Scot’s Newsletter Blog

It’s not exactly hot news any longer, but earlier this month Honda and Toyota pre-announced new or improved small hybrid vehicles. In Honda’s case, it was a brand new platform with an old name, the 2010 Honda Insight. In Toyota’s case, it was the redesigned 2010 Prius.

The 2010 Honda Insight

Honda has revealed more information than Toyota has about the new Insight, so it’s easier to analyze its pluses and minuses. The 5-door Insight’s styling is very similar to the Prius’s (although it can be argued the Toyota borrowed from Honda’s styling of the original Insight when it created the Prius). With the Prius as the benchmark, though, you might sum up by saying that the Insight is less in several regards: The overall size is smaller, the gas engine is smaller, its EPA fuel economy is rated at 40/43, and it’s expected to be less expensive than the Prius (although, neither manufacturer has revealed pricing as I write this).

Specifically, the new Honda Insight has a 1.3-liter semisingle-overhead-cam, 8-valve, 4-cylinder engine that makes 98 horsepower. By U.S. standards, that’s a small engine for a car whose curb weight is 2723 pounds. The 10-kilowatt electric motor delivers 13 hp. It should be noted that Honda’s hybrid technology uses a very small “assist” electric motor. (For comparison, Toyota’s 2009 Prius employs a much larger 50-kilowatt, 67-horsepower electric motor. According to Toyota’s preliminary specifications, the 2010 Prius’ electric motor will make 80 horsepower.)

The Insight has a continuously-variable transmission (CVT), like that of the Prius and many other hybrids. The battery pack is nickel-metal hydride, like those used by Toyota hybrids. The wheelbase is 100.4 inches. Honda’s approach is to go smaller and lighter — a strategy that makes sense given that the power-to-weight ratio is a big issue in hybrid vehicles, and even more importantly, weight has a huge impact on fuel economy.

Pricing is an important part of the Insight value proposition. Although Honda has not released pricing, industry observers have pegged it as possibly starting as low as $18,000 or $19,000, which is several thousand dollars less than the 2009 Prius.

But is less really more? That’s difficult to judge from a spec sheet. The Insight is expected to be available in April. Honda’s Insight website offers detailed specs, but for more information, see the 2010 Honda Insight press release.

Finally, I was let down by the final design and trim out of the 2010 Honda Insight. It doesn’t live up to the concept vehicles that came before it. To me it looks faintly reminiscent of a smaller 2001 Dodge Stratus with a Prius rear end. The front grill looks cheesy. Honda’s U.S. vehicles have, in general, lost their design appeal. My 1989 Accord was gorgeous in comparison with the current day Accord. The 2010 Insight isn’t butt ugly, like the previous generations of the Prius. It’s just bland.

The third-generation 2010 Prius

Toyota is calling this vehicle its “third generation Prius,” but as I predicted in earlier posts, it does not offer a lighter-weight lithium-ion battery pack. There are significant hurdles of safety and manufacturing that Toyota and others have not been able to iron yet pertaining to mass production lithium-ion batteries for hybrid vehicles. Even so, Toyota has managed to upgrade its technology in several significant ways.

The conservative body changes are also not the “pretty Prius” that was heavily rumored last year. The biggest change is is a nearly four-inch pushback of the hump in the roofline and some pillar repositioning to improve aerodynamics and deliver more rear-seat headroom where it’s needed. The cargo area is over two inches wider, and a tad longer. Toyota claims that the redesign also reduces the new Prius’ coefficient of drag to an impressive 0.25 (down from 0.26).

The 2010 Prius gets a larger, higher torque 98-horsepower Atkinson-cycle 1.8-liter 4-cylinder engine. Toyota says this larger engine (the old one was 1.61.5 liters) will deliver better fuel economy at highway speeds because it will be strong enough to run in a higher gear range (added for the 2010 Prius), even on inclines. And while this hasn’t been EPA-tested yet, Toyota is predicting 50/ 50 miles per gallon in combined driving.

Several changes are aimed at reducing power consumption. Toyota lightened its electric motivation system by trimming the size and weight of the electric motor, inverter, and transaxle. (Imagine if they paired that with a lighter battery pack.) The new Prius also offers LED low-beam headlights on some trim lines. The air conditioning system has been reengineered for cool-down efficiency.

Perhaps more importantly for those in colder climes, the heating system is more efficient in the 2010 Prius. I get about 5 miles per gallon less in the dead of winter in my 2007 Toyota Highlander Hybrid. The Prius probably doesn’t take this much of a hit because it was designed from scratch as a hybrid. The Highlander Hybrid’s heat is slow to take effect, so you really need the anemic heated seat to get through a New England winter. The gas engine has to run more frequently to make cabin heat. On really cold days, I’m not driving for gas mileage — I’m driving to warm up!

The new Prius has several new systems and functions that may be more glitzy than truly useful. But they’re also kind of cool. For example, an optional sliding-glass moonroof contains solar panels that can power a ventilation system even when the car is parked and off. It reduces cabin temperature on sunny days, reducing the initial cool-down period for air conditioning.

Some of the more advanced — and clearly in need of real-world testing — features include Dynamic Radar Cruise Control, Lane Keep Assist, the Pre-Collision System, and Intelligent Parking Assist. Each of these uses technology designed to save you from yourself, and, as such, I’m not a big fan. On the other hand, I haven’t tried them either.

Toyota’s 2010 Prius website is a triumph of form over function that doesn’t actually impart much more than basic bullet points about what’s new. Even the pictures of the new Prius there are based on a late prototype, not the final vehicle. The 2010 Prius press release is far more detailed. Check it out for more information. Until there are more hard facts on the 2010 Prius, you can refer to the 2009 Prius specs for details, since many things — such as its 106.3-inch wheelbase — are unchanged.

