normal upgrade, what could be reasonably fit without serious tradeoffs. Power just naturally increased as a result.

 

I say Gen2 and Gen3 PiP are collectors items as far as classics

 

I know some, and maybe many, will not agree, but I am concerned about Toyota's direction. (BTW, I have a loyalty to the Toyota brand. I've owner Toyota products for many years, including my current 2015 vehicle).

I'm not sure what market Toyota is aiming at? It seems that the 2016 Prius has some truly innovative, worthwhile features, but the available combinations almost seem contrary to what the buying public (at least in the US) wants. Then they tout the new Prime, (IMHO significantly improved looks over the lift-back) but the more I read about the 4 seats, non-flat floor, storage limitations, limited range and power, Toyota seems to have been short-sighted in the overall appeal of the new vehicle.

Toyota has produced a remarkably reliable, efficient and comfortable vehicle for years, and has established a wonderful reputation. But the competition is improving also. Every month we read of new models being introduced with virtually equal fuel efficiency, greater EV range, and in many instances, better looking automobiles. After 6 blissful years in my 2010, I planned on purchasing a new 2016 lift-back. But when I saw it, I was completely turned off, and started studying and reading about the Ioniq. Then the Prime appeared, and I forgot about the Ioniq and started reading about the Prime, but the more I read, the less interested I become. Maybe I'm ready to think about the new Tesla?

 

Try straddling with 2 other people. That gets old & uncomfortable fast.

Would a car seat and 2 people actually fit?

 

I still think the 2016 Prime is a starter platform and not what every model year of the Prime will offer. I don't think we'll be losing storage space, period. I don't care what the preproduction model showed, since Toyota has already stated "The growth boosts cargo room over its predecessor". So lets summarize the Prime's positives over the 1st Gen Plug-in Prius:

• More Gas (11.3 gallons vs 10.6 about 7% increase)
• More EV Range (22 miles vs 11 miles = 100% increase)
• Higher EV Speed (84 mph vs 62 mph about 35% increase)
• Higher battery EV Power (91 hp vs 51 hp about 78% increase)
• Quieter (Toyota claim)
• Better Ride (Toyota claim)
• Better gas mileage (Toyota claim)
• More Cargo space (Toyota claim)
• Heat in EV mode via advanced gas injected heat pump
• Automated grille shutters

Some of the things I'm not sure if they'll be more important or less, like using the gas injected heat pump for cooling. Does this cool the car so the compressor doesn't come on or does it just make the compressor more efficient?

 

That cargo space you're not gettin', everything else was fine.
We won't see as much cargo space as PiP1 in a plug-in car for a while.
The cargo room comments seem to relate to Gen4 over Gen3, and even that is questionable.
If you add Gen3's 3-ft3 under-the-floor, I think Gen3 has more space.

The other Gen4 cargo "increase" is on-paper re: the EPA cargo space definition, but that seems to be a problem with EPA cargo space spec. Go with EU VDA cargo spec for better cargo space numbers, I am thinking.

EDIT: Drash- if you want to include rear seating area as part of the Cargo Space, that I can see may be good space (see more below)

 

Toyota was likely taking advantage of the opportunity to test the waters. None of us really know what was under the false floor. The preproduction of the first generation plug-in had its floor raised but the final version didn't.

What if there was actually room to spare and they were using that reveal to get feedback? It's quite reasonable to think they've been testing multiple pack configurations... waiting to see how much the market is willing to tradeoff.

 

P.S. final comment-
The list of attributes given by Drash quoting Toyota on cargo space: Is that Toyota USA or Toyota Japan? I would suggest it is Toyota USA trying to spin the EPA space specs. You will not hear this from Toyota Japan.

>>If you put the seats down and say the whole area is cargo space, that may well be decent total space. Just saying what's in the back is not more. In fact the cargo space lost in the rear over Gen 3 must be somewhere, so maybe it is in the back seats. The back seats have generous space.

Prime would be nice car for HOV-3 in Northern Virginia, where we stop at locations to pick up riders (strangers) to get 3-4 for the HOV lanes. Volt would not be so good for the back seaters. But the bigger question is why bother with a plug-in at all in Virginia as we give no incentives.

A good thought contest might be Gen3 Cargo space vs. Model x.

 

if there were room to spare, they would have used it. if you mean they could lower the floor and fit 6kwh instead of 8, i don't think they're going backward on ev distance.

i think toyota is going the direction they have always gone, same as every company, profits. they just have different methods of getting there. it's obvious the hybrids time is limited, as more and more technologies are coming out. toyota is doing what they always do. innovating, retaining high quality, searching the future.
even when gen II prius came out, there wasn't much to compare it to, and they only captured a very small portion of the market.
many prius owners have and will move on, that's just the nature of the beast. you may not believe this, but a lot of people who owned gen 2's decided to stay with them, or move on to something else, when they saw your gen 3.

 

What is this fixation on total vehicle range? Are people regularly crossing the Outback with their street cars? I drive 300 miles a week, and fill up once a week with a non-hybrid. With the increased EV range of the Prime, Toyota could have gone with a smaller tank than the PiP, had a little more space for the battery, and people would still be going longer between gas station stops than with the PiP.

Toyota could have added the active grill shutters midcycle on the gen3. That's around the time they started appearing on non-luxury cars. The rest are nice if they pan out.

 

I like the cruising range increase that is great potential for Prius if Toyota would have added a couple gallons to Gen 2/3 that might have been a killer advantage.

Correct those of us used to Gen 2/3 may find Gen4 as a new proposition. I am thinking we still have Prius v, but if nobody is buying v that version dies, which shows no market for roomy hybrid car (if true). Everyone not liking Gen4 must go get a v to save it.

