I bought my 2010 Prius III-Nav two months ago and have really enjoyed her. She has been a pleasure in all respects - economy, performance, style (looks sporty to me!) etc. Never enjoyed any of the nine cars I have owned over the past 45 years more, dating back to my first one a 1964 WV Beetle. The only thing that concerns me a tad is I think it looks a little bit light, even though I know the weight (3,000 lbs) is not bad at all. Is anyone else concerned about weight? Is your Prius as heavy as other cars you have owned? Thanks for any thoughts on this!
I drove my 1800lb 1985 CRX HF for 275,000 miles. I didn't experience any bad effects from being too light. IMO, the Prius is way too heavy.
Nah, doesn't concern me a bit. The GIII is actually heavier than the GII it replaces I think. With all the safety features it has and a great crash test rating I don't see weight as an issue. If anything I would have liked it to stay light but enhancements had to have it increase in weight. The way I see it if I'm in this or something heavier like a camry, accord, maxima etc I'd still get messed up in a crash...
Thanks a lot, guys! I went and Googled the weights on all my cars (in order of increasing weight): 1964 VW Beetle......................................1625 lbs 1982 Chevy Chevette hatchback........2200 1989 Toyota Corolla hatchback........2400 1966 Ford Mustang..............................2600 1974 Ford Torino..................................3000 2010 Toyota Prius.................................3042 2002 & 04 Honda CR-V.......................3300 1994 Chrysler Concorde......................3495 AVE (excluding Prius).........................2660 lbs [The first Honda was struck by a telephone pole next to our driveway] The Prius is almost 400 lbs heavier than the average of all my other cars. AMAZING!!! Wow! Now I feel better and it looks like I made a premature assumption. I should have been like Goldilocks (remember her??) and asked: Is the 2010 Prius too heavy, too light or juuust right??? I moved from too light to just right - but what the heck do I know?? What do others, including those with Gen-1 and Gen-2 and other cars think? - g
My Clunker a 1987 Volvo Station Wagon weighed in 3032 lbs. The automatic transmission version 3169 lbs. And we all know the reputation Volvo's have for safety.
Sure, if you can accept my weird sense of humor... EPA and other frontal crash tests compare cars of equal weight (becasue they ram the test car into a stationary rigid barrier). But when a heavier car rams a lighter car, it's "survival of the fattest." - g
At 1,380kg, the Prius is getting there. The average weight of a car is 1,500kg. Our 2000 Corolla LE was 1045kg and our 02 Camry XLE 1,500kg. (of course now the Corolla is pushing 1200kg in XRS trim and the base Camry is 1,500kg with the XLE pushing 1,600kg)
Okay, that makes sense. It's the old Tank Argument, where the person driving the tank wins in a collision. The basic problem with this argument is that it depends on how and where the extra weight is deployed. If it is used in a ridged body and frame, the tank will survive but it's occupants won't. Crash survivability takes a lot more than mass. Crush zones, air bags, and other sophisticated features are far more important than mass, unless we are talking about huge mismatches. If you get hit by a train, airbags aren't going to help. Tom
Exactly. All else equal, weight is an advantage in a head-on crash with another vehicle moving toward you. The less change in momentum of your own vehicle, the less deceleration and energy transferred to the occupants. Of course, all else is rarely equal. Those rigid frame truck-based pickups and SUVs of the 80s and 90s were notoriously bad in crashes. They fare OK against smaller and lighter vehicles simply because of the mass and height advantage. Against walls, poles and other similar vehicles, they were death traps. They didn't crush well, so all the energy was transferred to the passengers in crashes:-( It used to be nearly impossible to compare vehicles that varied much in mass. There's a nice tool that uses statistical data to let you compare them- www.informedforlife.org . Read the fine print, though. The results suffer when any piece of crash test data is missing and then a typical result is used as a placeholder. So, it's not ideal for comparing models like the 3rd gen Prius, at least until a full set of NHTSA results are available. Once they are released, you can also plug them into the calculator on the website even before they update their charts.
