2018 Nissan Leaf vs Toyota Prius Prime

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Unlike the people here criticizing the Prime from ignorance, I own this car.
90+ percent of its use in our household is for my 90 mile work commute and our 250 mile each way trips we take once or twice a month. That is far from the ideal scenario for this car but lifetime (since March) we are at 110 MPG*. It was cheaper to buy than a regular Prius hybrid, uses half the fuel, has more safety features, and even the base model has DRCC (aka TACC), a much appreciated driver assist feature.

It is outstanding value.

* plus ~ $2 a month in electricity from my PV
 
So we now have to actually own the car to be critical of it, and not be called "ignorant?" Wow.

Perhaps the mods should delete the entire 2018 Leaf thread, or at least anything in there that's critical of it, since none are in consumer hands yet.

My biggest criticism of the car is that I feel Toyota could have done better.
 
RonDawg said:
So we now have to actually own the car to be critical of it, and not be called "ignorant?" Wow.
No, you have to have a clue to not be called ignorant.
 
SageBrush said:
RonDawg said:
So we now have to actually own the car to be critical of it, and not be called "ignorant?" Wow.
No, you have to have a clue to not be called ignorant.

And in what way have I been "clueless?" The figures I quoted about price, range, etc. are from reliable sources like FuelEconomy.gov.

And yes if Ford can make a Fusion Energi (a platform not originally designed for electrification) go almost as far as a Prius Prime (which is a newer design) on just its battery, I think Toyota could have done better. Because Hyundai/Kia did just that. It's called an OPINION. You don't have to agree with it, and clearly you don't, but calling me ignorant is over the line and offensive.
 
RonDawg said:
SageBrush said:
RonDawg said:
So we now have to actually own the car to be critical of it, and not be called "ignorant?" Wow.
No, you have to have a clue to not be called ignorant.

And in what way have I been "clueless?"
You have been busy, so here goes:

1. You said 22 EPA miles EV range
2. You said more expensive than Prius ECO
3. You said $100 savings a year compared to a Prius
4. You are unaware of the features present in a base Prime compared to a base Prius
5. You ignore the range of oil savings the car allows.

1. 25 EPA, although 30 seems to be typical on PriusChat and I get ~ 35
2. Tax credits
3. For my 90 r/t mile work commute I buy ~ 0.8 G of petrol and 15 cents of home PV electricity, so about 2.2 cents a mile. I'll leave the arithmetic to you based on 12k miles a year. In my Prius v(agon) I averaged 52 mpg.
4. Most importantly, DRCC (you know, the feature that cost an extra $4k in the LEAF2.)
5. My fossil fuel consumption has dropped about 50% compared to the Prius I replaced for the same use.
 
SageBrush said:
RonDawg said:
SageBrush said:
No, you have to have a clue to not be called ignorant.

And in what way have I been "clueless?"
You have been busy, so here goes:

1. You said 22 EPA miles EV range
2. You said more expensive than Prius ECO
3. You said $100 savings a year compared to a Prius
4. You are unaware of the features present in a base Prime compared to a base Prius
5. You ignore the range of oil savings the car allows.

1. 25 EPA, although 30 seems to be typical on PriusChat and I get ~ 35
2. Tax credits
3. For my 90 r/t mile work commute I buy ~ 0.8 G of petrol and 15 cents of home PV electricity, so about 2.2 cents a mile. I'll leave the arithmetic to you based on 12k miles a year. In my Prius v(agon) I averaged 52 mpg.
4. Most importantly, DRCC (you know, the feature that cost an extra $4k in the LEAF2.)
5. My fossil fuel consumption has dropped about 50% compared to the Prius I replaced for the same use.

