Featured Hyundai IONIQ - Prius competitor?

Prove it:

Kinda hard to do without an Ioniq on this side of the Pacific.

In contrast: 800 mile per tank challenge | PriusChat

A 2016 Prius photo by the USA owner.

Bob Wilson

 

Why would anyone buy a Prius with the gas prices so low? People have reasons for getting a plug in beyond fuel costs that are more important to them than the drawbacks.

The federal tax credits and other incentives lower the effective price, but they are also responsible for the high depreciation. For most, leasing is probably the best deal considering the rate of battery price decreases, and thus range increases

Going to hold no stock in any JC08 ratings for Toyota products for comparing to competiters then?

Ford abused a loophole meant for easing costs by letting them use the results of the Taurus for the Mercury Sable and Chevy/GMC pick up trucks. Then there was too much wiggle room in the test guidelines that lead to the EPA revising them for 2016.

In regards to the loophole, Ford violated the intent of the regulation, which isn't something the EPA could actually fine them over. Seems making them retest the C-max was about all they could do legally. In the case of the second rating adjustment on their hybrids and Fiesta, Ford admitted to the error before they were caught, with restitution to owners for the error. They might have been prodded by the fine Hyundai got slapped with.

Prove what? That you don't just the Korean numbers, that is obvious.

I am asking why to that is? I understand not trusting a smacked nice person TDI owner posting their MPG numbers without any backing data, or CR MPG test results, but these are numbers signed off on by the Korean regulatory body. Should we treat the in country fuel economy ratings of all domestic brands with suspicion?

 

I think you are onto something there... I remember there was an Priuschat webcast episode, there was someone who was very well respected saying there was a Japanese manufacturer deliberately revise down their EPA fuel figure shortly after the Prius c was released... He didn't say who but I suspect it's Toyota. I'm always in the believe the c EPA rating was very very conservative, maybe Toyota didn't want to trick off their customers like Hyundai and Ford did. Is the G4 being deliberately revised down? I think they might have...

SM-G900I ?

 

Reduced emissions & consumption should be obvious.

 

That's so 2012.... First, EPA dinged Nissan because the car could be charged to either "80%" or "100%" so Nissan now only charges to "100%" in later model years. Second, they have since improved their efficiency. The 2016 30 kWh model is 107 miles range and 30 kWh per 100 miles so 3.33 mi/kWh.

However, you can't compare that to a 105 mile range on a 28 kWh pack because you don't know how much of the pack is usable and how many kWh it takes to fully recharge it.

 

Also reliability, comfort and room, but those are not so obvious...

 

Prove it:

Kinda hard to do without an Ioniq on this side of the Pacific.

In contrast: 800 mile per tank challenge | PriusChat

A 2016 Prius photo by the USA owner.

You've answered your own question. Don't trust anyone until we can get our hands on them. Otherwise, we are just:


When the Ioniq actually arrives in USA hands so we can test it, might as well be a "Clean Diesel" or perhaps you missed this one: Compensation Information | Hyundai MPG Information

Bob Wilson

 

And Toyota completely acted completely above board in regards to the SUA case?

I'm fine in doubting whether the Ioniq will reach its Korean numbers on the EPA test, or if it will perform as well in the real world, and I have expressed such doubts. I was trying to understand the hostility over those reported Korean figures. It is a like to like comparison, and is just as valid as using Japanese or European ratings until EPA ones are available.

If those are all to be considered BS, well, the thread is opt in, and there is no need to visit until the car arrives in the US.

 

TROLL BAIT

 

It comes from decades of diagnosing 'hard' problems. First step, get empirical data and treat the descriptions of others as curious until independently confirmed. There are many too trusting suckers on the net (see @mojo.)

Bob Wilson

 

Upon the recent findings of EPA results for Tourings, this is the resumé:


Prius ECO trim excluded from the list. Prius 3 e 4 means III gen and IV gen, just in case...

I underline the meaningless choice of Hyundai about tires:

Michelin ENERGY SAVER AS 195 / 65R15 91T
RR Class 2 = B (Eu) ; Wet Class 4 = E (Eu) ;
[Available on the market A & A]

Michelin PRIMACY MXM4 225 / 45R17 91V 4E 3C
RR Class 4 = E (Eu) ; Wet Class 3 = C ( Eu) ;
[Available on the market A & C or B & A]

PS: sorry for the remaining italian bit on the header

 

Refresh my memory why so many favor 17 inch wheels. Is it just appearance?

 

IMHO, basically yes, Felt.
And you're going to pay it also with stiffness and aquaplaning...
Better grip? Yes, when you go drifting.....

 

Appearance traction handling. In cars where 17" tires are the smallest size it also allows brakes to be larger which helps resist fade.

Key numerics when it comes to fuel economy is the aerodyanmics and rolling resistance. 17" tires are normally wider than 16" tires which hurt both, but give them similar width and the only argument against 17" is mass and cost. On the gen IV prius there are 3 different tires. The eco tires have the least grip and lowest rolling resistance and only come on the 2 eco. The 17" tires have the most grip and highest rolling resistance and biggest contact patch.

 

All three versions of the Ioniq are supposed to be introduced for the North American market on the 23rd at the New York International Auto Show. Some questions should be answered then.

 

Vehicle weight usually governs the minimum tire size chosen by the manufacturer. Larger tires can support more weight. This is why the first and second gen Volt gets 17" tires -- the extra 400 pounds of battery weight requires the bigger tires. Similar story for most other cars with large batteries.

 

Well, I suppose this thread needs a little infusion.

I have shown a passing interest in the Ioniq EV, until I saw a close-up of the front. With no need for a radiator, or a grille to air-cool a radiator, Hyundai seems to not know what to do with the space. Hyundai's video shows a close up, and it revealed a plain panel that has been painted a contrasting color, and an oversize Hyundai oval (emblem) that in my judgement, is way out of proportion. Pretty bad.

 

"...oversize Hyundai oval (emblem)..."

Ugh, I hated when Ford did that on the Ranger tailgates for the last few years of the truck's run. Perhaps it won't be too hard to pop off. Then perhaps use some stick on vinyl to cover the entire 'grill'. I used some black textured one that looks kinda like carbon fiber on a couple spots of the current car. Cleaner to apply than paint, and it covers up any holes or cracks.

 

Oh I don't know. Get a box of shot-size, plastic cups and a hot glue gun and 'make art.' Or take the mythbuster approach:


Car bra:


Don't forget:


Bob Wilson

 

Great comments all,

Later today I saw a Tesla, and we all know that it appears to have a front grille. Upon close examination, it is solid plastic over most of the opening, but there appears to be an opening, I suppose for heater fresh-air? Ventilation? Cooling the inverter?

Re the Hyundai's expansive nothingness, I suggested maybe selling the space to advertisers?