[tahdizzle]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

But that's the thing, I have them folded up most of the time for storage space (helmet, laptop, bags in the rear passenger seats) and taking 3+ people places.

If they were eliminated completely I contend that the logical step would be to make the car smaller, sacrificing storage space, something they didn't want to do.

The rear seats are a there based on the space required for Toyota's target market, not a compromise to 'reduce insurance rates'. Just like 911's, Mustangs, BMW M3 etc.

Insurance rate for the 'four seater' Scion was higher (first three, ~$250/mo) than the 'two seater' Miata (second three, ~$200/mo), wouldn't your logic dictate the opposite as the Miata is the less responsible car to own? (Prices based on 2013 model, 20 y.o. driver, high mileage commute, with a clean record, in a high traffic area and el-cheapo insurance companies that aren't the best bargain, just wanted quick baseline comparison)

Engine displacement, # of air-bags, A ROOF, crash test ratings, ALL of these things are considered when calculating insurance rates.

Are you SHOCKED that your 2 door hardtop is cheaper than a 2 seater roadster?

Edit: I apologize, I mis-read.

Now, that is against the norm, but like I said, a lot of things are considered like: engine displacement, power ratings, the average age of owners...