1. Which I got from the OP, who wasn't that far off.
2. It is, when comparing MSRP of base models. I do concede that I didn't include government incentives, which will reduce the price.
3. That's from FuelEconomy.gov, who said the Prime would cost $600 over a year to drive, vs. $700 for the Prius Eco and $750 for the regular Prius.
4. I didn't compare features, I was only comparing base MSRP.
5. No I didn't. I even mentioned the overall fuel savings. What I was talking about is how the fuel savings were relatively paltry ($100-150 over a year per FuelEconomy.gov) vs. the initial purchase price. Again I was comparing base MSRP's and not including any government incentives.

So really my error is failing to account for the government incentives when discussing prices. Hardly "clueless."

See how nice and productive it is to have thoughtful discussion without resorting to insults?
 
RonDawg said:
See how nice and productive it is to have thoughtful discussion without resorting to insults?
Take your own advice, and we won't go down this road.

The problem with the fueleconomy "savings" calculation is the underlying presumption of paying average national grid prices for electricity. That may be true for the unfortunate or the clueless, but everybody else puts up PV and the savings multiply.

The larger point that GRA has been trying unsuccessfully to get through to you is that the Prime has great advantages over its hybrid cousin in many but not all use cases in terms of pollution and fuel consumption; and due to the tax credits and rich bundled features it is an easy choice over the straight hybrid regardless. You obviously did not read my earlier posts before chiming in or you would have realized that the Prime can be a fantastic value. It is not too late for you to become informed.

My experience: Richly optioned, Toyota reliability, > 100 mpg car for $17k.
 
The problem with the fueleconomy "savings" calculation is the underlying presumption of paying average national grid prices for electricity. That may be true for the unfortunate or the clueless, but everybody else puts up PV and the savings multiply.

You seem determined to insult as many people as possible. Between renters and those with the wrong kinds of roof or roof exposure (like me, with our slate roof), most people turn out to be either "unfortunate" or "clueless"...
 
GRA said:
rcm4453 said:
25 miles AER just isn't enough. What's that 25 miles going to be in the dead of winter going 70mph on the freeway with the heater on?!

Better off with just the hybrid version as just a few real world miles of electric range is just a tease!
What you mean is that 25 miles AER isn't enough for you. It's enough for plenty of people. If you're going 70 mph on the freeway (in the heart of the commute? not likely) in winter you really don't need the battery in any case; let the engine provide heat. Save the battery for when it gives you the biggest energy and pollution advantage - stop and go freeway driving and surface streets. And, for that small but growing % of the population who can take advantage of charging at both ends, 25 miles AER is plenty for everyone but the super/mega-commuters.

If your commute/routine driving is greater than the Prime's AER and being able to do all of it on the battery is important to you, then the Prime is the wrong choice for you. But the general public isn't so motivated, and according to polls their single biggest impediment to buying an EV is the price compared to an ICE (lack of charging infrastructure is #2). PEVs need to be able to compete on initial and/or monthly payments, especially once the subsidies disappear. For now, the Prime, along with the C-Max Energi, are the only PHEVs that can be nearly full substitutes for ICE equivalents at a price (including the fed. credit) that's close enough to ICEs that many people can afford to extend a bit. In California and other states that have their own credits or rebates, the Prime can be cheaper than the base Prius, so the decision on which one to get comes down to whether or not you need the extra seat and cargo space of the HEV, and whether or not you want all HVAC controls on the touch screen (or maybe I'm thinking of the Mirai). If those issues aren't important to you, then the Prime's the way to go, and that's the way you can get the maximum amount of butts in PEV seats, which will convince many of those people who are currently unwilling to completely change over to BEVs now to upgrade to more capable plugins for their next car, once the costs have come down further and the infrastructure has improved.

Almost no one buys cars based on TCO, even if they have the info to calculate that. What % of the car-buying population even compares insurance premiums for different cars and factors that into their decision? Most people who have to take price seriously into account (which doesn't include the typical new Model S/X buyer) decide whether they can afford a car on based on initial price (or more typically down payment plus monthly payments), as they can estimate with sufficient accuracy for their needs whether they can afford operating costs given EPA mpg. That's about as in-depth as most car buyers get (or want to) when it comes to TCO, so trying to sell cars to the general public based on TCO isn't likely to succeed - it sure hasn't so far, any more than selling them based on green credentials has.


