British Agency Asks Toy to "Shut their Pie Hole"

[Z-06]

Prius BS

The Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has labelled a television commercial for the Toyota Prius 'misleading' and banned it from being shown again.

The advert, created by agency Saatchi & Saatchi Japan, said "what if all cars were like the Prius? With its hybrid synergy drive technology, it emits up to one tonne less CO2 per year"

An on-screen note stated "One tonne of CO2 less than an equivalent family vehicle with a diesel engine. Average calculated on 20,000km a year. Toyota Prius: CO2 emissions: 104g/km".

Toyota sent the ASA a chart comparing the Prius's CO2 output with that of the Mk1 Prius and the Toyota Allion – a 2.0-litre Japan-only petrol car similar to the Avensis. Toyota also said that it had compared the Prius with all cars registered in 2005, which on average emitted 172g/km of CO2 to the Prius's 104.

However, while the on-screen text stated that the claim compared the Prius with "an equivalent family vehicle with a diesel engine," the evidence supplied to the ASA included both petrol and diesel cars.

What's more, 20,000km a year is the average distance travelled by cars in the US; in the UK it is just over 13,000km.

In its ruling, the ASA said that: "none of the cars with 1.5-litre engines featured in the chart emitted one tonne more CO2 than the Prius and less than half of those new cars that had engines of less than 1.8 litres emitted one tonne more CO2 than the Prius.

"We did not consider their evidence demonstrated that it emitted one tonne less than equivalent vehicles with diesel engines or that it took into account the average annual distance driven by private cars in the UK."

In May a magazine advert for the Lexus RX400h hybrid was also banned. Above a picture of the RX it stated "High Performance. Low emissions. Zero guilt."

The ASA ruled that "the headline claim was likely to mislead."

I guess since Toy does not have good diesels, they were trying to fool the Europeans to buy hybrids instead much to their chargin.

[Paolino]

Interesting. Again, when is the $h! going to hit the fan? When is it just going to come out in big, bold letters in newspapers, "HYBRIDS AIN'T ALL THAT"?

[Intrepidation]

[JT64]

Interesting. Again, when is the $h! going to hit the fan? When is it just going to come out in big, bold letters in newspapers, "HYBRIDS AIN'T ALL THAT"?

You could limit your argument to "Saatchi & Saatchi Japan guys are idiots."

Which would be accurate.

The article noted Saatchi & Saatchi Japan didn't do proper market research, and use numbers relevant to the target market.

But the $h! about hybrids will hit the fan when pigs fly.

Perhaps you can engineer us a flying pig?

Now we come to hybrids.

Hybrids are all that.

Hybrids use less gas than gas engines.

Hybrids emit less CO2 than gas engines,

Hybrids emit less CO2 than diesel engines.

But not better by 1 tonne compared to select vehicles. (This was the advertisement's numerically false claim.)

On buses, hybrids save up to 55% of gas, and reduce emissions by up to 90%.

http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/adv_te...hybrid_bus.html

Hybrid buses "produce up to 60 percent fewer oxides of nitrogen emissions and 90 percent fewer particulate, hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions. "

http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/enviro...rid_032906.html

On a 4000 lb SUV, hybrids save up to 45% of gas.

http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/adv_te...008-113006.html

On a 5500 lb SUV, hybrids save 25% of gas.

http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/adv_te...ahoe_10906.html

http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/adv_te...s_fullsize.html

GM continues to claim,

"Because the architecture can be scaled to fit multiple vehicles and adapted to gasoline or diesel engines, the two-mode full hybrid can be applied globally. In Europe , for example, where diesel engines are common in passenger vehicles, it can provide a significant reduction in fuel consumption, which would help automakers meet the region's ever-stringent carbon dioxide emissions standard."

Hybrids give everything better mileage and reduce emissions, whether a gas or a diesel engine.

"Batteries and electric motor reduce the use of the internal combustion engine. Therefore, the vehicle does not need as much fuel, creating better gas mileage and saving money at the pump."

For the future, GM comments,

"It will take approximately a decade until safe, affordable hydrogen fuel cells are widely available. In the meantime, GM will offer a range of hybrid cars and trucks and continue to improve the internal combustion engine."

http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/enviro...ry_message.html

So for at least 10 years, hybrids are the best solution.

GM will push hybrids, as potential customers, such as you, come to understand hybrids.

"If customers embrace hybrids as an environmentally sound alternative - and we believe they will - GM could sell more than a million hybrid cars and trucks over the next several years."

