2016 Toyota Prius: Return of the Disrupter - Up to 58 MPG

I was hoping to never buy either sort ever again. However, the household's AWD needed replacement before reasonable HSD choices became available. The Highlander was too big and expensive, the Crosstrek Hybrid was too small with a non-HSD system that was less than compelling. Thus, we ended up with one more manual transmission.

That will also keep us in practice for future car rentals. Where we go, Americans who cannot drive stick shifts must pay vastly more to get a scarce automatic.

 

Correct! People where 91 RON / 87 AKI is available, don't buy diesels, because there is nothing to gain. A diesel car is more expensive to buy and maintain and if fuel cost and maintenance cannot compensate for the high purchase price then, people would have bought a gasoline car instead. Furthermore, 91 RON cars such as Toyota cars are a threat for cars with turbo and direct injection engines too. German industry have set up their own rules in their country (United states of Europe) in order to keep toyota sales low.

They set up rules for every sector and this is how the Germans conquered Greece and the whole Europe, an area where Nazi's failed at, in the past. The entrance of Greece in Europe (Greece with help from the Germans secret agents like Michalis Christoforakos- Siemens head in Greece, and other agents in corrupted government (Simitis etc) used Goldman Sachs to hide Greek toxic debt for 10 years in order for Greece to enter EU) , the Greek Olympic games,the free flowing German money on greek market since the 80's used as a means of security in order to transform Greek economy into a completely destroyed area, fully dependant on German money today.

 

Strange numbers. The EPA numbers have the 2015 prius a mere 4% more efficient than the outgoing, at 52 combined (notwithstanding ECO model which is a bit better) vs 50. Basically it's barely measurably more efficient than the old one.

I used to be a hardcore proponent of manual, but in the US the technology is dead and exists only in the very cheapest entry level cars and then a tiny handful of sporty ones. Back when manuals were cheaper, faster, and better on fuel they made sense, now they offer no benefits so people have just given up on them. Got rid of my last one in 2010 and don't miss it to be honest. There is just no demand anymore.

 

EU NEDC cycle is notoriously unaccurate, by far, only JC08 is even more out of the chart. EPA cycle seems the best in town...
In the case of Prius IV, i guess such a huge and unrealistic 25% jump in combined mileage could come from the extra-urban part of the cycle, where the new 70 mph limit for ICE off could make a difference:



Not to forget that NEDC cycle is warm engine only and that Wayne from CLEANMPG already highlighted the highway excellent performance of the Prius IV (did he some high speed P&G? who knows.. )

 

The Prius IV Eco model EPA numbers are 12% (combined) and 13.% (city) more efficient than the outgoing...if these are only "a bit better" - what were your expectations? 30%?

 

This is not a proper comparison, unlike the one Skoorbmax did, within compatible trim. The increase in mileage due to the technical upgrade of the HSD is in those 2 mpg more, not the 12% of the ECO that probably got most of the extra from LRR tires (already with negative reviews in the web) and/or stripping things to create a barebone trim.
A comparison btw Priu IV ECO and a gen3 have no technical nor commercial sense.

 

I didn't make the comparison but answered a post saying 'a bit better'.
Several reporters claimed they heard from Toyota reps the testing was done in strict accordance with the upcoming more strict EPA rules. Mentioning only 2 MPG improvement without mentioning this fact is also 'not proper comparison'.
Added.
Looking at reviews of several reporters and comparing them to their Gen 3 reviews from the past indicate (to me at least) that the core models real world improvement will be more than 2 mpg, no matter what the formal EPA rating (not yet announced) will be.

 

Have you found out some evidence about the Prius IV beeing tested with the new EPA rules? I'll be interested, because i did'nt found any clarification here or in the web about the enforcement of the new rules. If not, i don't see why a car maker should decrease the appeal of their car using more restrictive rules for the EPA rating.
Of course this is because we are interested to understand if Prius 4 EPA improvement is just 2 mpg on a compatible comparison. Till the moment of the clarification, the improvement IS 2 mpg.

