Upscale Prii an endangered species ?

mm-hmm.

 

Fuel tanks are specified by the amount of volume they can hold. Consumers would have a difficult time converting a weight of fuel to knowing how full their fuel tank is.

Consumers are used to calculating fuel economy by using MPG or L/100km, both of which require volume to calculate, and neither requires weight.

The entire fueling infrastructure is configured to meter fuel by volume, not weight. Retrofit would take a considerable expense and retraining of the population of drivers and station attendants.

Assessing value could become confusing when fuel densities change seasonally, or vary by formulation. For example, winter blends of #1 and #2 fuels would confuse customers when suddenly their fuel tank capacity holds a different weight of fuel. Another example would be blends of ethanol confounding the consumer. Only mathematicians would be able to figure out how far the weight of fuel they purchased will get them, or how much it will cost.

Lets continue your BTU / lb list...

Gasoline: 114,000 BTUs per gallon, 6.073 lbs / gallon -> 18,771 BTUs / lb.
Diesel: 128,700 per gallon, 6.943 lbs / gallon -> 18,536 BTUs / lb.
Ethanol: 67,100 BTU per gallon, 6.584 lbs / gallon -> 10,191 BTU / lb.

With ethanol containing roughly half the BTU per pound compared to gasoline, various blends of ethanol will result in varying weights of fuel being carried by the fuel tank, and a wildly varying mileage per pound of fuel.

BTU / lb does not help the consumer figure out what the most efficient, economical way to travel is.

What was your intent of portraying diesel and gasoline as nearly equivalent fuels if not to dissuade people from choosing diesel technology? If I was mistaken and you are not against diesel as a transportation fuel, then I apologize for arguing against a point you were not making.

I consider myself fuel agnostic, so the preciousness of diesel is only related to how economically I can accomplish my transportation needs.

 

Diesels are inherently clean for emissions of volatile organics (hydrocarbons) and carbon monoxide. On the other hand, diesels historically have had high emissions of nitrogen oxide and, of course, particulate matter. My understanding is that the latter two problems have been solved thanks to particulate traps. A few years ago, a new diesel vehicle was brought up to Capitol Hill in Washington. The engine was started, and someone held a white handkerchief to the exhaust. The handkerchief stayed white.

 

The 17" wheels on the five yield lower fuel economy than the 15" wheels. It's harder to get over 50 mpg especially since mine didn't come with low rolling resistance tires. I think they would be pretty close. I would like to get behind the wheel of the accord hybrid and see what the real world economy is. I would also like to drive my prius with 15" wheels on to see the difference in economy.

 

i would too. the hyacc must have 17" wheels?

 

Yeah the Accord Hybrid has 17" wheels with michelin energy saver tires I think.

 

i suppose it comes down to weight and aerodynamics.

 

i'm not saying it can't achieve it's numbers, we get 50 in the hyacc. we get 65 in the prius.

 

we didn't get that nonsense here. (Australia). I've no idea what mine is. You could specify which options/extras you wanted according to your budget. Mine was a "demo" model (actually the boss's wife had commandeered it and he asked sales to get rid of it while they were on holiday in Vietnam.) with 5000 kms so I didn't get to specify anything but did get $12,000 dollars off and still got a new car warranty. It doesn't have a moon roof or the fancy parking and super cruise control (normal CC) which I am very grateful for.

 

Is a hybrid Camry a reasonable alternative to the Accord hybrid?

 

Yes, similar in size but the EPA rates the Accord better in MPG.

 

Thank you.

 

you can congratulate honda all you want. if it turns out to get 50 mpg, it will be the same as the hycam. one just does better on the epa test than the other. the proof is in everyday driving. not ny testers, but by real people in everyday situations. that remains to be seen, and i remain optimistic but unconvinced until i see it. i hope to drive one someday to compare to the 50 mpg we are getting in the hyacc on a day to day basis. i do realize (and so do the manufacturers) that people purchase based on the maroney sticker, and that could boost hyacc sales initially over hycam. but whatever the real world numbers turn out to be, it will play out in the marketplace at some point, along with a proven hybrid system and batteries vs new tech and a company with poor hybrid history.

 

i realize that. i'm just saying that real world prius numbers depend on your driving style, location and etc., hyacc will too. not everyone will get epa mileage. some will, some will do better and some will do worse, just like prius.

 

And it's pretty easy to get better than the EPA estimates on the Prius. The Accord makes me nervous, like you said, until real world results have been extracted from owners.

 

I agree that comparing the current Prius to the hybrid Accord makes the Accord look good. Over the next year or so we will begin to learn if the Accord lives up to its promise.

When Akio Toyoda took over heading the company he was pretty vocal about wanting to put style and fun back into Toyota products. I think that he has succeeded on this front and I hope that some of this rubs off on the next generation Prius - if it does the new Prius could actually be a bit of fun to drive.

I'm planning keeping my 2009 until my 14 year old starts driving then give it to her. But if I were looking to buy a new car today I'd probably go with the new Mazda 3 wagon - beautiful car, solid company and good fuel economy and best of all I could get it with a stick.