Letters to the Editors
Send a letter to the editors

Subject: Prius Follow-Up
From: Michael

Thanks for your thorough review of this incredible car. The only area where we differ is the mpg. I can't understand how your mileage can be so much lower than everyone else's. I just drove a 700-mile round-trip from Atlanta to Fla. Two-thirds of it was interstate at 70 mph and the rest was highways at 40-65 mph. I averaged about 49 mpg. I just can't imagine you are putting it through conditions much more difficult than that, and yet you are getting in the low 40s. Either there is a problem with the car (oil level, tire pressure, etc.) or your driving technique wastes energy.

With a variety of drivers using our Prius on a daily basis it probably gets more of a workout than one that is driven on a more routine schedule throughout the week. We'll be keeping a close eye on the mileage numbers throughout its stay with us, but we make no excuses for our observed mileage up to this point. — Ed.


Subject: Prius Long-Term Review
From: Bruce

I have a minor problem with your otherwise informative 2004 Prius long-term review. Bumping the maintenance costs up by $270 to replace a key you lost seems a bit unfair. That's not a standard cost that buyers will have to pay, unlike things like oil changes and tune-ups. Sure, it's expensive, and you noted it in the write-up, but it's hardly a cost of ownership of the Prius.

We realize that this expense isn't what most owners would consider normal maintenance, but we had to include this cost somewhere. We'll note the unusual nature of this expense in our final tally of the Prius' cost of ownership so as to keep it from getting unnecessarily punished for our mistake. — Ed.


Subject: Bait and Switch Question
From: Cassandra

I just read your article about bait and switch and I have a question for you based on a recent incident at a car lot that I am very upset by. I would like your opinion on it.

I went in to buy a used Nissan Xterra in Florida (of which I am a resident), and after negotiating the price and giving them all of my information (filled out the financing application) the salesperson left for awhile and came back and told me I was approved for the loan I wanted at 4.4% with $1,500 down through my credit union. My husband said to him, "You ran her numbers and she WAS approved?" and the salesperson verified that yes, I had been approved. So I agreed to buy the car.

We went to the back financial room where I signed all of the papers for the car. Three days later they were hunting me down like a pack of wolves…calling my parents, my cell phones, etc. This was over Memorial Day weekend and I was on vacation. When I returned, my husband called them back and asked what they needed from us. They said they needed me to come in and "sign some more paperwork" but the salesperson was evasive as to why. I told my husband to call them back again and tell them I wanted more specifics than that…I was getting suspicious. Finally he got the finance person on the phone who informed us that I had NOT been approved for that loan, and that they had found me another loan at another bank for 6.9% interest. This, of course, is going to raise my payment.

Needless to say I am extremely upset. I purchased the car with the knowledge (what I now know as a LIE) that I had been approved for THAT loan through my credit union. What are my rights as a consumer? How could he have let me take the car? I have had the car for over a week now THINKING that I owned it! I signed a purchase agreement that says I agree to buy the car but at 4.4% and for the payment I agreed to. Do I have to buy the car now no matter what? What do you suggest I do? Please help soon as I will be hearing back from them today or tomorrow (they agreed to run the loan with my husband as co-signer) and need to give them a decision. At this point, I really want to just give them the car back.

Please help! Thanks!

Consumer Advice Editor Phil Reed responds: From what you've said, we believe that you own the car and do not need to respond to their pleas to bring the car back into the dealership. If you have the car and you have a contract that says you own it, then you own it. If, as they have said, they have been unable to get the loan approved at that rate, then that is their problem. If they persist with repeated phone calls, tell them to speak with your attorney. — Ed.


Subject: Thanks!
From: Tom

I've purchased three cars now using your guide and I have one thing to say…FANTASTIC. Although my wife doesn't like it when I take the printout from your Web page with me to the dealer, I just can't resist the sour look on the guys' faces when I pull my sheaf of papers with "Edmunds" on the top out to review. They almost ALWAYS say the same thing, "We go by KBB." I politely reply, "Yes…I figured that." You guys are the best.