As far as Prime I just think buyers have spoken - given current large incentives structure - they want max batteries, good power EV experience, comfort in the front seats for the drive to work, and willing to give up rear cargo space and willing to give up for-the-whole-darn-family car design.

Prime offers the following unique proposal: how about a PHEV like Volt. but instead of huge batteries, how about great comfort in the rear seats? And unfort the answer may be PHEV drivers are not only willing to sacrifice rear cargo space, they may also accept perfunctory rear seats to get the bigger EV range.

 

There's a couple reasons for wanting extra long range.

The first is reduced frequency of fuel station visits (which also means being able to shift fuel purchasing versus consumption more easily, based on fuel pricing). I get about 200-250 mile tanks out of my Miata in my normal driving, versus 550-650 mile tanks out of my Golf, so fuel station visits are obviously more frequent.

The other thing is... at least on TDIClub, there's a lot of road warriors that expect to be able to go at least 700 miles without stopping - no restroom breaks, no food breaks, just keep rolling as quickly as possible. Cars capable of long range are more likely to attract audiences that demand long range out of their cars, after all. (The trick with a TDI being driven long range is, once you hit the end of the tank, refueling for maximum range takes a long time, due to how diesel foams, though.) In my case, though, I need to stop every 150-180 miles anyway, so it doesn't really matter if I get 350 (in my Miata) or 700 miles (in my Golf) on a highway tank (especially because a range fill on the Miata is a normal fill, whereas a range fill on the Golf is slow).

 

That blows my mind how some sacrifice so much just to save a few minutes. I've driven 750-mile spans 4 times this year. Each involved 2 rests and stopping for a meal in the middle. What the heck is the rush? Enjoy the drive. Geez!

Get a coffee. Relieve you bladder. Take a moment to rest your mind.

You're thinking generically, like all the others in the automotive industry. That's not how Toyota operates. We've witnessed how they test the waters in several different ways over the years.

That isn't what I meant either. I was pointing out how they were soliciting feedback on the raised floor. Maybe there really is room for 10.5 kWh underneath. Maybe 8.8 kWh will fit flat. Maybe an increase will be considered mid-cycle. We really don't know. What we do know is that the reveal was emphasized as just a prototype, subject to change for the final version.

Remember, cost is the primary motivator. Toyota is seeking a way to sell in high-volume at a profit without tax-incentives. Why not test the waters now, when there is still ample time available to adjust?

 

There might be a few outliers(smart fortwo?), but the shortest range for gasoline vehicles seems to be 400 miles. That's 400 miles until, "I should get gas soon", not running on fumes. Keeping the same size tank as the gen4 means the Prime has a little over 600 miles of range with one charge.

The trip to my parents in NC is about 600 miles, so a Prime might do it without stopping. It is a 9 to 11 hour drive depending on traffic. Regardless of would the car can do, I'm going to stop at some point. Yes, there are situations were going 600 miles and nearly half a day without stopping could be an advantage. Most of those situations involve long distance buses and long haul trucks, not personal cars.

The gen4 is easily going to to 500 miles until the driver thinks he has to stop for fuel. The majority of cars aren't doing long distance trips daily though, and time to stop for gas is measured in days not distance. The Prime can do 100 miles on EV a week for most owners, more with workplace charging. So if it had a smaller tank than the Prius, it would still go more days between stops. I think most would rather have a little more rear space than long trip range greater than the Prius.

Up to now, the only PHEV with what could be called perfunctory rear seats was the Volt. Because of customer feedback, GM improved upon them. Still small, but improved. The Ford Energi's didn't reduce the rear seat space from the hybrid models, and the PHEVs had a higher take rate compared to the hybrids than other brands. The Volt beat them in total sales, but the Volt's closest sales competitor was the Leaf, and BEVs don't suffer the lost space issue. The other PHEV that met or beat the Energi's in sales numbers was the PiP.

PHEV buyers do want better EV performance, and they were willing to accept loss of cargo space, and maybe in rear seating for this. This compromise might only apply to the first generation of PHEVs though. Long range BEVs that were affordable simply weren't available, making compromised PHEVs more attractive. But like hybrid sedan trunks, the people still criticized the PHEVs for reduced space.

The gen2 Volt has shown that it is possible to reduce the space for the battery while improving EV performance. Hyundai has opted to increase the Sonata EV range over the Fusion, while keeping the trunk about the same size. For everyday use, it is enough trunk. A hatchback will retain more space and be more flexible with it, but the small trunk might work for some on trips. Then there are options for carrying more cargo on car. There isn't for more people.

The Energi's are still gen1 PHEVs, and it will be a couple years before we see what direction Ford goes in terms of EV performance and car space. Toyota's gen2 PHEV matches those gen1s in cargo space and EV performance while also having a rear passenger compromise from the gen1 Volt. The better MPG will be great for when you can leave a kid at home.

So the Miata is one that can't do 400 miles on a tank.
I understand that there are road warriors out there, but the majority of drivers on the road are more like you and I than them. With regularly available gas stations, we don't need to carry large fuel tanks. Diesels and hybrids manage long ones through efficiency.

Going smaller than typical fuel tank on a PHEV should be a plus. Even long distance range doesn't match a hybrid version, it will still be good compared to the majority of cars. Then the EV miles will stretch out the tank between fills for every day use.

 

It's worth noting that the new Miata probably could just eke out a 400 mile tank, so it no longer counts towards the sub-400 mile range cars, either. (Most of that is due to massive efficiency improvements, despite a (IIRC) smaller tank.)