I do agree with the points that you have made. You are 100% right the Prime's AER is no where near enough for me. My point is that for the people looking to drive electric, the Prime falls too short in the AER department. Wouldn't the desire to drive electric be the primary reason anyone would be considering the Prime over a hybrid in the first place? For those who live in states that actually have cold winters that 25 AER is going to be like 10 miles! At that point why even bother?! The consumers who don't care about driving electric will just buy a regular ICE or hybrid. Some lucky folks that live in the right states to receive incentives will buy it over the Hybrid version because it will cost about the same, that's a no brainer for those people. There may be a select number of buyers that don't get the incentives that feel the safety features and tech is worth the additional cost over the hybrid but that's not that many. I know when you look at the monthly sales over at IEVs it appears to be selling quite well but not when compared to mainstream ICE vehicles.

I guess what I'm trying to say is the Prime misses the mark on attracting buyers looking to go electric. It's on point as a hybrid and it's new safety features but there are more affordable options out there for those looking for a hybrid.
 
SageBrush said:
Take your own advice, and we won't go down this road.

YOU went down this road, and continue to do so:

The problem with the fueleconomy "savings" calculation is the underlying presumption of paying average national grid prices for electricity. That may be true for the unfortunate or the clueless, but everybody else puts up PV and the savings multiply.

Perhaps it is YOU who should take your own advice, especially since someone else has also mentioned that you seem "determined to insult as many people as possible."

But I guess when you can't argue facts (like dismissing my quotes from FuelEconomy.gov), you insult. That to me is the ultimate in ignorance.
 
RonDawg said:
Not everybody can put up PV. Either it's unaffordable for them, or they live somewhere where there's not roof exposure (i.e. someone who lives in a heavily wooded area and their home is always in the shade), or they are renters.
I have never argued that the Prime is the perfect choice for everybody; it is you with your "laughable" post that implied the car is a poor choice for everybody. In fact it is an excellent value and choice for a large swath of the country.

My PV does not use my roof, and I rent. About 65% of American families own their homes. All across the country community solar may be available. PV component hardware is the same price everywhere. GET A CLUE.
 
SageBrush said:
I have never argued that the Prime is the perfect choice for everybody; it is you with your "laughable" post that implied the car is a poor choice for everybody. In fact it is an excellent value and choice for a large swath of the country.

I called its AER "laughable" because it just seems to game the CA HOV sticker system, and the government incentive system. I never said, nor implied, that it's a poor choice. I have said it's an ugly car (on different threads), and that Toyota could have done a better job with it, and (before I found out about the incentives) that a regular Prius is a better value.

My PV does not use my roof, and I rent. About 65% of American families own their homes. All across the country community solar may be available. PV component hardware is the same price everywhere. GET A CLUE.

Rather than continuing to insult me (and people like LeftieBiker) how about providing a link to this PV system you speak of that doesn't require a roof?

BTW I live in SoCal and there's no "community" solar available to me. If I want solar, I have to put panels on the roof of my condo, the HOA won't allow them anywhere else (and there's really nowhere else to put them that won't block something else anyway). My utility doesn't even have the option to pay extra for "green" electricity that comes from the same overhead wires that my "non-green" electricity currently comes from.
 
RonDawg said:
BTW I live in SoCal and there's no "community" solar available to me. If I want solar, I have to put panels on the roof of my condo, the HOA won't allow them anywhere else. My utility doesn't even have the option to pay extra for "green" electricity that comes from the same overhead wires that my "non-green" electricity currently comes from.
Most weekends when the weather is fair, I volunteer a couple hours of my time along with a few others to help neighbors put up PV. Most place it on the roof. They end up paying about $1 a watt after the federal tax credit. They save money from day one on their home electricity, even if they take out a loan, and in my locale where grid electricity is cheaper than the national average. A few more panels to run EV miles is dirt cheap.