During the hybrid's life, hybrids "allows the internal combustion engine to use less fuel, producing fewer emissions."

GM continues to explain how, even at the end-of-life of hybrids, hybrids are environmentally friendly:

"[Batteries] can be fully recycled. In fact, the batteries on all GM hybrids will have a sticker on them directing you to the web site, www.recyclemybattery.com, which will tell professional dismantlers how to recycle the hybrid battery."

http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/edu_k-...on/hybrids.html

So before you dismiss hybrids, try dismissing Saatchi & Saatchi Japan, and see if that solves the problem.

Or you can give us the flying pig. Which would be cool too.

Edited June 10, 2007 by JT64

[aaaantoine]

I want my flying pig, dammit!

If the goal is to consume less gasoline, the person with enough resources will pick the car with the best fuel economy, which would probably be a diesel. A diesel hybrid, if one is ever built, may also be considered.

If the goal is to produce as few emissions as possible, the person with enough resources will pick whatever vehicle produces the fewest emissions per mile. It may be a hybrid, or it could be a PZEV Civic... Or a ZEV Electric car of some sort.

HOWEVER, if the goal is to get the lowest cost of ownership possible, the person is going to go with a CPO subcompact. Hybrids would be out of the question.

[JT64]

A diesel hybrid, if one is ever built, may also be considered.

HOWEVER, if the goal is to get the lowest cost of ownership possible, the person is going to go with a CPO subcompact.

Edmunds does their share to help explain hybrids.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Featu...rticleId=120205

Hybrid diesel: Ok for Europe only. Europeans are used to paying $10,000 more for their cars than Americans. That includes the extra price of a diesel. So they merely pay the "hybrid" premium to get a "diesel hybrid".

America can't get that, since Americans would have to pay a premium to go from "gas" to "diesel", and another premium to go from "diesel" to "diesel hybrid". Americans are not used to paying an extra $7,000.

So the USA is stuck with gas/E85 hybrids.

The GM buses are hybrid diesels. The premium is acceptable if you're a big metropolitan city.

CPO subcompact: People need big SUVs and trucks. Hybrid SUVs and hybrid trucks.

Even if people want a car, there's plenty of people rich enough to get at least a midsized hybrid sedan.

As we can see with the Prius rebates, mass production is dropping the hybrid premium, and with the decades of research costs paid off.

CPO subcompacts reserved for the poor. You'd want more room if you have money.

Which makes hybrids a go for all vehicles.

With Toyota, Honda, GM, Chrysler, BMW as the main producers, it's hybrid vehicles for the next 10 years.

Honda is trying small city car Civics as hybrids (city mpg), and large highway cruiser Accords as diesels (highway mpg), since they both have equivalently large premiums.

Edited June 10, 2007 by JT64

[PurdueGuy]

The GM buses are hybrid diesels. The premium is acceptable if you're a big metropolitan city.

...and if the state decides to spend tax money on the buses like 2 new hybrid buses in Lafayette, IN. Still, it was a good idea, in my opinion. The buses have the hybrid tranny setup from Indianapolis, and a Cummins diesel from somewhere else in the state, plus one or two other major things from in the state. That makes them an awesome PR buy. Add on top of that the possibility that the buses will save enough fuel to help pay for themselves (they couldn't say if they would come out ahead or behind fiscally compared to regular buses), and it's a great buy for our city/state.

[Duncan]

CPO subcompact: People need big SUVs and trucks. Hybrid SUVs and hybrid trucks.

Even if people want a car, there's plenty of people rich enough to get at least a midsized hybrid sedan.

As we can see with the Prius rebates, mass production is dropping the hybrid premium, and with the decades of research costs paid off.

CPO subcompacts reserved for the poor. You'd want more room if you have money.

Bull. A large number of the people who buy big SUVs and trucks on the assumption that "they'll need that capacity someday" are lying to themselves, and would most likely be better served by an AWD minivan or a good-sized wagon.

Now, if those people want to continue lying to themselves, whatever - so long as they at least buy a diesel hybrid version of that truck. Then, until the day they "need the capacity", they'll at least be running as efficiently as possible.

I still think straight-up diesels without the hybrid parts are a better option, mainly for the fact that the replacement battery costs are eventually going to bite the industry in the ass where customers are concerned. (Thus Toyota looks really good now, but might have been better off spending all that money on diesel engines that are worth a damn. Honda's possibly got them beat on that front, at least if Euro reviews are anything to go by.)

