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
You can come up with any explanation of why it shouldn't happen you like. It is a real thing. Denying it is silly. Just about every owner sees it and Toyota warns about it.
In the summertime the bladder is already fully 'relaxed' and can take a full shot.
The
Over the course of a year and keeping track tank by tank by tank manually it all evens out, miles driven/fuel purchased. I ignore the trip computer.
1. Is this similiar to other's experiences?
2. Does this argue for filling more often rather than less often?
So far I'm getting 56 MPG imperial, 4.9 l/100 km, or 48 MPG US. This is fuel purchased and distance traveled since purchase of the car.
You're formula assumes there is no cost to polluting the air, and global warming.
First of all: you are not REALLY getting higher mileage on the "top 1/4" of your gasoline tanks.
It just seems that way because of the way the computer in the Prius calculates mileage.
If you are using the car computer's numbers and not the old-fashioned "miles driven divided by gallons pumped" calculation, then you are being fooled.
The only correct way to properly calculate your MPG is to keep track of the miles driven between fill-ups and the gallons pumped at the fill-up and then divide the miles driven in that tank by the gallons pumped at that fill-up.
Give it a try........and don't be fooled by the FCD........
Got the car $1200 off sticker, bought Platinum extended warranty for $1,200 (Six years/ 100,000 miles bumper to bumper, $0 deductible)
Hope this helps..Sam
Separately, when we were having problems with our Volvo S60 which requires premium at sea level but are advised to use mid-grade where we live, that dealer recommended that we avoid non-branded fuels (Costco, Safeway Markets, etc.) as they tend to purchase inventory from whomever's around and has the best price. With a given brand (Sinclair, Shell, Bradley, etc.) you're going to get a more consistant product. Also, he said if you see the tanker-truck at your local station making a delivery to keep on driving by and go someplace else or come back when things "settle down" in the storage tank. Seems logical to me but I can't back that up with any facts or bad experience.
1) Aerodynamic Drag
2) Mechanical Drag
3) Tire Rolling Resistance
4) Heating/Air Conditioning & Electronics
5) Road Rolling Resistance
Prius drivers have for years reported a perplexingly wide spectrum of mileage figures stating lifetime MPG figures all the way from the mid 30's clear up into the 60's.
There are many reasons for this; a few of which I will list below. This list is niether exhaustive nor in order of importance:
1) Tire pressure
2) Engine Oil viscosity
3) Engine Oil level
4) Road Surfaces
5) Winds
6) Ambient Temperatures
7) Elevation above sea level
8) Operating Speeds
9) Fuel Blends
10) Humidity
11) Barometric Pressure
12) Heater or AC settings & use
One item in the above list is 'Wind." Take for instance an 8 MPH Wind; which is almost impossible to discern when travelling down the highway. Let's see what an 8 MPH wind alone can do to Prius mileage. Putting the following variables into a Simulator :
Temperature: 88 F
Wind Dir: as per table below
Wind Speed: 8 MPH
Barometer: 30.03 inHg
Humidity: 64% (Relative Humidity)
Elevation: 410 ft. above sea level
AutoAC: ON
Climate Cntrl: 75 F
Fuel: 115,400 BTU/Gal-US (RFG Reformulated Gasoline)
Fuel kWh: 33,557
Tire Rolling Resistance: 0.0077 (Prius OEM @ 38/36 psi front/rear)
Road Rolling Resistance: 0.001144 (Smooth Dry Asphalt)
Cd: 0.26 (Coefficient of Drag)
FA: 2.16 m^2 (Frontal Area in meters squared)
cwCd: 0.000014 (Crosswind Corrected Coeficient of Drag)
cwFA: 0.000085 (Crosswind Corrected Frontal Area)
After putting the above variables in the simulator and only changing the 8 MPH wind direction as per the table below, we get the following MPG Values at these different speeds:
SPEED.....8 MPH-33° Crosswind......8 MPH-180° Tailwind
20 MPH........85.50 MPG....................95.44 MPG
30 MPH........76.58 MPG....................91.13 MPG
40 MPH........68.35 MPG....................85.42 MPG
50 MPH........55.24 MPG....................71.32 MPG
60 MPH........49.29 MPG....................64.83 MPG
70 MPH........42.71 MPG....................56.66 MPG
80 MPH........37.39 MPG....................49.70 MPG
90 MPH........32.54 MPG....................43.14 MPG
100MPH........27.49 MPG....................36.27 MPG
Winds can really make a big difference. Interestingly, the average wind speed across the USA is 8.5 MPH; with slightly higher speeds in the northern states vs. the southern states.