My On-Paper Assessment

It should be noted that while both the Insight and Prius are 5-door hatchbacks, the Prius is larger than the Insight. It’s also likely that the Prius base price will be at least $2,000 more than that of the Insight, and the cost delta could be as much as $5,000. Toyota is very busy watching its bottom line these days. The point: These cars are not really quite in the same class. If you want a low-cost hybrid that gets over 40 mpg and has a back seat and a fifth door, the Honda may be just fine for your needs.

Based on the specs we have to date, however, for me it would be no contest in favor of the Prius. I believe performance, both in terms of pick up and gas mileage, will be better in the Toyota hybrid. (The Honda is very likely to offer better handling.) The Prius also offers more cargo space. These are the most important things to me.

In the real world where people have varying priorities, there’s more than enough room for two 5-door hybrids. Both vehicles will be successful, and despite their similarity in appearance, will appeal to different types of buyers.

Tweet Delicious Digg Ping.fm Reddit Stumble Upon

I am not impressed with Windows 7 Beta 1. While virtually every reviewer, including my friend and Computerworld’s lead Windows editor and reviewer, Preston Gralla, is for the most part praising Windows 7, Beta 1 is every bit the pig that Windows Vista is. How could reviewers be missing that? The earlier Alpha was fast — even I said so. This beta is not.

For those of you who downloaded the new Windows 7 beta, try launching two Windows at once or loading two Internet Explorer windows. Try deleting one large folder of files, and then while that’s taking forever to delete, try deleting another. Or really anything that involves walking and chewing bubble gum. Like Windows Vista before it, Windows 7 Beta 1 is sluggish, glitchy, and inconsistent. It may be fast for a while, here and there, but as soon as you really press it, performance folds up like a house of cards.

It took me 30 minutes to figure out how to avoid using the brain-dead “HomeGroup” feature to share files and folders on a wireless network. Windows 7 kept telling me that it was sharing the files on the “domain” that was the workstation name of my Windows 7 computer, not the workgroup name on my network (you know, like, “Workgroup”). In fact, there’s no place that I can find within the Network and Sharing Center to create or change the workgroup name. In other words, Microsoft removed this ability in Windows 7, since Vista’s Network and Sharing Center had it. Eventually, I just rebooted Windows 7 and it started recognizing the workgroup name of the other computers connected to it (I wanted to see whether the incorrect workgroup name was a bug or a feature — it was a bug). Yes, you can still change the workgroup name several levels deep under the System Control Panel, but that’s not even slightly intuitive for the uninitiated.

I suppose I should score something in Windows 7’s favor because I was at least able to network with Beta 1, something I gave up on with the Alpha version. Microsoft still doesn’t get networking. In trying to make it more and more a wizard process, it has needlessly complicated it for people who already know what they’re doing. It comes down to this, if the only way we’re being given tools to network requires us to use the HomeGroup, the new name for the Windows Networking Wizard, something is awry. HomeGroup assigns you a cryptic password which you must “write down” to remember, and every computer on your network has to use it. You can’t change this password. And, as with the Alpha version, I don’t see a way to network using HomeGroup with a Linux or Mac machine. (For additional information on the operation of Homegroup, please see the more recent post, Windows 7 Homegroup not so hot in Beta 1.)

The new taskbar, missing from the Alpha code, wasn’t worth the wait. It’s not special. The windows-management features first shown in the Alpha are pretty cool. But the new taskbar is a pale imitation of the Mac’s Dock feature. I suppose that if you’ve never used the Mac’s Dock, you’ll find this innovative. But if you have, you’ll recognize the fact that Microsoft hasn’t improved on it in any meaningful way.

For pictures of the new Windows 7 Beta 1 features, including the new taskbar, see the image gallery for Preston’s Gralla’s Computerworld review of Windows 7 Beta 1.

Other new features include Jump Lists (prettier context menus with new functions) and Aero Peek (yet another way to look behind opened windows). But let me expose this for what it is: Fluffy UI stuff to help make you feel good about a warmed over version of Windows Vista with a new name. Taken as a whole, the changes so far shown in Windows 7 are minor.

In Beta 1, I continue to be happy with total gag order Microsoft gave User Account Control (UAC) by default. It makes using Windows 7 far less annoying. But taking away a bad idea also isn’t that big a deal. You could turn off UAC in Vista too.

Yes, Windows 7 Beta 1 is better than Vista, but if Microsoft doesn’t do serious work on the next version of Windows’ ability to run tasks simultaneously, on software quality, on adding that feeling of effortlessness that the Alpha displayed, I won’t be likely to recommend it. Microsoft needs to do well with this version of Windows. It needs to change the perception of what it’s like to use Windows. Beta 1 is not confidence inspiring in that direction. And for those of you wondering, I clean installed these new Windows 7 bits on the same machine I used for my Alpha review. While no barn burner, it’s a respectable 2.0 GHz Core Duo with a decent graphics subsystem. I purchased it in 2006 to evaluate Windows Vista’s Media Center functionality.

Beta 1 is a prerelease version of Windows 7, so I’m not drawing conclusions this early. But having reviewed every beta and gold release of Windows since Windows 3.0, I’m seeing the beginning of a pattern I’ve seen before: Windows gets slower and less responsive as it gets closer to being released.

At some point you have to just say no to more features and services that build unsustainable overhead. When you use other operating systems — such as Linux and OS X — it becomes clear that Microsoft and its OEM PC manufacturers really don’t care about the fact that Windows is perennially overtaxed.

Tweet Delicious Digg Ping.fm Reddit Stumble Upon