Hi Glider, There have been a few crashes talked about on here. One between a Silverado (Cell Phone Yapping driver), and a Prius, where the Silverado was lifted off the ground by the Prius, and it looked to me that the left A pillar of the Prius was crumped when it hit the underside of the Silverado engine. There was a report that the most serious injuries encured in that crash, by the Prius driver, were due to the full paint cans he was carrying with the rear seats down, that were thrown forward in the crash and impacted the driver's head. This illustrates Tom's point, that crashes are very complicated, and it depends on where the weight is deployed and the shape of the vehicle. In the example above, the heavy MG2 end of the transmission, and the sloping hood of the Prius served to cause the crash energy to be disipated lifting the Silverado upward, and the drivers compartment remained substatially intact. There was another crash where a drunk 20 something Prius driver got going the wrong way on an interstate. She hit a border patrol officer in an S 10, body-on-frame pickup head on. The front half the S10 was demolished, and the Prius not nearly as badly collapsed. I believe both died however, as a 120 - 150 mph closing speed head-on collision is unsurvivable, even if the vehicles do not collapse.
Yep, there is definitely a consensus that the 2010 Prius is not a light car. In fact, most people who replied thought it should have been a little lighter. I fully agree with all the the comments made and greatly appreciate your posts! ...well, maybe I was a little surprised that DrJon and Fujisan appeared to question - in a good-natured manner - my story that I was hit by an aggressive telephone pole. So, a little more info on this (since were are talking about weight and collisions): The pole is 60 yds (~m) from my driveway. I had turned right onto the street when something fell off the front passenger's seat of my 2002 Honda CR-V, so I leaned over to pick it up and was back in position in maybe 2 or 2 1/2 secs when I saw the *&%* pole jump right in front of my car (HONEST!!!) I hit the brakes about 1/2 sec before the pole collided with my Honda - just inboard of the right headlight. I just went outside and made two simulation runs to estimate my speed at impact (worst case, assuming the brakes did not slow the car at all). One run was at my normal speed, the second run I accelerated a bit faster than I usually do. The speeds were 16 and 19 MPH when I passed the pole. I'm pretty confident that the speed wasn't higher than this. (This time the pole behaved itself, but you can never trust those things... can you?) The 02 CR-V was totalled. They said the body was bent/twisted beyond repair. I was shocked - thought we were talking about a $5-6K body job. The insurance company estimator checked into it and agreed with the assessment. I got a new 04 CR-V out of the deal (The thing was only 18 months old, for cryin out loud) Would you expect a Honda CR-V to be totalled hitting a phone pole at 16-19 mph?? You can see how slight the damage to the wooden pole is. Some of you folks have good insight into things like this. [ 1ST PIX PARALLEL TO STREET - 2ND PIX FROM STREET]
Poles can be among the worst things to hit because the crash forces are concentrated into a small area of the front end, rather than being spread out over half (like the IIHS offset) of the front end or the full width (like NHTSA). The mass of your vehicle is generally not an advantage when hitting an object that remains fixed, like a pole or wall. That's also why even the biggest truck based monster SUVs and pickups often fared very poorly in single vehicle crashes against fixed objects, despite their mass. The vehicle is hopefully designed to crush in order to absorb energy and protect the passenger compartment from intrusion. Unfortunately, that can mean a lot of front end damage, even at relatively low speeds.
In my line of work, I've seen cars wrapped around a telephone pole and no damage to the pole. I've seen poles snapped and the car able to drive away. The damage is no indication of the force.
toyota purposely put the passenger cage very far from the front of the bumper reinforcement bar, the use of aluminum in the hood and hatch creates a huge crumple zone.
You should have kept the 66 mustang in the garage covered up. What would it be worth today? I have noticed the doors sound a little thin when I close them..