Another very interesting 'Wind' fact is that winds are detrimental to mileage 70% of the time & only beneficial 30% of the time as illustrated in this image:
It is not easy always knowing why your Prius is getting good mileage one day vs. another until all of the above variables are taken into consideration & MOST ESPECIALLY WINDS.
Can you simulate rain a) normal rain, b) downpour?
My own estimation from the MFD is that the fuel economy reduction factor is about 15-25% of 'normal'.
Very good point! Rain has a very big impact on mileage. Let's input the same variables into the simulator except for two items; let's change the Wind to NONE or 0 MPH & then we will change the RRR (Road Rolling Resistance) to show a Light Rain, Mild Rain, Heavy Rain & let's throw in Deep Gravel also:
Temperature: 88 F
Wind Dir: NONE
Wind Speed: 0 MPH
Barometer: 30.03 inHg
Humidity: 64% (Relative Humidity)
Elevation: 410 ft. above sea level
AutoAC: ON
Climate Cntrl: 75 F
Fuel: 115,400 BTU/Gal-US (RFG Reformulated Gasoline)
Fuel kWh: 33,557
Tire Rolling Resistance: 0.0077 (Prius OEM 38/36 psi front/rear)
Road Rolling Resistance: As per table below
Cd: 0.26 (Coefficient of Drag)
FA: 2.16 m^2 (Frontal Area in meters squared)
cwCd: 0.000014 (Crosswind Corrected Coeficient of Drag)
cwFA: 0.000085 (Crosswind Corrected Frontal Area)
MPH.....NoRain.....LightRain....MildRain.....HeavyRain.....DeepGravel
20.........91.15..........77.80........72.33...........68.16...........55.79
30.........84.35..........71.78........66.65...........62.76...........51.23
40.........77.20..........66.35........61.86...........58.42...........48.13
50.........63.49..........55.40........51.98...........49.33...........41.24
60.........57.26..........50.79........47.99...........45.80...........38.94
70.........49.93..........44.98........42.79...........41.05...........35.50
80.........43.84..........40.05........38.34...........36.96...........32.48
90.........38.18..........35.30........33.97...........32.90...........29.33
So yes, your estimation of 15%-25% is right in the ballpark!
Elevation & Temperature too have large impacts on mileage.
Best Regards,
If I am looking at 20-30 mpg, that is frustrating. My '91 Civic, with 271K+ miles on its 95hp, 1.5L, gets 32-34mpg during the winter or summer in the city. And last fall, I made a trip to Boise, Idaho in it and averaged better than 42mpg at 70-75 mph. What is wrong with this picture? A 16 going on 17 year old car, that burns a quart of oil every 1000 miles gets the mileage that these new hybrids get? Something sounds wrong to me. I am half tempted to just rebuild the motor in my Civic and get a good body from down south somewhere and laugh my butt off at these full-sized SUVs.
I guess, for me, the $300 I bought the car for 4 years and 120K miles ago + the cost of rebuilding the motor is more cost justifiable than spending 25K+ for a car that might get less mileage than the one I have. LOL
Anyway, if there is someone out there that lives somewhere in northern Michigan, Wisconsin, or Minnesota that can shed some light on their experiences, I would greatly appreciate it!!!
Have fun all!!
First, modern cars must get good crash ratings. To do this you will no longer see 2000 lb cars. Looks like 2800 lb and up is now the norm. Weight kills mileage.
Second, modern cars must keep emissions very low. To do this they have to keep the cat. and engine warm. That requires extra fuel. Some even have to cool the cat. in certain circumstances, and they inject extra fuel with no oxygen to do that. This all results in more fuel burned, more CO2 produced, but less CO, NOx, and hydrocarbons emitted.
Finally, we now drive at 70 - 75 MPH without thinking it's fast. Much higher speeds than even 10 years ago. Speed is a big mileage killer!
