Prius rental....
- Thread starter hattaresguy
- Start date
- Status
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: Leo99
I don't really understand Toyota's thinking on the Prius interior. I gave the Prius a quick cross-shop while looking at new cars and the interior is just plain stark. They could have made it so much nicer.
It reminds me of a rental corolla. Which is exactly what it should be like in rental trim - commonality of fabrics, materials, etc. helps save cost.
I suspect that the higher trims are somewhat nicer, and a camry hybrid that sacrifices some MPGs for performance and comfort is much nicer, ditto the avalon and the lexus variants.
The prius is an MPG-oriented low-cost car. Its not trying to be a lexus or a supra.
I don't really understand Toyota's thinking on the Prius interior. I gave the Prius a quick cross-shop while looking at new cars and the interior is just plain stark. They could have made it so much nicer.
It reminds me of a rental corolla. Which is exactly what it should be like in rental trim - commonality of fabrics, materials, etc. helps save cost.
I suspect that the higher trims are somewhat nicer, and a camry hybrid that sacrifices some MPGs for performance and comfort is much nicer, ditto the avalon and the lexus variants.
The prius is an MPG-oriented low-cost car. Its not trying to be a lexus or a supra.
Originally Posted By: raytseng
I think half of your complaints have to do with you've probably gotten a couple seasons old cheapo fleet model from enterprise.
You're treating it like a test drive, which it is not.
All basic rental cars are not going to have the set of features that you would want for yourself. They are getting the least expensive model and doing the bare minimum. Especially from enterprise which is a rental company not targetting premium rentals.
That must be why three of my last four Enterprise rentals were a Ford Focus Titanium, a Chrysler 200 Limited (even had a sunroof), and a Camry SE...all "premium" models?
I think half of your complaints have to do with you've probably gotten a couple seasons old cheapo fleet model from enterprise.
You're treating it like a test drive, which it is not.
All basic rental cars are not going to have the set of features that you would want for yourself. They are getting the least expensive model and doing the bare minimum. Especially from enterprise which is a rental company not targetting premium rentals.
That must be why three of my last four Enterprise rentals were a Ford Focus Titanium, a Chrysler 200 Limited (even had a sunroof), and a Camry SE...all "premium" models?
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: Leo99
I don't really understand Toyota's thinking on the Prius interior. I gave the Prius a quick cross-shop while looking at new cars and the interior is just plain stark. They could have made it so much nicer.
It reminds me of a rental corolla. Which is exactly what it should be like in rental trim - commonality of fabrics, materials, etc. helps save cost.
I suspect that the higher trims are somewhat nicer, and a camry hybrid that sacrifices some MPGs for performance and comfort is much nicer, ditto the avalon and the lexus variants.
The prius is an MPG-oriented low-cost car. Its not trying to be a lexus or a supra.
It also reminds me of a rental Mercedes 2014 C300 I had once, very basic, basically no option packages, it didn't even have navigation. I looked at the registration and it was still a 40k+ car based on the sales tax paid.
Originally Posted By: Leo99
I don't really understand Toyota's thinking on the Prius interior. I gave the Prius a quick cross-shop while looking at new cars and the interior is just plain stark. They could have made it so much nicer.
It reminds me of a rental corolla. Which is exactly what it should be like in rental trim - commonality of fabrics, materials, etc. helps save cost.
I suspect that the higher trims are somewhat nicer, and a camry hybrid that sacrifices some MPGs for performance and comfort is much nicer, ditto the avalon and the lexus variants.
The prius is an MPG-oriented low-cost car. Its not trying to be a lexus or a supra.
It also reminds me of a rental Mercedes 2014 C300 I had once, very basic, basically no option packages, it didn't even have navigation. I looked at the registration and it was still a 40k+ car based on the sales tax paid.
The interior of the Prius II is definitely low rent, though it does have intermittent wipers. And there is no excuse for it to not have automatic position for headlights in this day and age. Too many people drive around at dawn or dusk with no lighting at all.