[JT64]

A large number of the people who buy big SUVs and trucks on the assumption that "they'll need that capacity someday" are lying to themselves, and would most likely be better served by an AWD minivan or a good-sized wagon.

I'm referred to truck and SUVs, for people who need those vehicles.

For instance, GM began by offering its hybrid Silverados for sale to commercial fleets only. That is one possibility to keep them out of the hands of show-offers.

Even if show-offers buy them, at least it's not a gas-only truck/SUV.

Which is still a gain. How will you convince show-offers to stop buying a truck of any kind?

There is a large gain in dropping a full hybrid into a truck; 40% for city, as GM stated.

________________________________________________

With massive investment by the industry to go hybrid, this technology is well researched.

What will you do to stop GM, Chrysler, Ford, BMW, Mercedes, Toyota, Honda, and the licensee Nissan?

These articles say a battery replacement is $3,000-$8,000, but the failure rate is near 0%.

http://hybridcars.about.com/od/hybridcarfa...batterycost.htm

http://www.hybridcars.com/technology-stori...ment-costs.html

http://www.greenhybrid.com/discuss/archive...php/t-5847.html

Please provide more links you find.

The articles attribute "failures of batteries" to 2 things:

1. Actual battery failure due to Honda's manual transmission use - hybrids require computer control.

2. Corroded terminal - which shouldn't cost much to fix, but people who handled it were dumb or greedy.

The high cost and resistance by mechanics to repair seems to be from lack of training.

The customers, after much stressful arguments, have been sucessful to reduce to cost to <$1,500.

The technology is sound, but people still try to weasel money out of customers.

That has nothing to do with the hybrid technology itself.

Perhaps some new, to-be-drafted fraud laws could cover these things.

Perhaps laws can force hybrid makers to increase warranty on the battery to 200,000 miles

(currently 100,000 miles / 150,000 miles California)... :AH-HA_wink:

Toyota expects the batteries to last 15 years... it'd be nice if they warrant that.

15 years/200,000 miles...

That would be nice to see.

Write your congressmen!

GM just signed 2 contracts for advanced development of lithium batteries.

Do you think the scientific community and GM is that stupid?

To compare, it'd be interesting to look up the average life span of gas vehicles.

Engine failures, transaxle failures... there's plenty of costly repairs on regular vehicles already, limiting their lifespan.

This undated article says the average non-hybrid lasts a mere 145,000 miles, 13 years, assuming without any major part replacement.

http://www.safecarguide.com/gui/new/neworused.htm

This is possibly what the California law is based off of.

Calculating US non-hybrid 13 years, 12,000 miles = 156,000 miles lifespan.

UK data is 13.95 years, 8000 miles = 112,686 miles lifespan.

http://www.cfit.gov.uk/docs/2001/scot0122/scot0122/02.htm

Overall, as Toyota predicts, if the battery fails, it's time to junk the car.

And that's no earlier than non-hybrids.

____________________________________________________________

Note that the diesels to come to America are new, experimental techologies on demo cars.

Not the diesels of old.

The Prius and Insight were demo cars for hybrids.

Now come Mercedes' and Honda's diesel demos.

The new diesel technologies haven't been tested for long, and will take a while before they demonstrate their durability and become widespread.

Not even one model year of the new diesels have been tested by the public yet.

What is their failure rate, and what does it cost to repair those newly designed drivetrains?

The hybrid demo, the Toyota Prius, went on sale in 1997.

It's been in public test for 10 years to demonstrate the technology.

Edited June 13, 2007 by JT64

[JT64]

On a separate note, the Toyota Prius is the vehicle with the absolute lowest CO2 emissions for sale in the UK, lower than any gas or diesel microcar available.

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/informati...bles.asp#petrol

[Z-06]

JT is Prius your wife or your keep that you are siding with IT so much?

[JT64]

JT is Prius your wife or your keep that you are siding with IT so much?

As you can see from its images, the Prius is very round and smooth.

That is a possibility.

[Z-06]

Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder.

[Duncan]

I'm referred to truck and SUVs, for people who need those vehicles.

For instance, GM began by offering its hybrid Silverados for sale to commercial fleets only. That is one possibility to keep them out of the hands of show-offers.

We're agreed on that point - the buyers that really need that boost in mileage, like fleet operators, should have it.

Even if show-offers buy them, at least it's not a gas-only truck/SUV.

Which is still a gain. How will you convince show-offers to stop buying a truck of any kind?

There is a large gain in dropping a full hybrid into a truck; 40% for city, as GM stated.