The old high mileage cars such as the early Civic, Suzuki, and others that got 45-50 MPG wouldn't pass current emission standards for new cars, nor would they be as safe in an accident. I wouldn't want one. My Prius does just fine, thank you. Don't expect 60 MPG though. Use the new ratings, which indicate 48 MPG overall for a Prius. Which, coincidentally, is just what I'm averaging since I got my car. I expect it to improve a bit, but get a lot worse in winter.
I haven't yet had the winter experience with my Prius, but I expect the engine will not want to shut down very often, based on other's experiences. This will result in poorer mileage, just like any other car in winter. I've seen most reports of 35 to 40 MPG in the northern US and southern Canada (the parts that get -real- winter). You do have to block the air intakes on the front of the car (many use the black foam plastic pipe insulation). Also, a block heater is a good thing (available from some US dealers, and most Canadian ones). Short trips will also yield poorer mileage in a Prius. In non-winter weather, mileage is lower for the first 5 min. of driving - around 35-40 MPG. In winter, it's more like the first 10-15 min. before the car warms up. Once warm, you can get 50 MPG and up, but the average will suffer due to the warmup losses.
It's the regulators, not the car manufacturers that are driving all this. Last fall the US Supreme Court ruled that CO2 was a pollutant that the EPA could regulate. If the political will is there, that could result in a "remix" of the control factors that -could- result in better mileage and lower CO2 with only a slight increase in CO, NOx, and hydrocarbons. We shall see. I'm not holding my breath.
Ummm, both old and new cars go the same (faster) speeds, so I don't see how this affects the modern designs more than the older vehicles...
"It's the regulators, not the car manufacturers that are driving all this. Last fall the US Supreme Court ruled that CO2 was a pollutant that the EPA could regulate."
No, not quite. They said that the EPA had to make a determination if CO2 was a pollutant, not that it is a pollutant subject to regulation. So the EPA has to weigh in on the subject - which it has yet to do.
However, I disagree with the premise that modern small ICE-only cars cannot get good MPG. I think that the Honda Fit (for example) will do similar MPG in winter as summer, which is to say around 38 MPG highway - rather less than summer MPG for a hybrid (depends on the hybrid driving style), but possibly more than winter MPG for a hybrid. For someone who makes very short trips (at any time of the year), where the hybrid components don't function to their maximum, a small ICE-only vehicle may actually yield better MPG. And the Fit is a safe car. So is the Toyota Yaris, and any number of other small vehicles from several manufacturers.
The Honda Fit gets much poorer mileage in winter than summer, just like any other vehicle. It also gets poorer mileage in EPA comparisons and the "real world" than the Prius. My Prius is so far at 48 MPG overall average (fuel used vs distance traveled since purchased), and does that even on the highway. Of course, if I drive at elevated speeds, the mileage drops. I see 6 l/100 km at 120 km/hr (that's around 40 MPG at around 80 MPH). The Fit and Yaris would get worse mileage at that speed.
The Hybrid system is there to allow the small 1.5 l engine to operate in its' efficient range and to recover energy normally lost in city driving. It does have less effect on the highway, except it is used to give a boost to the ICE from time to time (quite a lot, actually), to help maintain speed without loosing ICE efficiency from throttle burping. The CVT also helps with this.
I didn't say or imply that modern small cars were unsafe, in fact, I said/implied the opposite. They are safe cars because they have been designed to meet tougher crash standards. I said they are just heavier cars, and because of this and the tighter pollution standards, they don't get the mileage of previous generation "small cars", such as the 80s Civic.
1. My mother-in-law owns a Fit, and her mileage does not change significantly during winter. Maybe 1 MPG or so. The 38 MPG highway (at 80 MPH) I mentioned was real world, not EPA.
2. I think my statement about very short trips in a small modern car vs. a hybrid are still valid. Under certain special circumstances the small car might be the better choice, especially when purchase price is considered.
3. RE: Weight. The Fit weighs 2500 lbs with the AT (2300 with MT). That is still pretty light. My point about modern cars and safety is that the small cars I was mentioning (like the Fit) have both very good MPG and high safety - one does not have to accept increased weight in exchange for safety.
