Why did they uglify the 2010 Prius?

Alam99, I sold my 2002 Prius after driving it for 2 years. I did this because of the slow acceleration, tire wear, and the "death shudder" problem. Looking back, I probably should have kept the car. Frankly, I liked the smaller size of the Gen I Prius and the small turning circle of the car was great.

My preference for the 2010 MY Prius over the 2009 begins with efficiency improvements. First, the heat exchanger on the exhaust is a great way to get the engine warmed in cold weather as well as in short trip driving. It is a much better approach than a thermos bottle and it will improve mileage as well as creature comfort.

Second, the electric water pump will allow temperature control of the engine even if it is not running. This should be a great way to minimize engine hot soak every time the engine stops rotating (longer engine life). You also get the added advantage of no drive belts and their inherent friction losses. Many of the revolutions made by an engine driven water pump are unnecessary. An electric pump (if properly designed) should last longer than a conventional water pump, although the coolant pump on the Prius 1.5L was about as simple and small has I have seen.

Third, the A/C efficiency is said to be improved.

Cooled EGR improves engine efficiency and lowers exhaust temperatures.

It has been reported that the high voltage inverter now has a separate coolant system from the engine. The Gen I had a separate reservoir, radiator, and electric coolant pump. Was this not true of the Gen II Prius?

The tires on the Gen III have finally grown up. Any car with this weight should have always had 195-65R15 or larger tires. A Corolla and Civic have them. My Scion xD has larger tires (195-60R16). Vehicle handling characteristics including the feel in the electric steering are said to be better.

Adding telescoping steering and adjustable seat height was another "it's about time" feature. The dash layout without the dependence on an LCD display is an improvement.

I suspect the transaxle change to a higher speed gear reduced MG2 was all about cost reduction. The smaller torque MG2 in the 2010 will undoubtedly be much cheaper to manufacture. If Toyota had kept the 1.5L engine, you would not need a 20% smaller transaxle.

 

I love my 2006, but that having been said, I would love to trade up to the 2010 one day. Both specs and shape appeal to me (41, married, 2 kids) so go figure!

 

O.b.e.

 

This might bring down the fun banter on this topic, but car looks are only somewhat important.

Comfort has jumped very high on my list since test driving other small-midsize Japanese cars like Honda Civics and Mazda3 - 5's both of which accomodate tall drivers very well with generous legspace and telescoping steering wheel.

I heard someone mention the 2010 driver's seat only slides back 1" further than the Gen2. Hope not.

 

I didn't measure (how would you do this anyway -- distance between the vertical line of the front of the seat back and the brake and accelerator pedals?), but I estimate that it slides 3" to 4" further back than the Gen2. In any event, I think it's got to be at least 2" further back.

 

If there are obviously more attractive ways to get a 0.25CD then maybe you can name one other manufacturer who has used those obvious and more attractive ways to build a 4 door car with a CD of 0.25 or lower?
Sorry, I can't think of any.
By the way, I love the style for how it looks not the aero number.

 

Forty feet long and shaped like a cigar.

Tom

 

But that's ok to me ... as driver, you can get the good legspace for 95% of the time. The other 5%, you collect $$ to move the seat forward. Win, win

--------
Boo & dox, thanks for the info... sounds promising.

 

Are you implying that you're looking dated too, Pat!!

 

No different than here in the Los Angeles area. Who enters a freeway on-ramp at 0 mph and exits at 60 mph? As far as I am concerned, it is a meaningless statistic that far to few people have questioned the relevance of over the years. What matters more, especially in merging freeway traffic, is probably 25-55 mph times, together with a driver's timing ability, which only comes with practice. I find my Prius perfectly capable of merging with the flow of freeway traffic without problems.

It is true that sometimes you have to have the confidence to intimidate idiots in SUVs (though not 18-wheelers!) speeding in the freeway slow lane, when they should be aware of possible entering on-ramp traffic. If they rear-end you, they are the one's responsible.

 

Whoops, did I come on too strong? I just don't think it's pretty or cool in that way. Seems a little funny to me to talk about it as if it were or was intended to be. I did try to acknowledge the design challenge. It is an incredible amount of interior space in such a small footprint. With that challenge, it was bound to be a bit bulbous. As far as naming aesthetic competitors, I'm not a gearhead, so I can't really help you. I'm not even sure a couple of points on the cd scale really make that much of a difference. Must be at least a couple of BMWs that come close though... or maybe that new Telsa sedan? In any case, I'll defer to your superior fashion sense..

 

I'm in the same boat as the OP. I think the 2004 looks better than than 2010. I think it looks like what a knock off would look like, sorta like what kia or hyundai would come up with. Hopefully it looks better in person.

 

I really think the 2010 Prius looks more functional than the Gen2.

The extended peak of roofline, backwards ... clearly says this new Prius has more headroom in the backseats. Many small families with teens or soon to be teens, 'growing like a weed', will be glad to get a car with more rear headroom.

The Gen2 car is certainly lacking in headroom for anyone near 6ft, I think.

I also like the extension of plastic front fascia below the hood. This makes the metal hood less susceptible to rock chips. Not that plastic doesn't chip, but I seem to feel worse about getting rock chips in metal than in plastic.

The Gen3 Prius will bring many into first time hybrid ownership, and I think it will be phenomenal success.

 

I think the visual appeal of any car is subjective and unique to the individual. That's why there are some cars that I would never desire owning, driving, and in some cases even looking at with more than a glance. My personal opinion of the 2010 Prius is that it does look much better in person, especially some of the front end views.

Like I said in a previous posting, the 2010 we are buying is for my wife. It'll be her car, and we hope to get one in May or June since our daughter will start driving my wife's current car. She's picking it out, but I have to say I like it too. If I were picking out the car, it would be the 2010 Camaro SS (keeping it under $40,000.00) we sat in at the Chicago Auto show. Now that will be a car you can race the SUVs with...lol.

As far as I'm concerned too many people feel compelled to try to get ahead of another driver instead of simply merging in behind...especially when the other driver is speeding or driving aggressively. I've driven 2008s and 2009s, and both were quite capable of attaining highway speeds easily. No doubt the 2010 will do so too. But, if you really feel compelled to race SUVs and others, I'd suggest the 400 hp Camaro instead of a Prius.

 

I think it also depends on whether you already own a pius or not. You get used to a shape and look for a car. I myself like the new Prius more than the old one it has more edges which break up the panels.

 

This.

When discussing logo's as plus or a minus in buying a vehicle is almost as bad as the 3 min wasted in responding to a molehill issue. 3 min of my life gone....dumb.