By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
- What you say will be quoted out of context, to alter the intended meaning.
- Definitions of terms will be changed after the fact, to draw a different conclusion.
- Data from an extreme example will be treated as if it were normal, to create a false average.
- Relevant facts will sometimes be completely ignored, to prevent you from winning an argument.
Don't let any of that bother you. After awhile, observers will notice that behavior and begin disregarding it entirely, allowing you to state your point unimpeded.
As for me, I shared all that I could here. Yesterday was my 4-year anniversary with Prius. It marked the taking of the next step in rollout. People are now well aware of what it is and what it has to offer. Now I'm going to focus much more on showing them, rather than trying to raise awareness. If you need to hunt me down, just look for my "john1701a" id using a popular search engine.
Good luck with your own hybrid endeavors.
JOHN
Best of luck.
while i usually appreciate reading your comments, i must disagree with this statement:
"Also, 1.1 miles is so short of a distance you really should be walking. I did for countless years, even in the dead of Minnesota winter. (Heck, when I go out for a short bike or rollerblade in the evening, I do at least 10 miles.)"
In theory, 1.1 miles SHOULD be within walking distance, but theory hardly ever is practical in real life. There are times when it's very cold, raining, snowing, storming, blistering hot, or any other weather. Plus, it's been mentioned that many people have families. Not many toddlers appreciate the 2.2 mile RT walk as much as the rest of us. Another issue is time. It'll take 40 minutes to walk that far round trip under normal conditions. Many people are quite busy and don't have time to expend walking. In this case, a bike would be much more practical. But again, in less-than-ideal conditions, biking may not be a reasonable endeavor.
I guess what I'm saying is that your statement covers "walking" in general and an umbrella claim that one should walk whenever the distance is < 1.5 miles is just not applicable to all cases.
I just think it's a shame that our country didn't adopt the European model for cities and transportation. They are quite efficient and well-planned.
On another subject, since when is a national crisis constituted by $1.80/gallon gas??? I do believe there are many things more important and urgent than gas prices! If you don't wanna pay so much, GET SOMETHING MORE FUEL EFFICIENT!
When reporting any average MPG number without the details of the drivng conditions, it won't make much sense. What makes most sense for fair comparisons is to simulate the EPA test routine. For the city test, it should be cold engine, 11 miles, 23 stops, flat roads, no wind, 31 minutes, average speed 20MPH, max speed 57MPH, idling x% of the time at the temperature of 70 F, etc.
-juice
If you fill the tank and the batteries are already at full charge and none of that full charge was "free" then the miles you will now accumulate in pure stealth mode should be attributed to the fuel used from the PREVIOUS fill-up.
The only way I can see to get a reasonably accurate MPG rating is to average your computed mileage over say, ten or more fill-ups.
legislation before April 12 when Assembly Bill 2628 will be discussed in the Transportation Committee. It is easy to do by going to http://www.assembly.ca.gov/legcomment and entering
Assembly and bill number 2628. Any comments this bill can get might help it pass. A similar bill to this died last year before action was taken. Let's let them know in Sacramento that we want this bill to pass this time.
I thought it was interesting that CR mentioned the emergency handling was safe and secure, acceleration was on a par with others in the class (mostly 4-cylinder sedans), and that they did not mention anything about problems refueling the car or problems with the gas gauge. The two negatives they highlighted were the lack of feel in the electric steering, and that the multifunction display "may be confusing to some." The plusses they highlighted were fuel economy (duh), responsive transmission, and a well-controlled ride that provides "good isolation and compliance" and a "steady and composed" highway ride. They also highlighted the hatchback versatility of the Prius (none of the other tested cars was a hatchback).
There's a lot more of course, much of which covers ground already discussed at length here.
It will likely average out over many refuelings but trying to compute MPG based on one fill-up will not likely give you an accurate measure.
It wouldn't even help to be sure that the batteries are at the same charge level at each fill-up since there is no way to know how much battery charge was "free" and how much was from the ICE.
Makes one wonder how complex the on-board computer's calculation is. Does it try to adjust the computed MPG based on future mileage stored in the batteries or not?
The burning issue is....
The OBC's computed MPG, versus my own at fill-up, on my 01 RX is always off by some minor, expected, margin. The MPG deviation on my 03 Prius seems to be all over the map, sometimes much wider deviation.
Really just a heads-up for those trying to compute single trip MPG.
You probably can't.