I am wondering, what is the actually gas tank size in the Prius? I know the specs say, 11.9 gallons, but I've yet to fill more than 10 gallons. Is there some reserve?
I guess I just don't understand. If they can make a 427 cu in small block Chevrolet get 28mpg on the highway, why can they not get a 1.0-1.5 Liter get 5-6 times that? Ok, so maybe 5-6 times that is not completely realistic, but how about maybe 3-4 times that? I don't see any reason why not.
As for the supreme court's ruling that the EPA needs to take a look at whether CO2 is a polutant or not... You people need to call your congressman and have them put some pressure on the EPA. Every time you or anyone else on this planet exhales, you are sending out CO2. If they come out and say that it is polution, it won't be long before we as people will have to pass smog tests. "No more than X breaths per day, or you will get fined for poluting!"
All jokes aside, every living organism generates CO2. Including plants after dark. If everyone is truly worried about CO2, get out and plant more trees. Better yet, stop mowing down an entire acre to build one house. Just take out the trees where the house will be and leave the rest. The more trees and vegetation we have, the less you have to worry about CO2.
The winter/summer mileage difference is not much, by my account. Maybe, at most, 1 mpg for my civic. Nothing for me to worry about. I do not have a block heater installed, and I drive 2 miles to work, and still consistently get 34-35 mpg in the city, and 42+ on the highway(70-75 mph), even in the winter. If I do 80, it drops to about 38mpg, and if I hold it to 62 mph, it will get 47.5 mpg. My '91 Civic weighs about 2400 pounds. And like I mentioned in my previous post, it has 270K+ miles on it and burns more than a quart of oil every 1000 miles. Not bad for a wasted motor.
As for the "safety" issue. I don't know about you, but I don't get on the road saying to myself, "Oh I think I am want to have an accident today." I have no tickets, and no accidents. Period. Not bad for a 28 year old living in a place where more accidents are caused by excessive speed, drinking, or hitting deer, than anything else. Basically, mostly stupid people doing stupid things. There should be no reason for a rearend collision. If you weren't following too close, and doing 15-20 mph over the speed limit, you would have plenty of time to see the person in front of you stopped. To cut this short, I think that if people, in general, would use a little more common sense, and good judgement while driving, there would be no reason for "side curtain air bags" or "crumple zones".
If I had it my way, if I were to buy a brand new car, I wouldn't take it until all the ABS, Air bags, traction control, backup cameras, DVD players, TVs of any kind, and anything else that takes the drivers attention off the road, or takes control of the vehicle away from the driver, were removed from the vehicle. So I may be a dummy to say they least.
Enough of my ranting. Someone do something about the mileage on these new vehicles!! The more I read, the more I am disgusted!!! :mad:
The fuel will expand roughly 0.5 to 1 litre, based on roughly .1%/deg C, underground tank at 15 C, air at 30 C. One litre will be burned in about 20 km in my Prius. You'd better fill up at a station a long way away from home or work, or wherever you plan to stop, and drive fast as the expansion will occur in 20-30 min. This does not account for the higher temp reached by the car sitting in the sun. This also does not account for the air trapped in the tank. There will be some. It will quickly cool to the fuel temp as you fill up from evaporation and splashing. It will expand more than the fuel, giving extra pressure to force the fuel through the evaporative canister (if it isn't at the vent - and it appearantly isn't, as this has happened to a few unlucky owners).
I have overfilled my car twice due to nossles that didn't shut off. I noticed an extra 80-100 km on the tank. So I surmise the amount of fuel from "normal" nossle shutoff to filling to the top of the filler tube is 4-5 litres.
I guess I don't understand. What 7 Liter displacement engine gets 28 MPG on the highway? ( 427 cu in = 6997.27 cc, i.e. just about 7L).
Are you talking about a 1960s or 1970's car without modern smog controls?
EPA 18/28 with more horsepower than any of the old 427s.
(16/26 for the 427 cubic inch Z06)
2006/2007 models. The 60s and 70s models got worse mileage.
By your logic, why not just make a one cubic inch motor and get 12,000 miles per gallon?
One of my closest friends has a C6 and we go to corvette shows very often. He can occasionally get 28-32 mpg in his corvette and all the Z06 owners report that if they do 70mph highway they can get like 27-29 but almost never see 30 or higher unless they are traveling downhill for a long period OR have a strong tailwind.