Subject: "Skyrocketing Gas Prices"
From: Anonymous

I disagree with your article's assessment that we should be grateful that we do not have to pay exorbitant prices at the pump for gas like the British and Hong Kongians. I have learned that we pay a much higher percentage of tax per gallon than they do. And when it comes down to it the price per gallon, after taking out the respective country's taxes, the cost is about the same. OPEC continues to hold the West "hostage" in this gas crisis by refusing to produce more crude keeping the supply down and synthetically the cost up. The U.S. has long sat back and relied on the OPEC nations to produce our oil for us. We as a country have to make the commitment and make the investment in drilling and producing oil on our own.


Subject: "Skyrocketing Gas Prices"
From: Ted

I found your article generally interesting, informative and fairly accurate. However, I do have a few comments and corrections for you to consider.

First: "Gas" is one of three common physical forms of an element or compound found on our planet. The other two are "Liquid" and "Solid." The liquid fuel used in most automobiles is called "Gasoline" (I believe that in the UK, it's called "Petrol"). I understand that the general U.S. public has become accustomed to calling this fuel "Gas", but as a supposedly recognized automotive expert, I would have expected Edmunds to at least begin the article with the proper term before sliding into the slang of the masses. Proper use of the English language as we know it has degraded horribly over the past few decades. Our society does not need the acceleration of this decline to be promoted by an "expert."

Second: I take exception to and request a clarification/correction to your statement that the removal of lead adds 3 cents to the cost of a gallon of gasoline. Lead is not a naturally occurring component of gasoline. The lead that used to be so prevalent in gasoline was an additive that was manufactured independently and mixed with the fuel after it was refined. Although probably not the only source, DuPont was one of the last major manufacturers of the additive called "Tetra Ethyl Lead" (TEL). In its pure form, TEL is extremely toxic and is one of the few forms of lead that can be absorbed through human skin and introduced directly into the bloodstream. It is my understanding that the additive was used as an octane booster (anti-knock compound) and that the lead was intended to lubricate and prevent uneven burning of the valves in the engine.

As an aside, at least one gasoline supplier attempted to stand out from its competitors by marketing an alternative additive. Do you remember Sinclair and its catchy sales jingle about using Nickel? (How could you forget the green dinosaur?)

Once the U.S. EPA decided that lead in gasoline was an environmental hazard, U.S. refiners had to find replacement octane boosters/additives. At that time, the refiners put on major marketing campaigns misleading the U.S. public about the cost of removing lead. The replacement octane boosters may have cost more than TEL, but there was no cost for the lead removal. There was actually a cost reduction for not adding a separately manufactured ingredient. Did you have an intern write your article, have you bowed to the influences of the oil companies or am I just terribly misinformed?

Finally, your article infers that additives (such as MTBE) that are intended to reduce harmful emissions are somewhat isolated to use in California. Wake up, people! This and other "oxygenating" additives are used nationwide and have been used since at least 1989. They are not new, they are not restricted to California, and they have risen to the forefront as some of the worst "nasties" to ground-water contamination from leaking fuel storage tanks. Hence, your description of MTBE being a "controversial" additive, but your article should have explained the controversy! Or, did your authors just copy that phrase from another source and not bother to research it?

I apologize for "soapboxing" here, but with all the hype about increasing gasoline prices, I felt a need to clarify some misconceptions.

P.S. I did like your closing comment about the Excursion.

Thanks for your clarifications. We don't purport to be chemical engineers around here, but that doesn't excuse us from using the correct terminology. — Ed.


Subject: 350Z Long-Term Review
From: Jonathan

Are you guys serious? You opt for the stiff-legged, less luxurious track model, and then have the nerve to complain about stiff ride and ho-hum interior? Seriously, as I read the review, I was dumbfounded. The car is supposed to be stiff. Low-profile tires are supposed to be harsh and largely impractical. In the future, please don't fault cars on characteristics that you easily could have avoided. It's like ordering an ultrared car, and then complaining two weeks later that the car is too red. Thanks.

P.S. I own a 350Z touring, which would address all of your complaints.