As far as driving goes, it is definitely not a driver's car. But set aside the hybrid anti-driver issues and my main complaint is they didn't bother to program the HSD to behave like a CVT should. That is, maintain constant power and engine RPM as vehicle speed changes. Instead it does exactly what I knock some CVTs for - despite a steady position on the go pedal, engine speed and power output increase as vehicle speed increases, and vice versa. Yes I am only referring to when the piston engine is actually running. And Toyota actually got the CVT right on the Corolla.
As far as driving goes, it is definitely not a driver's car. But set aside the hybrid anti-driver issues and my main complaint is they didn't bother to program the HSD to behave like a CVT should. That is, maintain constant power and engine RPM as vehicle speed changes. Instead it does exactly what I knock some CVTs for - despite a steady position on the go pedal, engine speed and power output increase as vehicle speed increases, and vice versa. Yes I am only referring to when the piston engine is actually running. And Toyota actually got the CVT right on the Corolla.
I still don't like it, gas ain't that expensive.
2 more days and they can have it back.
I would have been much more happy with a nice rental Cruze.
2 more days and they can have it back.
I would have been much more happy with a nice rental Cruze.
Last edited:
Theres no point in discussing any further as nothing or nobody is going to convince you to like a vehicle you do not like.
You stated your point, we get it. Cars are personal items and people choose the vehicles they do for all types of reasons. A Toyota Prius isnt for you. Done.
You stated your point, we get it. Cars are personal items and people choose the vehicles they do for all types of reasons. A Toyota Prius isnt for you. Done.
I don't care to rent them often. I've driven them on long trips (about 1000 highway miles) and found the fuel economy excellent.
The one I rented had a really good audio system, so that was nice. The seats were comfortable, but certainly did not provide much support in the corners. It matters not, the Prius is not something you'll throw into a corner more than once or twice.
It really is a capable car, but it absolutely, positively is not a sports car, and it clearly communicates this to the driver. That's too bad as cornering prowess does not consume energy.
Also, cars such as the Tesla can be accelerated hard without any range penalty. The "work" done is the same, whether done slowly or rapidly. Because the Tesla uses elec power, there are no engine efficiency problems with high rates of acceleration. The Prius could stand to have more powerful electric motors to provide a better rate of acceleration.
The one I rented had a really good audio system, so that was nice. The seats were comfortable, but certainly did not provide much support in the corners. It matters not, the Prius is not something you'll throw into a corner more than once or twice.
It really is a capable car, but it absolutely, positively is not a sports car, and it clearly communicates this to the driver. That's too bad as cornering prowess does not consume energy.
Also, cars such as the Tesla can be accelerated hard without any range penalty. The "work" done is the same, whether done slowly or rapidly. Because the Tesla uses elec power, there are no engine efficiency problems with high rates of acceleration. The Prius could stand to have more powerful electric motors to provide a better rate of acceleration.
Last edited:
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Also, cars such as the Tesla can be accelerated hard without any range penalty. The "work" done is the same, whether done slowly or rapidly. Because the Tesla uses elec power, there are no engine efficiency problems with high rates of acceleration. The Prius could stand to have more powerful electric motors to provide a better rate of acceleration.
Hogwash. Losses (heat) increases as the square of current. So if we're talking a 270V system, 270kW is 1000A. Given the mass and speed, I'm assuming that the car puts out something around there. So the losses are one hundred times higher than if it lightly accelerated and cruised, pulling 30kW.
Math is 270kW = 1000A X 270V and 27 kW = 100A X 270V, while I^2R losses mean that for constant R, the power dissipated as thermal losses is 100x higher at 270kW 1000^2=1000000 while 100^2=10000; 1000000/10000=100.
Also, cars such as the Tesla can be accelerated hard without any range penalty. The "work" done is the same, whether done slowly or rapidly. Because the Tesla uses elec power, there are no engine efficiency problems with high rates of acceleration. The Prius could stand to have more powerful electric motors to provide a better rate of acceleration.