That said.. the prius is known to have seen 80-90 mpg on some highway stints.. downhill and with tailwind..
SO lets go by the AVERAGE:
Corvette (from our experience) ; 25-27 MPG
Corvette ZO6 (from other drivers); 23-26 MPG
Prius Owners (highway) ; 46-49 MPG
So just under double..
now also consider that the prius holds 5 people.. if we were to schrink the car to hold just 2 people.. (ie Insight) I'm sure we could increase gas mileage by about 7-9 mpg.
LASTLY - the whole 7 liters getting that much why cant a 1.5 liter get x amount of miles:
You can't just shrink the engine size and expect to double.. in that case why does the 7 liter corvette "Only" have 80 more HP than the 4.2 liter Audi RS4 engine? Liter for liter it should be 700hp.
Also, just because the engine is cut in size.. the CAR weight is still the same.
Sorry about my rant.. BTW - my corvette buddy makes fun of me and my wife's prius.. but whenever we all go out.. guess who's driving..
AND he plays with all the gadgets and gizmos in the car.. and we average about 48-50 mpg summer and 43-46 mpg winter. We will be getting an engine block heater soon - $29 and it supposedly helps winter mileage by about 1-2 mpg.
Overall we are very happy with the car and love how there are no pollutants.. if you ever flew into LA you would understand the impact we have! (I live in Philly though and hope that it never looks like LA).
YES, on the 80-90 mpg numbers. I posted some time back about a 50+ mile return run from a ski area on I-70 that put me in the driveway at 87 mpg.
DOUBTFUL, on maintaining your 46-49 highway with 5 people. Is that how many folks you had in the car when your arrived at the number? My experience is that, on highway trips, each person "costs" about 2mpg.
Rockies to Bend, Oregon with wife in the car, 51 mpg. Bend to Rockies after wife had flown home, 53 mpg. (Figure into this a 5,000 ft net gain on the return trip.) Scientific? By no means, but it's something I'll be keeping my eye on.
Hope This Helps
If we value our country, our Troops and our way of life, we must do all we can to get more MPG.
Slow Down, Drive Less, Buy a fuel efficient car. United We Stand Divided We Fall. We Must All Pull Together To Become Free Of This Oil Habit. Our Country Comes First Not Our Comfort.
Rob
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/WebX/.f0db6d9/359
Specifically, notes about seats, driver height, non-telescoping steering wheel, etc.
Thanks for the link to that excellent report. It appears that the Prius is a capable highway cruiser. I'm going to take a test drive very soon. Do you know of any rebates or incentives on the Prius?
Here's a list...vaya!
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/WebX/.ef28f8b/
I now own an '04 with 160,000+ miles. I have the oil changed every 5000 miles. At each 50,000 miles I have other routine service done. I replaced the 12 volt battery at 130,000 miles. I replaced the plugs, serpentine belt and water pump at 155,000 miles. The belt was not worn out, just frayed. The water pump was "weeping", so I replaced it while the belt was off. This is the best car I've ever owned. I recommend it to anyone who asks about it. I now have 9 friends who own Priuses and as far as I know there have been no major problems of any kind with any of them.
I li ve in CT in a hilly region of the state. I often commute into NYC and drive to Rhode Island. I do a lot of highway driving as well as short up and down hill trips. I tend to average 46 MPG overall. I drive the car around 75 MPH on the highway (if I go slower, I'll be run off of Interstate 684 by everyone going 85 MPH). I consider my mileage to be real world because I don't really attempt to do all the "hyper miler" techniques to squeeze gas mileage out of the car.
Hope that gives some information to mix into others opinions.
Good Luck!
I recently received an email from J. D. Powers and Associates saying they were doing a survey of Prius owners who have the navigation system to see how effective it was for us. I do have the nav system and would love to give feedback BUT it required opening an attachment so I deleted it-I won't take a chance on phishing.
Do you know if this is a legitimate survey or a scam?
I have found the Nav system to be horribly incorrect and a waste of money so if it is not a scam, I would like to participate! Thanks for any info you may have.
I am in the southeast and wonder if it's only bad in my region.