We might agree with you if it weren't for the fact that our long-term RX-8 has identically sized low-profile tires that manage to return a compliant ride while maintaining excellent grip and handling characteristics. — Ed.


Subject: Turbodiesel Engine Available in California?
From: Hank

I've just returned from a month in Europe, where we rented an Audi A4 wagon with a 1.9 turbodiesel and a 6-speed stick. What a great powertrain and fun car, especially when passing gas stations! Two years ago we drove all through France with a VW Golf and a similar engine. I'm sold.

Is this or a similar engine legal and available in California? If so, what makes/models have them? I'm quickly coming up on a major maintenance and tires for my '01 VW Passat V6, so would love to switch before laying out that money.

Although Volkswagen is introducing diesel-powered versions of the Passat and the Touareg into the U.S. this year, neither one will be sold in California due to stricter emissions regulations in that state. — Ed.


Subject: TMV and Truck Comparo
From: Shane

I just finished reading the 2004 comparison test at Edmunds.com, a very well thought out and written review by the way. However, I was struck by one thing, in the review, you talk about the cost of the vehicles, and from the looks of things you are using the MSRP prices. I was surprised by this because you do such good work providing information on True Market Value. I would have loved to see the TMV price for these trucks, instead of the MSRP.

I recently ordered a new GMC Canyon, and used your resources extensively to work toward the best deal I could, and in the process of researching vehicles, I researched each of these vehicles along with the Dakota, Canyon and Colorado. What I found, which is no surprise to you, is that the Nissan and Toyota have lower sticker prices, yet by the time a buyer negotiates his best price, there is very little difference in actual purchase price because there is little negotiation room on those two trucks. They sell at MSRP, while the domestics tend to sell for thousands less than MSRP. In the end, the final sale price is the same, I must say that I prefer seeing the lower MSRP to the inflated MSRPs used by domestics, but I would love to see the TMV values included in reviews such as this, because then you are really providing a much better point of reference for your readers.

We have stayed away from using TMV prices in comparison test scoring mainly because the numbers are constantly changing depending on various rebate and incentive programs. By using each vehicle's MSRP, we can be reasonably sure that those numbers will remain constant for that year. In the future, we are considering using both TMV and MSRP pricing to give a more well-rounded view of each car's cost basis. — Ed.


Subject: Full-Size Truck Comparison
From: Kyle

Though written well, your article regarding the Ram was a little shortsighted — why was the Ram tested with both 20-inch tires and an AWD transfer case? (Most Rams are sold with the traditional transfer case incorporating rear wheel drive, 4hi, 4lo and even a neutral switch.)

While I wouldn't think it is your fault, who "chose" the tested vehicle?

Re: your objections on price — no one pays 40-plus grand for a new Hemi. Currently the national rebates approach $5,000.

It is rather misleading to skew your comparison in such a way as to allow the full-size Titan to win out, your only legitimate objection being rear legroom; considering that many buy "quad cabs" for their families, it is most likely the little ones who will be stuck in the backseat.

You at Edmunds have a tremendous influence on what consumers buy. I sell cars for a living and am constantly referring consumers to your site in spite of your sometimes prejudiced and narrow-minded views of car salesman (i.e. "Confessions of a Car Salesman", etc.). Let us not be prejudiced as we evaluate the actual cars.

We tested what Dodge gave us, and in this case it was a Ram with the optional wheels and AWD transfer case. That said, even if we'd taken $5,000 off the Ram's sticker price it still would have cost more than the Titan. Given such circumstances, we wouldn't consider the test skewed against the Ram especially when you consider the fact that the Titan not only bested the Dodge at the track, it also won out in the feature content and editors' picks categories. As far as the rear-seat room goes, if you can get a Titan that has more than enough room in back for adults, why would you settle for a Ram that can only comfortably seat children? — Ed.


Subject: Hybrids
From: Monique

Do you have any picks for the hybrid cars? I live in the city, and as a city driver the constant stop and go burns up gas very quickly. With the gas prices as they are I've been looking for more information on hybrid cars but you had none.