IT IS EASY. We put up 5-10 kW arrays in a few hours. If I had one helper to get the panels on the roof I could complete an array in a weekend.

Your situation may not be. It happens. But do not presume that everybody else is like you. Same goes for the Prius Prime.

Get involved. Get informed. And stop being so rigid that you think only the LEAF or a Volt can possibly be better for the environment, the community, and personal finances.
 
LeftieBiker said:
Between renters and those with the wrong kinds of roof or roof exposure (like me, with our slate roof), most people turn out to be either "unfortunate" or "clueless"...
One example:
https://www.google.com/get/sunroof/data-explorer/place/ChIJPV4oX_65j4ARVW8IJ6IJUYs/

So it is much more a case of clueless rather than unfortunate.
 
SageBrush said:
Your situation may not be. It happens. But do not presume that everybody else is like you. Same goes for the Prius Prime.

Conversely, don't assume that just because it's possible where you are in Colorado doesn't mean the same elsewhere in the US.

It also seems presumptuous that someone should be able to take out a loan to finance a solar array, especially right after they bought a new car. You don't know what their finances are, so don't assume they can afford it just because you can.

And stop being so rigid that you think only the LEAF or a Volt can possibly be better for the environment, the community, and personal finances.

That I never said AT ALL.

SageBrush said:
LeftieBiker said:
Between renters and those with the wrong kinds of roof or roof exposure (like me, with our slate roof), most people turn out to be either "unfortunate" or "clueless"...
One example:
https://www.google.com/get/sunroof/data-explorer/place/ChIJPV4oX_65j4ARVW8IJ6IJUYs/

So it is much more a case of clueless rather than unfortunate.

Leftie is in upstate NY and you're showing a map of California. Even if the link showed the correct map, it has nothing to do with what Leftie is talking about.

I did input "Buffalo NY" and it shows rooftops being more on the "shady" side; I don't know where Leftie lives, but if his area gets similar solar exposure, that could be a problem if his property is wooded.
 
RonDawg said:
22 miles of EV only range is laughable, though not as laughable as that of its precedessor which had IIRC less than 10 miles' of pure EV range. It was targeting one specific market: California, for the HOV exemption stickers.
BS.

I do not live in California, and I do not own an HOV sticker.
Yet the Prime provides me tremendous value and has reduced my work commute fossil fuel consumption by 50% compared to the Prius it replaced despite my work commute length that is more than double the American average. At a more average 40 miles a day the Prime covers about 75% of the distance in EV and the remainder at ~ 60 mpg for most drivers. That works out to 240 mpg or better for half the driving populace. On long trips only the Tesla can do better, but it is quite a bit more expensive to purchase.
 
rcm4453 said:
I do agree with the points that you have made. You are 100% right the Prime's AER is no where near enough for me. My point is that for the people looking to drive electric, the Prime falls too short in the AER department. Wouldn't the desire to drive electric be the primary reason anyone would be considering the Prime over a hybrid in the first place? For those who live in states that actually have cold winters that 25 AER is going to be like 10 miles! At that point why even bother?! The consumers who don't care about driving electric will just buy a regular ICE or hybrid. Some lucky folks that live in the right states to receive incentives will buy it over the Hybrid version because it will cost about the same, that's a no brainer for those people. There may be a select number of buyers that don't get the incentives that feel the safety features and tech is worth the additional cost over the hybrid but that's not that many. I know when you look at the monthly sales over at IEVs it appears to be selling quite well but not when compared to mainstream ICE vehicles.

