On Jul 4, 3:15 pm, "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:



On Jul 4, 1:51 pm, "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Prius owner are you?
No, I'm not.

The Telegraph should stick to printing planted MI6 stories,
their speciality.

Well at least they got into the thing, and drove it under some
sort of test conditions and compared it with an equivalent small
turbodiesel, and came up with an assessment that isn't entirely
based on wishful thinking.
Which means nothing considering their obvious biased agenda. I don't
need to get into it to know the 'dust to dust' report is skewed.

If you're not an owner have you driven one and read reliable test
reports? Magazines as far apart as Autocar and Which have criticised
the unrealistic running cost claims. Unfortunately since they're based
on official government figures it's not possible to prosecute under
the misleading advertising laws.

But if you're not an owner, why are you so keen on defending the idea?
I don't need to be an owner to defend something that is being
misrepresented.

But the main misrepresenting is in the hype and advertising.

That does not mean that the report is not skewed which is what my post
was about. The 'hype' is subjective anyway.