We not only have a hybrid car in our long-term test fleet, we also have a special report that gives details on just about everything you would want to know about these increasingly popular gas sippers. — Ed.


Subject: Hybrids — Battery?
From: Ted

You need to discuss battery development. My understanding is that the batteries will last only about four years and then have to be replaced at a cost which suggests one has to drive more than 100 miles per day to have fuel savings equal battery replacement costs.

The battery in the Toyota Prius is designed to last the life of the car. Its warranty covers all hybrid components including the battery for eight years or 100,000 miles (10 years/100,000 miles in Calif.). — Ed.


Subject: "Top 10 Luxury Vehicles Under $45,000"
From: Greg

Top 10 "luxury cars"?

The Z4 is a sports car — two-seater. If that, why not the Corvette — still under $45K and outperforms the Z4 — and most other sports cars costing 2-3 times as much.

The BMW 3 Series is a sport sedan.

The 5 Series I agree with.

No problem with putting an SUV in the category, as long as it's luxury equipped, to use your term.

Pick your terms and categories more carefully. Top-10 rankings are fun to read and use when considering what to buy — so please do your level best not to muddle the vehicles!


Subject: "Top 10 Luxury Vehicles Under $45,000"
From: Anonymous

I just looked at your top 10 list of luxury cars under $45,000 on AOL.

Is Edmunds a foreign-owned company? What is your definition of luxury car?

Your list of 10 is less than half right (in my opinion). I would not consider the Audi A4 or the VW Touareg, Infiniti FX45 or the Saab 9-5 Wagon luxury cars. What features do these cars have to make you consider them "luxury"?

You seem to be very biased toward foreign cars. What about American cars? What about the Chrysler products (Pacifica, Crossfire)?

I know the list is for 2004 models, but the new 2005 Chrysler 300C is definitely a luxury car (yet is called a "near" luxury car — I don't know what that means). The 300C "loaded' has more options than other (so-called) luxury cars and is only $36,000.

I am not associated with Chrysler in any way, but I do own an LHS, which has more luxury in it than any of the cars you listed in your top 10 and the price was only $32,000. The new 300C replaces the LHS and the 300M.

What does "near luxury" mean?

Thanks for reading this and I look forward to your response.

We agree that the 300C is a terrific car for the price, but our parameters specified 2004 vehicles only — leaving the '05 300 off the list until next year. Audi, Infiniti and Saab are all generally considered luxury brands and their cars by and large reflect that positioning. Although Volkswagen has not been a luxury brand traditionally, you would be hard-pressed to sit inside a Touareg and not consider it a luxury SUV. Regarding the Pacifica, given the amount of time our long-term Pacifica has spent at the dealer, we would find it hard to call it one of the "best" luxury vehicles in its category. — Ed.


Subject: Luxury?
From: Doug

It seems that you were short on time picking your Top 10 Luxury Cars. Some of your choices do make sense but when did a sport coupe become a luxury car? The BMW 5 Series is an excellent car and could easily be considered luxurious, but how does the small and cramped 3 Series make the list? G35 Coupe, Z4 Roadsters, Touareg, FX45 and a Saab WAGON round out your list of Top 10 Luxury Cars. Has the definition of a luxury car changed that much, or should you just change the title?

The title of the story was "Top 10 Luxury Vehicles" which allowed us to include various body styles in the list beyond basic four-door sedans. — Ed.


Subject: Top Luxury Cars
From: Anonymous

Just wondering what country you folks are from? I'm an American, and I will always buy American. If you live in, and make your living in the U.S., why couldn't you have found a way to include a few or, gee, just one American car? Sure, you might have had to raise the price level a little, or "broaden your horizons" a bit. Who picked the $45K price limit? Was it someone who wanted to make sure that none of Cadillac's fine cars would be able to compete? Gee, some of the BMWs picked sure looked more like "roadsters" or "coupes"…have you driven a new Corvette lately?

A Volkswagen on the list? Oh, please!!

Get a grip, quit kissing every foreign carmakers a**, and realize that real Americans support America, we get a good laugh from the idiots who think a BMW is a sports car, and better yet, that a Volkswagen is anywhere close to a luxury car.