I guess what I'm trying to say is the Prime misses the mark on attracting buyers looking to go electric. It's on point as a hybrid and it's new safety features but there are more affordable options out there for those looking for a hybrid.
Actually, I misspoke earlier - the Prime is priced less than the price of the base Prius using only the fed credit, so there is absolutely no financial reason to opt for the regular Prius unless you don't have enough tax liability. It's considerably cheaper than the base Prius with any additional credits or rebates. If they don't care about the extra seat or the reduced cargo height, why would anyone buy the regular Prius, especially since the Prime will get far better mpg most of the time? The 'people looking to drive electric' include lots of people who don't need to drive more than 25 miles routinely, but who also want max. mpg on road trips where there aren't any places to charge.

As to extreme cold winters, sure, the Prime may require you to use the ICE more often than a car with a greater AER would, but so what? The people for whom that's a consideration will buy a different PHEV or a BEV - satisfied former Prius owners (2 million sold in the U.S.) who upgrade to the Prime will take their win the remaining 8-9 months of the year. However, as 40-50% of all U.S. PEV sales have been in California, and I imagine a large % of the rest in states like Florida and Texas where serious cold isn't a factor, the majority of Prime owners simply won't be bothered.

Those who will be bothered should buy a car with a greater AER, but then you can always find someone who's pushing the AER limit - the high mileage Volt owner has only driven his 2012 (35 mile AER) a bit over 1/3rd of his 400k total miles on the battery, but then his one-way commute in Michigan is 110 miles. The Prime would be cheaper to operate and burn less gas than his Volt, plus have an MSRP over $10k less than his Volt did, but I don't think anyone would consider describing the Volt 1's AER as 'laughable' (I know that wasn't you). The Prime would also burn less gas than a Volt 2, unless he can charge at both ends (don't remember if he can or not). Even an i3REx's AER wouldn't be sufficient to cover his commute, and he'd have to spend about $15k more up front to get that (I'm assuming anyone who could seriously consider an i3 REx will qualify for the full fed. tax. credit, reducing the MSRP difference by $3,300 or so).

In sum, the target market for the Prime isn't the 'Give me a BEV or give me death' crowd, and I agree with Jay Cole at IEVS that the Prime will eventually outsell the regular Prius and may also be the best selling PEV this year (depending on when the Model 3 deliveries ramp), once they get the inventory. PEVs need to move well beyond the early adopter enthusiasts, and I believe sub-$30k base PHEVs like the Prime and C-Max Energi point the way. Getting PEV base MSRPs down to $25k and eventually $20k will be critical for the mass market once the fed. credit is gone, and if PEVs can't compete, the general public will stick with ICEs or HEVs.

P.S. A general observation - there's absolutely no need for name calling. Let's keep it civil, h'mm?
 
GRA said:
In sum, the target market for the Prime isn't the 'Give me a BEV or give me death' crowd, and I agree with Jay Cole at IEVS that the Prime will eventually outsell the regular Prius and may also be the best selling PEV this year (depending on when the Model 3 deliveries ramp), once they get the inventory. PEVs need to move well beyond the early adopter enthusiasts, and I believe sub-$30k base PHEVs like the Prime and C-Max Energi point the way. Getting PEV base MSRPs down to $25k and eventually $20k will be critical for the mass market once the fed. credit is gone, and if PEVs can't compete, the general public will stick with ICEs or HEVs.
Exactly right.

For now the Prius Prime is the ONLY well equipped family car in the world that sells for $17k - $22k in the US depending on tax credits, and returns 100 - infinite mpg for the middle 90% of the driving public in their daily driving, and best of any car other than a Tesla for longer drives. That is an amazing achievement.

If I ran Toyota I would make adverts with Arithmetic lessons for the American public. And ask them about the other cars in their household when they wax poetic on EV purity.
 
I don't know, I paid $17,500 tax title and license back in 2014 for my car new, despite a sometimes bi annual 3,500 mile trip out west I'm still not doing bad.

125785_IMG_0435.jpg


No regrets not waiting years to jump to EV
 
Back
Top