Another tidbit is that this dealer in the Twin Cities now has over 100 names on their Prius waiting list, and people keep jumping on the list even now. They don't seem to care it might be 12-18 months before they get a car. Of course, there's no way to know how many people are on multiple lists, seeing who can deliver first. They might have a shorter wait for a Highlander. There's only 10 names on this dealer's waiting list for the Highlander hybrid so far. With gas prices expected to increase during the summer driving season, I don't see demand slacking off anytime soon, at least not until alternatives like the Highlander and Accord hybrid become available.
You need an absolute minimum of 35 PSI in front (33 PSI in back). Softer will kill efficiency, as well as the tires themselves.
Increasing pressure (always with a 2 PSI bias in front) will both increase MPG and tire life. So it is very worthwhile to give it a try. My preference is 44/42.
What's the deal with tire pressure? I understand that a higher pressure will result in better fuel efficiency, but won't it also result in less tread on the pavement and thus compromise safety? If 44/42 was ideal for the Prius, then why didn't Toyota put it in their owner's manual??
Prius sized tires tend to loose traction by rolling over on the edges (where there is hardly any tire on the road)rather than sliding out laterally. Higher pressure reduces this trend. Experiment if you want. Run your car with 20 psi then 40 psi. There is much more tread on the road at 20 psi, but the car will handle much beter with 40.
http://www.lacar.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&s- id=219
-juice
If the 04 prius actually got between 52 and 60 mpg like the EPA claimed, i'd be impressed. When the 04 prius was first announced, I was impressed. I even tried to defend it as being economical in comparison to certain vehicles. But when real world mpg isn't much better than some conventional vehicles, i'm quite dissapointed. Getting an extra 5 mpg for $6000 extra up front is a sham.
If you're an environmentalist, save the $6000 and put it toward a more efficient furnace in your home, more insulation, or solar cells.
kpoeppel
When do the 2005 Pruis' go on sale? I'm on a list now, Since I'm sure I won't get a price break on a 2004, should I wait for a 2005?
Thanks
If you are on a list now, you might actually get a '05 model! Ask your dealer how long your potential wait is--they can give you a pretty good idea based on their allocations, although strange things can happen and you can suddenly move up the list. If you got on the list before March 10, you will get a $300 price break on the '04--the price just went up $300. But you should get a letter from Toyota regarding a $300 rebate for those who ordered before March 10.
When do the 2005 Pruis' go on sale? I'm on a list now, Since I'm sure I won't get a price break on a 2004, should I wait for a 2005?
Thanks
Prius sized tires tend to loose traction by rolling over on the edges (where there is hardly any tire on the road)rather than sliding out laterally. Higher pressure reduces this trend. Experiment if you want. Run your car with 20 psi then 40 psi. There is much more tread on the road at 20 psi, but the car will handle much beter with 40.
But if it handles better and increases fuel efficiency without sacrificing safety, then why doesn't Toyota recommend the higher pressure?? There must be some trade-off. Will the tires wear out much faster?
If the 04 prius actually got between 52 and 60 mpg like the EPA claimed, i'd be impressed. When the 04 prius was first announced, I was impressed. I even tried to defend it as being economical in comparison to certain vehicles. But when real world mpg isn't much better than some conventional vehicles, i'm quite dissapointed. Getting an extra 5 mpg for $6000 extra up front is a sham.
If you're an environmentalist, save the $6000 and put it toward a more efficient furnace in your home, more insulation, or solar cells.
kpoeppel
Why not just get a moped then? It gets great gas mileage and it's super cheap compared to the Prius.
You might have a point if the two cars were comparably equipped and Toyota was charging 6 grand more for only slightly better fuel economy, but you're comparing a bare-bones Civic Hx with a well-equipped and roomier Prius. Sure, if you don't want to pay the extra money for the CVT, the Smart-start and Smart-entry, HID headlights, VSC, etc., etc., then go for the HX --I'm sure it's a fine car (I used to own a Honda Civic myself and loved it). But if you want all this plus better gas mileage (my average is 50 mpg and I take mostly short trips of 15 mins or less), then consider a Prius. Personally I like the styling better and get a kick out of driving a hybrid.....especially the sweet sound of silence as it shuts down at a stoplight (that's gotta be worth at least a couple of bucks). I'm sure as the weather gets warmer the fuel economy will climb just as surely as the price per gallon.
Oh, and since the typical Prius owner makes over 100K/yr, I'm sure that high efficiency furnace will fit nicely in the cargo area without causing much of a dent in the wallet
I hope to see hybrids suceed, but the current ones still fall short in my humble opinion. Maybe in 10 years or so...
