1200lbs

The Matrix is rated to tow 120llbs. It's perfect for hauling that 4'x8' utility trailer to the hardware store and back.

The Prius V doesn't seem to be up to that task; at least Toyota doesn't think so, and when my wife hopped in to the back seat of the Prius V, the suspension sunk far more than either of us would like to admit -- so some rear suspension modifications would probably be required to tow a trailer with a 150lb tunge weight gracefully.

So, yeah, I can see a reason to have both a Matrix and a Prius V in my driveway.

"Never mind the inefficiencies of nickel-metal-hydride batteries, the problem with hybrids is the maintenance costs of both the gas engine and the electric powertrain."

I see your reasoning, but it doesn't match my experience as a Prius owner.

But that hasn't been true with the 2nd-gen Prius in my driveway. Toyota built the thing to be reliable, and it's had the lowest TCO of just about any car that I or anyone in my family has owned. It's certainly comparable (TCO-wise) with the Honda Accords and other conventional Japanese cars we've owned.

The fact of the matter is that the Prius, especially the second generation one, is just a very reliable and efficient car.

Whether this holds for the Volt, though, remains to be seen!

Yawn. Hybrids have been past the show-car / celebrity car / halo stage. Time to make a cost effective strong-hybrid pickup truck and actually sell it.

One big feature that was touted on some GM hybrid pickup trucks: onboard AC power for running power tools at the jobsite. Not mentioned in the article and, if done right, it could be a big deal for both contractors and RVers.

" I've yet to see writers here angry about Toyota not being serious about EVs, nor Honda, either. Chrysler, either, but."

Toyota didn't crush the RAV4 EVs. And they did make a new electric-ish technology available.

GM crushed the EV1 and then tried to tell us that their Malibu BAS system was as good as the Prius. And people tell us we all should love GM because they're an American company that provides lots of jobs in oindustrial heartland, despite their past refusal to make good small/efficient cars for the US market.

It's not usually made as part of the argument, but Toyota has catered to the efficiency enthusiast market, while GM dismissed it and literally crushed some people's hopes. The Volt is a solid step, though.

Perhaps the cost to fill up a snow machine or ATV would be more relevant than a Tahoe?

Wake me when the configurator includes the rumored turbodiesel engine.

Until then, the CX-5 is just another crossover that the press suggests has better handling and worse towing than the Escape. My 10 year old Escape is fine in the handling department, so meh. Put a diesel in it, though, and I'm excited.

Grammar. Just shoot me now.

Grammer correction:
If you're referring to the Tesla Model S Pricelist here:
http://www.teslamotors.com/models/options
I remain skeptical.

Where does your $400/KWH number come from?

If you're referring to the Tesla Model S Pricelist here:
http://www.teslamotors.com/models/options

Here's why:
1. Assuming that the cars are actually being priced at-cost, the marginal-price-per-KWH is $500/KWH when moving from the 40KWH model to to 60KWH model, and it's $400/KWH when moving from the 60KWH model to the 80KWH model.
2. The cars are not priced at cost. We don't know what their bill-of-materials looks like.
3. Maybe they make less money on the higher end vehicles. Serious luxury cars cost $50k, and they expected to sell more of the low-production-cost base models, so maybe they chose a higher margin on that car than the others.

I'd love to hear the logic behind your number.