http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...080273996.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_lifestyle In this comparison of the Prius and the 2010 Fusion and the Altima, the writer says: "For the record, I drove a 2009 model since the 2010 version wasn't available in time for my review -- but the only differences between the two will be minor and barely noticeable cosmetic changes." He does, however, correctly cite the price and mpg ratings of the 2010.
Not really a very good article at was it. I like the Wall Street Journal but they really ought to stick to what they know, business and finance, when it comes to cars they are at a total loss. Unfortunately a lot of their readers don't know that and, like the fans of any big newspaper, if it's in "their paper" they are likely to believe it.
I could not find the quote you include in your posting about the WSJ article. Perhaps the author has already received enough feedback to have edited it.
It's called lazy journalism practiced based on artificially imposed deadlines instead of offering your readers what they pay for and deserve.
No, it is still there, the end of paragraph #12. PS -- NB. As a WSJ commenter points out, the sentence in question refers to the Altima, not the Prius.
PS -- NB. As a WSJ commenter points out, the sentence in question refers to the Altima, not the Prius.[/QUOTE] Wow--You're absolutely right. Funny--I read it several times and didn't realize that. I read it as though he'd driven the 2010 Prius at some earlier point, and then used the very similar 2009 when making the comparison in this article, for no apparent reason. I don't think the writing is great, but I still should have understood it better than I did.
I very much doubt anyone's going to base their buying decisions on some moron's writing in the WSJ. Case in point, sales of Prius have continued to overshadow (by a wide margin) every other hybrid car out there no matter how much hype and reviews try to get people to buy other cars.
Just 'cosmetic changes'? Poor those Japanese 200 engineers' (as mentioned on an article found by Tideland) hard work got so understated like this? He needed to do a little bit more research before writing this!
Don't forget and an OT comment I cannot resist is the WSJ's enthusiasm and trust in the administration of GWB: good for the barons of Wall Street, bad for the country and the rest of us. The WSJ has its tone of infalibility down cold.
Can you imagine WSJ not able to get a 2010 Gen3 to do a comparo test in October 2009? This article must have been written late 2008 or early 2009 and never got published until now.
The writer did drive a 2010 Prius, released in May. The 2009 under discussion was the Nissan Altima, whose 2010 version was released in September.
Yep, if there wasn't a lot of anti-hybrid opinion laced within the article, which there is, the author would of lost credibility immediately with the statement that the only differences between the 2009 and 2010 were minor and cosmetic. Most of us know that the new Prius has a redesigned heat exhaust recapturing system, eliminating the coolant thermos. A new gas tank, eliminating the gas bladder tank. As well as reported by Toyota upon release, a HSD system that is 90% redesigned. Not even to mention an entirely new bigger engine. That all adds up to more than just cosmetic changes. Maybe in a different era this would be a forgiveable mistake. But given the wealth of information available on the internet how hard is it for someone supposedly charged with being knowledgeable about a vehicle and actually doing a comparitive review for a major media paper to spend 10 minutes finding out the simple basics of an automobile? Poor review, bias and slanted and informatively flawed.
You are forgiven. Nearly all of us with full-blown browser access on real PCs still managed to mis-read it.
