dresler

I believe the true, just, and final authorities have already spoken on this issue:

https://rennlist.com/forums/off-topi...hlight=dresler

BruceP

Uh, yeah. I'll get right on that.

I find this schoolyard "show me the proof" game tiresome. I think that burden is on you, now. I've actually made my case. You, on the other hand, appear to have turned this suddenly into a debate about load capacity (!?)

Instead, let's do this: Here is the original data source that sparked the 2008 New York Times article on the debate. Scroll down, and you'll see documents including the lifetime fuel cost rankings and some articles defending the methodology (the Hidden Cost of Driving a Prius piece is interesting, and does propose a specific alternative from Toyota's product line). Read this material, and then you can make an informed decision about whether you find their work valid.

http://www.cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/

And if your passion for the Prius remains undimmed, maybe we can take it to Off Topic. I'd rather be discussing my sweet new sport seats and what kind of oil I should use on them.

pszikla

associated press this morning:
The memo said technicians with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Toyota could not duplicate the sudden, unintended acceleration that James Sikes said he experienced March 8 when he reached 94 mph on a California freeway. Investigators tried during a two-hour test drive Thursday.

The memo was based on a congressional staffer's observations of a two-day inspection last week at a dealership in suburban San Diego. A Toyota official who was at the inspection explained that an electric motor would "completely seize" if a system to shut off the gas when the brake is pressed fails, and there was no evidence to support that happened, according to the memo.

"In this case, knowing that we are able to push the car around the shop, it does not appear to be feasibly possible, both electronically and mechanically that his gas pedal was stuck to the floor and he was slamming on the brake at the same time," according to the report for the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Kurt Bardella, a spokesman for the committee's top Republican, Darrell Issa of California, said Sunday that the findings "certainly raise new questions surrounding the veracity of the sequence of events" reported by Sikes.

"We're not saying Mr. Sikes is wrong or that he lied, we're saying that questions have arisen in the investigation," Bardella said.

ClickClickBoom

Also released: the brake and accellerator pedal were pressed alternately over 250 times during the event. The brake was pushed lightly enough not to disengage the motor. This according to the onboard computer.

Looks like someone has some 'splaining to do.

Wellardmac

Pretty funny!

Although, I am confused as to how he managed to wear down his pads and rotors if he was only applying the brakes lightly and intermittently.

Pac996

Yes there are a lot of people full of it. In the motorcycle world the 2005 and 2006 model of the GSX-R1000 had a big gathering of big abusers and looser acusing Suzuki of a faulty frame. Of course the fools had crashed their bikes at high speeds or wheelied the bike to death till the frame cracked. Some even tried reporting the bike fell apart acting like they never slammed the bike back to the ground.

All these people are proving is that they shouldn't be allowed on the road due to not knowing how to operate machinery on the road. But get rid of the factor on the road and tax fees for vehicle registrations would drop by 3/4.

C4CRNA

I think he was looking to make money as an expert witness in future litigation.

VGM911

The OP of this thread reported that the length of the incident was 20 minutes. If that's true, then in that 1,200 seconds, Sikes was alternating an accelerator/brake "back and forth" every 4.8 seconds. This, too, is hard to believe.

On the other hand, I'd like to see Sikes take a lie detector test.

VGM911

+1

And...makes me think the truth may never be known.

tooloud10

You made the claim that many Prius owners would be better served by driving a Yaris or one of many better alternatives to the Prius. I pointed out that the Yaris isn't a comparable vehicle and asked you to name any other comparable new vehicle that was more economical than the Prius.

Sorry, but that has nothing to do with your claims. Check my posts--I'm responding to what you said here:

I don't care about lifecycles and stats from "design to junkyard". I've only asked which vehicles you're talking about that offer the same benefits of the Prius without the sacrifices it apparently asks us to make.

I don't like the Prius and would not buy one, but I also won't tell anyone else that they shouldn't either. I take issue with the claim that there are better choices out there for economical driving, and all anyone has given me are "diesels", the few models of which that are available to the US are more expensive to buy and more expensive at the pump.

As for the off topic lecture, spare me. We were already eight pages into a Prius thread in the 996 forum; don't act like it was somehow my actions that got us here.

BruceP

Once again, you conveniently change the subject. Or perhaps you should read more slowly.

My principal point has been that there are many alternatives that impact the planet less in terms of fuel use, not that impact the owner less. Your entire argument appears to be based on a misunderstanding of what I've been saying, and your dismissal of data because you don't like it shows real intellectual immaturity.

Your hostility about this completely mystifies me. Makes me nostalgic for Ben.

Barn996

No, not Ben!

Wellardmac

I was thinking about Ben as this played out also.

Tippy

Damn Bruce, not gonna leave again are ya?

Marc Gelefsky

Nooooooo!!!!!