That's another story, we are discussing on some other thread just about the excellent results in real world of Wayne of Cleanmpg. Here the discussion was on EPA rating. And basically Skoorbmax was wondering about the difference btw EPA e NEDC rating. So in terms of EPA rating is absolutely correct, until is demonstrated the use of the new EPA cycle, that "it's barely measurably more efficient than the old one".

 

Check Thread repository for ALL non-PriusChat 2016 Prius reviews | PriusChat and find yourself.
As for why - being conservative?

 

As you point out, manuals can only be found in the bare bones 'loss leaders' or sports models. With the majority of buyers that actually want a manual, about half of BR-Z/FRS sales are for it, the transmissions offered here have been geared for performance. When 5 speed manuals appeared here, the extra gear was used to improve acceleration, and the top gear ratio wasn't much better than what the old 4 speed had. During the same time, the automatic was getting gear ratios for fuel economy.

It is different in Europe. There manuals aren't just bought for performance, and they will have gear ratios comparable to the automatic. Which means they have a better fuel efficiency. There are a few such cars in the US. The 1.4L turbo Sonic gets a better rating with the manual than the automatic.

The previous Prius generations all got a 10% better EPA rating than the outgoing model without resorting to ECO trim type tweaks. In that case, 4% is disappointing, and the early reports had the ECO getting 20% better.

The new rules are supposedly going into effect for 2016 models. They do not include any changes to the test cycles themselves. A cost down test from 70mph will result in a higher road load for the those tests than the current 50mph one.

Beyond the road load test, the new rules are about the condition of the car used for testing. It appears the manufacturer can still use a hand built car for the test, and thus get the panel gaps as tight as possible. NEDC allows taping of said gaps. They specify how much wear can be on the tires, and other components of the car. The test car will be 'broken in', but can't have bald tires.

The new, stricter rules will mean lower results in most cases. How much remains to be seen, but I don't see them dropping the past 10% improvement all the way to 4%.

 

Disappointing? To someone who drives Chevy Sonic?
Giora merge

You can try starting this post:
Prius Eco 58 MPG vs Prius 54 MPG - What's the difference? | Page 2 | PriusChat
and on...
Trollbait description of the new rules is not accurate and incomplete.
Another Giora merge

I was under the impression NEDC includes one 'cold' start as well?

Effective year 2000, that idling period has been eliminated, i.e., engine starts at 0 seconds and the emission sampling begins at the same time. This modified cold-start procedure is also referred to as the New European Driving Cycle or NEDC.

 

Toyota went with two models for EPA because apparently small modifications (LRR 15" tires, weight) makes a huge difference. I think Toyota went with best case MPG (ECO trim) and worst case MPG (Touring 17"), where with gen3 they wen't with something in the middle.

IMO if you buy pckg. 4 with 15" LRR tires you will be very near that ECO model.

 

Don't you think it is a bit of advertising double fallacy to say up to 58MPG?

First it is reference to City MPG only, second it refers to ECO model only, which Toyota expects to sell less than 10%. I suspect they will be actually loosing money on it, and they just put it out to make a claim. One could say they stripped the necessities like spare intentionally, to ensure not many people would buy it.

 

More and more cars are eliminated the spare. It is not done to dissuade people from buying the car, but to cut down on weight.
It is also done because it is simply becoming less and less of an issue.
Tires have become better and better.
Personally, I haven't had a flat that forced me off the road in almost 3 decades.
The last time I punctured my tire with a screw, it caused a slow leak. I brought it in two days late and had it taken care of.

People would be better served carrying around other spare parts than a wheel.

 

Source please?

 

Source: The Psychopathic Daily News

 

Netcub channel, but it only works if you live in Kentucky and work for Toyota.

 

Of course, your reply is simply more trolling, about the only thing you contribute to this forum.

 

Actually you are both right/wrong. The information presented on this forum by Toyota (put on here by Danny and several others) indicated that the "eco" model would have low sales. Didn't say how low however.

ALL advertising I've ever seen often includes the term "as low as", referring to price, weight, mileage, etc. etc. Standard ad guy practice. Learn to recognize the truth bending, cavet emptor. Or something like that.