It is--and lower emissions. Compare the fuel economy of the Prius to that of other midsized cars--it's about double theirs. Not too shabby.
Don't overlook other benefits of the Prius:
* quiet, luxurious low speed cruising
* HOV lane access in states like VA (CA soon?)
* state sales tax credits in states like MD
* increased range
* lower emissions
* versatility of a hatchback
* nearly 300 lb-ft of torque at idle
Civic doesn't offer a 5 door body style, plus it's smaller, can't use the HOV lanes in VA, pays 5% sales tax in MD, has less range and almost zero torque at idle...
-juice
So you see, it is all relative and they approximate to the same percentage. Plus you are getting a car that is much better equipped and much better for the environment.
Plus, if you add the AT to the Civic and then choose between your two colors (boy Honda is generous!) and add what you can to get the Civic up to what the Prius comes standard with (and you can't get those things - not even power windows - you are talking over $17k.
45 seems to be when people are complaining.
Take a look at the current Consumer Reports issue for a review of the Prius vs. four other similarly priced and sized midsized cars. Their mpgs were all in the low to mid 20s. One had a small V6, the others were fours. Performance was comparable for the tested vehicles, according to CR, with the Galant being a mite quicker than the rest of the pack. That might give you some idea of what would happen if you were to drop a regular ICE powertrain into a Prius. For another example, look at the Toyota Matrix, which is about the same size and weight as the Prius, or the four-cylinder Camry.
It's technically possible to produce a vehicle like that now. In fact the French did something like it 25 years ago.
Motor car companies need to get off their lazy butts and INNOVATE!
First - EPA sets the mileage figure not the manufacturer. Toyota by law can only use the EPA rated values.
Second - The EPA test methods do not simulate real driving. Check out how they test on their web site.
Third - I hate it when you ask someone what their mileage is and they quote a number from a trip as if it was an average. If I did that then my 2004 Prius gets 55.6 (My last trip of 140 miles).
Go look at the long term tests here at Edmunds or MT, C & D and you will see, regardless of models, that the average always falls a little below or occasionally equal to the EPA city rating. As a matter of fact the percentage of discrepancy is about equal to the Prius.
Here are 2 examples. EPA ratings and actual long term here at Edmunds.
2004 Honda Accord EX 4 cyl auto
EPA - city = 24, Highway - 33
Long term - worst = 15.4, best = 26.2 for 15,391 miles.
Mazda 6 6cyl maual
EPA - city = 19, Highway - 27
Long term - worst = 14.6, best = 26.4 for 17,211 miles.
My Prius
EPA - city = 60, Highway - 51
Long term - worst = 40.6, best = 55.6 for 3200 miles.
My Prius got better than the EPA highway while the othe 2 fell short.
Notice that worst for 2 of the cars are around the same percentage. Mazda did better.
Prius 32% worse
Honda 35% worse
Mazda 23% worse
You can review all the other cars and the difference between their worse and city EPA mileage are in line with both the Honda and Prius
If you look at the Accord board the average gas mileage is 28-32 well within the 34-24 EPA range. I have an Accord and have never gotten below 26 mpg on any tank in 21000 miles of driving. I also have only had 3 tanks above the 34 mpg. The Prius gets great mileage, but just ignore the EPA numbers. Unlike 99% of the other models on the road, it appears that the Hybrids do not regularly get within the EPA range.
What Toyota has finally done is make a real-world, user-friendly car that gets 40+ mpg in every-day use. CU averaged 44, MT 41+, and it's clear from the posters here that mid-40s is a reasonable expectation.
Both the EPA and Toyota agree that the EPA testing cycle simply moves the numbers to another planet - so what? That fact doesn't change the bottom line. On THIS planet, the car is still pretty unique - which is why they can't make enough of them.
Mazda3 only comes with the non-PZEV 2.3l for now, but it might get the PZEV 2.0l later, who knows?
Other 5 door PZEVs include the Focus 2.3l and the Outback.
-juice
My 2004 Prius avg is 44.8 for 3200 miles. This comparison is not fair because I got the Prius on Dec. 3 and most of my driving was in very cold temps.
My last 2 tanks have been 48.3 and 49.6 with warmer weather. I expect my average for the year will be around 50.
Interestingly I lose only about 4% in summer with the A/C running.
So the cold has a bigger effect on my fuel efficiency than A/C does.
-juice
Rich