This article reinforced my thinking. When I'm ready for a new luxury car, I'll once again go to the Cadillac dealer. When my "Vette" has too many miles on it, I'll purchase the next one. For sure, I will not be looking for an opinion from Edmunds!

We should broaden our horizons, huh? Look in the mirror, Captain America, foreign car manufacturers have been creating far more jobs in this country than GM has as of late, and if you think of Volkswagens as "nowhere close to a luxury car" you obviously haven't been in one lately. Our decisions are based on actually driving these cars, not whatever our local Chevrolet/Cadillac dealer tells us. — Ed.


Subject: Vehicles for Shorter People
From: Stephanie

I don't know how many vehicles you tested for this list but I thought I would give my take on the subject. I fudge my height and claim 5 feet although I'm about a quarter inch off and my mother is only 5 feet 2. We are therefore VERY qualified judges for this subject. Over the years of driving, we have discovered that Ford is our best friend. Maybe not on every model, but consistently we have gotten better sightlines and overall "feel" from its vehicles than any other. It has also been our observation that Chevrolet is absolutely the worst pickup designed for short people. They have a much sharper angle on their seats, even the S-10, that forces us to sit on the front edge or we tend to be looking at the sun visor.

Our list of the best vehicles for shorter drivers was compiled using both statistical data and our own experiences with the vehicles themselves. Given that every driver is different in more ways than just their height, we recommended that car buyers test-drive a variety of vehicles to get an idea of which one fits them best. — Ed.


Subject: Bang-On "Most Wanted" Picks!
From: Bruce

Hi, you guys 'n gals!

I've loved cars for over 55 years and I can spot another car lover from 100 feet.

Even though I'm 10,000 kilometres (poncy metrics and 'English' spelling) away in New Zealand — yeah the country that took all the Oscars for Lord of The Rings — I can tell you lot know your cars because your picks are spot-on.

Well done.


Subject: Minivan Comparison — Toyota Previa
From: Susan

"Early in their development, minivans went through an awkward phase that spawned such hideous contraptions as the Dodge Colt Vista, Mitsubishi Expo LRV, Nissan Axxess and Toyota Previa, many of which were really just tall wagons."

I find this quote to be interesting and difficult to comprehend. I've been a Toyota Previa owner for 11 years. I've been searching the market for a vehicle to replace it, as it has become a high-mileage vehicle, and it continues to come out on top. Rightly, the exterior design is a little odd, but the interior works so well, it is impossible to replace. The folding back-row seats were easily moved and with the reversible second row, we've moved large amounts of cargo. I've raised kids through school years, moving to college and back, and this vehicle had room to do it all, plus move people. Service has been minimal, the interior still is in great shape and its basic design makes the cornering far superior to its newest Sienna replacement. I've known numbers of Previa owners, and none would refer to these vehicles as "hideous contraptions," and drove them to the end of their life rather than replace them earlier.

I have no comment on the other "tall wagons" referred to above, but the reference to the Toyota Previa is obviously from someone who didn't use the vehicle.


Subject: 2004 Mazda 6 Hatchback and Wagon
From: Nick

Look, guys, I do respect your publication, but the lead of this story is beyond lazy. Americans (at least those who read the automotive press) gave up the notion of stodgy wagons and rattley hatchbacks since the Avant and sporty Acuras, Hondas and VWs graced stateside showrooms nearly 15 years ago. It looks like it is time to hold your writers to a slightly higher editorial standard.

Although the American public has shown some acceptance of hatchbacks and wagons, compared to buyers in Europe we're still way behind in our appreciation for these practical and good-looking SUV alternatives. Both Honda and Toyota tried selling wagon versions of the Accord and Camry and they both failed miserably, while Volkswagen sells far fewer versions of its Passat and Jetta wagons than it does its sedan counterparts. Certain members of the buying public may have come around to how good today's wagons and hatchbacks are, but more often than not they are shunned because of lingering stereotypes based on outdated misconceptions. — Ed.