What's wrong with 1 and 2 Prius' designs? Reputation? You mean their drivers reputation? BMW drivers have much worse reputation (probably as bad as a make's reputation can get), yet BMW has a thriving fanbase. Hybrid's production pollutes just slightly more than regular car's and hybrid is as eco-friendly as a modern car can be. What Sunny do you have problems with?
You mean the reputation of making cars that don't break? If anything, the Prius helped boost that. Also give concrete claims to the Prius production pollution because at this point I refuse to believe these urban legends.
Well, if you had to get to a place in a certain time, the Prius wouldn't be great at that. Also, saying the Prius is "great" is a lie. Don't forget that the 1st gen didn't make a good impression and start. The Sunny was mediocre at best. (I'm feeling like quitting the forums if I'm not doing anything good for the community.)
Yeah, because buying a Lamborghini would help. The Prius is great, you just have the blandest taste for cars ever, the thing you go by "good cars" is those that have a shit ton of horsepower. The 1st generation of the Prius is like the Sunny. It was just boring and that's why people don't like it. People who just go around judging cars without a clue what their purpose piss me off.
This If you have to get somewhere in a certain time, plan ahead. If you have to get somewhere quickly, you're out of luck in 99% of cars because of traffic and speed limits.
Get to place in a certain time? Speed limit's the same for everyone. Since you refuse to make it clear what Sunny you hate, as a 1994 Sunny 1.4 owner I state that it is fast, light, fuel efficient, roomy and easy to repair.
That's mostly because the most verbal members (As in not all but a lot of them) of them are complete douches.
I actually believe in Global Warming but I also believe major cities are the ones to blame, mostly because of the large population this map from NASA do prove my point See most of the major polluters are large cities like New York City, Los Angeles, London, Berlin, Moscow, Tokyo, and of course China (That's not a city but look at the red, it's redder than Texas). Now let's not turn this into a Global Warming Thread, I just wanted to say that crazy theory I have.
Of course they are. And that's exactly where hybrids make most sense, and the kind of customerbase hybrids are meant to cater to.
Well, if talking only about Chrysler and Dodge, then they only have a handful of cars left in their lineup.
Sometimes you don't need a truck or an offroader, but just a classic commuter sedan, wagon or hatch. Then in 95% of cases you look past FCA's american branches. And if your commuter car needs to be smaller than the american definition of fullsize or to be something else than sedan, you look past them in 100% of cases. Also I hate how they built the new Cherokee on an on-road platform. Killing three cars with one stone: Dart, 200 and Cherokee (though an ugly shadow of it still haunts the market).
I think the new Continental is a great way for the brand to go. OT: Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Plymouth, Mercury: All made great cars for decades, but sucked so hard in the '90s and '00s that they up and died. Sad, really. Bugatti: Sure, it's been owned and managed by many, many different groups over the years, but it is a travesty to see the logo on this: also on this: It just seems like Bugatti should've taken a more luxury route rather than a supercar route. Could've been a good contender with Rolls-Royce.
If you're gonna accuse with the speed of a machine gun, bring some reason. --- Post updated --- What? Bugatti's always been a high-performance brand. The Royale was just a loss-bringing exercise.
