From car blog TopSpeed.com, which grabbed it from the Dutch Autoweek (more pictures):
Read about the 2010 Prius on TopSpeed.com. And, it appears TopSpeed isn’t the only one with pictures. Click here to see all the pictures from Google Images.
Toyota will start building the Prius in its plant near Blue Springs in late 2010.
Wow, they are not the most attractive looking cars, are they? I know that I wont be buying one! I will stick with my Pontiac Bonneville, its awesome!!!
Until next time…
That is one ugly car, but since Exxon is making billions by breaking the backs of struggling Americans, Toyota will sell them by the millions. Why didn’t the big 3 didn’t think of this?
check out this story
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/31/used-prius-prices-higher-than-new-models/
In a strange way it sort of looks like the Pontiac Aztec. You know with the boxy time look to it. Still would not drive the thing. I would look like Donkey Kong in the thing. The only problem that I have with cars of that size are safety in a collision. I mean I just would not buy it for my wife. I know that it gets probably like 50 mpg, but I am willing to give up a few mpg’s for safety.
You are exactly right Billy; how well do you actually think that would hold up in an accident??? Not very well i assume…and billy, that was very sweet to say about your wife! Good to know that there are still some good husbands out there!
Until next time…
I don’t think Toyota – or any other car manufacturer, for that matter (except the old Yugo) would put a deathtrap on wheels on the road. You gotta remember that all vehicles go through safety tests anyway, and automakers aren’t looking to have a lawsuit on wheels.
The Prius, ugly as it is, would probably hold up as well as any car in an accident.
But for any vehicle, it’s the type of accident that will determine how well you survive. You could be in a Suburban, for example, but if you get smashed by an 18-wheeler, chances are you’re not going to do any better than the guy in the Prius, or the Taurus or the whatever.
Actually, I kind of like the way it looks. And I’m not worried about safety, either, since Toyota has a good record. I wish I had one now, since I’m looking at a 100-mile round trip commute 5 days a week for the next 5 months.
It’s a mistake to correlate size with safety. SUVs and trucks are built to lower passenger safety standards. The American Scientist had a very good article on the subject a couple months ago (http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/feature/2008/2/safer-vehicles-for-people-and-the-planet/1). The results of their studies of collisions, based upon federal road fatality statistics, show that there is more of correlation between manufacturer and safety than size and safety. Toyotas of any size are safer than GM cars. The most dangerous cars on the road, in terms of driver fatalities, are the Dodge Neon and American full-size pickup trucks. Japanese and German cars are the safest vehicles on the road. It’s all about better design, not size.
So if a 2,000 lb.car and a 5,000 lb. car are involved in a crash together,the 5,000 lb. might be damaged worse?Not in my law of physics class.
moparman- In your law of physics class, the section on collisions should have had the standard disclaimer “in an idealized world, with all other factors being equal and constant” the 5,000 lb. car wins. But, not everything is equal. If you are driving a full-size pickup truck and plow head-on into a Japanese sedan, your odds of dying are 8x greater than the driver of the rice burner. Your full-size pickup lacks the safety engineering of the sedan, increasing the probability of your death.
Think of it this way. Formula 1 race cars weigh less than any production car on the road today. Yet they can crash into a wall at a racetrack at over 100 mph and the driver survives. What do you think would happen to you if you drove a GMC 1/2 ton into a wall at a similar speed?