Again, I will grant you that point. However, I think the time of the "family pickup" is finally beginning to wane.

With massive investment by the industry to go hybrid, this technology is well researched.

What will you do to stop GM, Chrysler, BMW, Mercedes, Toyota, Honda, and the licensees Ford and Nissan?

I personally can't do anything to stop them, if that's what you're implying. I just think that their powertrain development money could be better spent on improving and optimizing technologies we already have via use of direct injection, new valvetrain technology, more sophisticated engine management, etc.

These articles say a battery replacement is $3,000-$8,000, but the failure rate is near 0%.

http://hybridcars.about.com/od/hybridcarfa...batterycost.htm

http://www.hybridcars.com/technology-stori...ment-costs.html

http://www.greenhybrid.com/discuss/archive...php/t-5847.html

Please provide more links you find.

That's sufficient proof for me, thank you. It's still expensive compared to a plain old engine rebuild, though.

The articles attribute "failures of batteries" to 2 things:

1. Actual battery failure due to Honda's manual transmission use - hybrids require computer control.

2. Corroded terminal - which shouldn't cost much to fix, but people who handled it were dumb or greedy.

The high cost and resistance by mechanics to repair seems to be from lack of training.

The customers, after much stressful arguments, have been sucessful to reduce to cost to <$1,500.

That's not surprising, given the general history of the automotive repair industry. As for the battery cost negotiation - do Toyota, Honda and the others really want to lose that much money in replacement every time a mechanic flubs a repair?

The technology is sound, but people still try to weasel money out of customers.

That has nothing to do with the hybrid technology itself.

Perhaps some new, to-be-drafted fraud laws could cover these things.

Perhaps laws can force hybrid makers to increase warranty on the battery to 200,000 miles

(currently 100,000 miles / 150,000 miles California)... :AH-HA_wink:

Toyota expects the batteries to last 15 years... it'd be nice if they warrant that.

15 years/200,000 miles...

That would be nice to see.

Write your congressmen!

Fully agreed on the need to warranty the batteries - I wouldn't expect anyone to write a law requiring it, though.

GM just signed 2 contracts for advanced development of lithium batteries.

Do you think the scientific community and GM is that stupid?

No - but that's only because I think GM's hybrid concept (more like a locomotive, which they're pretty familiar with) is a better design to start with.

To compare, it'd be interesting to look up the average life span of gas vehicles.

Engine failures, transaxle failures... there's plenty of costly repairs on regular vehicles already, limiting their lifespan.

This undated article says the average non-hybrid lasts a mere 145,000 miles, 13 years, assuming without any major part replacement.

http://www.safecarguide.com/gui/new/neworused.htm

This is possibly what the California law is based off of.

Calculating US non-hybrid 13 years, 12,000 miles = 156,000 miles lifespan.

UK data is 13.95 years, 8000 miles = 112,686 miles lifespan.

http://www.cfit.gov.uk/docs/2001/scot0122/scot0122/02.htm

Overall, as Toyota predicts, if the battery fails, it's time to junk the car.

And that's no earlier than non-hybrids.

I'm just not fond of the idea of a "general car fault" - why, if I like the car, should I be forced to dispose of it after 13ish years? It's much like the Microsoft model - keep maintaining support on the old stuff just long enough to get people used to it, then get rid of it all in one fell swoop and force everyone to upgrade.

Note that the diesels to come to America are new, experimental techologies on demo cars.

Not the diesels of old.

The Prius and Insight were demo cars for hybrids.

Now come Mercedes' and Honda's diesel demos.

The new diesel technologies haven't been tested for long, and will take a while before they demonstrate their durability and become widespread.

Not even one model year of the new diesels have been tested by the public yet.

What is their failure rate, and what does it cost to repair those newly designed drivetrains?

The hybrid demo, the Toyota Prius, went on sale in 1997.

It's been in public test for 10 years to demonstrate the technology.

Mercedes is hardly new to diesels - I'd think they have a pretty good handle on how to design them to last. (You'll note the numbers of 1970s Benz turbo-diesels that are still chugging along happily and with minimal smoke today.) And Honda, as far as I'm concerned, knows how to design engines - it's kinda why they exist. Granted, they are relatively new to diesels, but I think they've earned the benefit of the doubt.

For that matter, so has GM - because honestly, if there's one thing they do better than anyone else, it's certainly powertrain development.

I don't think we actually disagree on the merits of hybrid technology - I just think there are better ways to use the standard engines we've got now, and that's worth exploring along with side trips into hybriddom (if that's a word...).