Hogwash. Losses (heat) increases as the square of current. So if we're talking a 270V system, 270kW is 1000A. Given the mass and speed, I'm assuming that the car puts out something around there. So the losses are one hundred times higher than if it lightly accelerated and cruised, pulling 30kW.
Math is 270kW = 1000A X 270V and 27 kW = 100A X 270V, while I^2R losses mean that for constant R, the power dissipated as thermal losses is 100x higher at 270kW 1000^2=1000000 while 100^2=10000; 1000000/10000=100.
Also don't forget air resistance, the faster you go, the more power you need to move air out of the way. That's why there's an ideal speed where you get maximum efficiency with minimal air resistance. I think the basic formula is that when you double the speed, you need 4 times the power.
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Also, cars such as the Tesla can be accelerated hard without any range penalty. The "work" done is the same, whether done slowly or rapidly. Because the Tesla uses elec power, there are no engine efficiency problems with high rates of acceleration. The Prius could stand to have more powerful electric motors to provide a better rate of acceleration.
Hogwash. Losses (heat) increases as the square of current. So if we're talking a 270V system, 270kW is 1000A. Given the mass and speed, I'm assuming that the car puts out something around there. So the losses are one hundred times higher than if it lightly accelerated and cruised, pulling 30kW.
Math is 270kW = 1000A X 270V and 27 kW = 100A X 270V, while I^2R losses mean that for constant R, the power dissipated as thermal losses is 100x higher at 270kW 1000^2=1000000 while 100^2=10000; 1000000/10000=100.
There is no question that resistive heat losses and battery heat losses at a 4C discharge rate are increased. We can even include the tire distortion frictional losses too. It matters not. The real world results are in. Rapid acceleration in battery powered vehicles does not appreciably affect range. The work done is the same and the energy consumed is, in effect, not significantly different.
There is also no question that the various drag forces are not independent of speed. I clearly understand this. So, rapidly getting to "Cruise speed" results in more time at the "high drag" velocity. Once again, it matters not, when the "cruise speed is fairly low, such as in a 30, 35 or even a 45 or 50 MPH zone. The increased time at the high drag speed is not enough to reduce range appreciably. This changes when out of the city and speeds increase markedly. I am unaware of any "stop n go" 70MPH zones.
Real world testing results from Tesla: Going flat out 0-60 mph uses less than 0.1 kWh of energy from your battery MORE than going very slowly 0-60 mph.
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Also, cars such as the Tesla can be accelerated hard without any range penalty. The "work" done is the same, whether done slowly or rapidly. Because the Tesla uses elec power, there are no engine efficiency problems with high rates of acceleration. The Prius could stand to have more powerful electric motors to provide a better rate of acceleration.
Hogwash. Losses (heat) increases as the square of current. So if we're talking a 270V system, 270kW is 1000A. Given the mass and speed, I'm assuming that the car puts out something around there. So the losses are one hundred times higher than if it lightly accelerated and cruised, pulling 30kW.
Math is 270kW = 1000A X 270V and 27 kW = 100A X 270V, while I^2R losses mean that for constant R, the power dissipated as thermal losses is 100x higher at 270kW 1000^2=1000000 while 100^2=10000; 1000000/10000=100.
There is no question that resistive heat losses and battery heat losses at a 4C discharge rate are increased. We can even include the tire distortion frictional losses too. It matters not. The real world results are in. Rapid acceleration in battery powered vehicles does not appreciably affect range. The work done is the same and the energy consumed is, in effect, not significantly different.
There is also no question that the various drag forces are not independent of speed. I clearly understand this. So, rapidly getting to "Cruise speed" results in more time at the "high drag" velocity. Once again, it matters not, when the "cruise speed is fairly low, such as in a 30, 35 or even a 45 or 50 MPH zone. The increased time at the high drag speed is not enough to reduce range appreciably. This changes when out of the city and speeds increase markedly. I am unaware of any "stop n go" 70MPH zones.
Real world testing results from Tesla: Going flat out 0-60 mph uses less than 0.1 kWh of energy from your battery MORE than going very slowly 0-60 mph.
Last edited:
- Status
