2021 Prius Prime informal review vs. a "vanilla" Gen4

Good point. In fact, I apparently edited out that statement after you quoted it but before I saw your quote.

 

Think it was actually from my post.

The easier math comes in when comparing different cars. The potential car buyer has an idea of their daily trip distance. Just multiply the volume/1distance rating by distance of the trip. Worse case, the rating is actually volume per distance greater than one, so the rating has to be divided that distance first, but in most cases the value is an easy to divide 100; just move the decimal over two places to the left.

With distance per volume, they have to divide their trip distance by the rating, which gets trickier when the distance is less than the rating. For most multiplying is easier to do than division without aids.

Volume/distance is also better for consumers because bigger number equals more fuel used. It's the inverse with distance/volume. There is the bigger is better mentality to it, but the math makes it harder for a car buyer to determine how much better it would be for them.

Then the distance/volume method exaggerates percentage changes on efficient cars, and obfuscates their impact on lower efficiency ones.
Take a 10% change.
80 to 88 km/L looks impressive, but converted to L/100km it is 1.25 to 1.14. For every km, the higher efficiency is saving just 1.9mL(an ounce is roughly 30mL).
Now 20 to 22 km/L looks minor, but the 5 to 4.54 L/100km is far from it. That is 4.6mL less per km, or 2.4 times more fuel saved than with the previous example.

 

They both just look like 10% to me, but it's much easier to see that 88 km/L is 10% more than 80 km/L than it is to see that 1.25 L/100 km to 10% more than 1.14 L/100 km.

 

It used to be “first world problems”; now it’s “Prius Prime fuel economy problems”, lol.

 

Individuals do not equal groups. How you view numbers does not mean the public views them the same way.

A store sells something for $9.99. I, and the majority, round that up to $10 while puttering through the store. But a non insignificant part of the population doesn't do that. They actually ignore the number after the decimal, and see the item's price as $9. They'll do this for items with higher and lower prices, so what they calculate for what they are spending can be way off from what they actually did. It is why marketers price things as $x.99 and not a whole number.

The first gen Highlander hybrid had an impressive 36% improvement to combined MPG rating over the ICE model. It wasn't a big seller as many Highlander buyers didn't think the 26mpg rating wasn't impressive enough to pay for. Perhaps, the 5.26 gal/100 mi to 3.85 gal/100 mi looks equally unimpressive, though those people that ignore after the decimal will see saving 2 gallons per 100 miles, but it would be far easier to calculate weekly, monthly, or yearly fuel costs. With MPG,most people would have to go to Fueleconomy.gov and personalize the numbers.

 

I don't think the lack of enthusiasm for hybrid versions of SUVs comes from an inability of the general public to understand percentage gains. I, too, am often unimpressed by the numbers for hybrid versions of gas guzzlers. The absolute value is far more important to me than the relative value. 26 mpg is still 26 mpg, regardless of whether it's a 36% improvement over previous versions or 200%. People who already drive SUVs aren't letting MPG influence their purchasing and people that do make purchase decisions on MPG aren't impressed with 26 mpg. In terms of marketing, there's really no market for the hybrid versions of SUVs until they can get the mileage high enough to compete with passenger cars.

I don't understand how it would be easier to divide your annual miles driven by 100 and multiply by the g/100 miles rating than it would be to divide your annual miles by mpg.

 

The Highlander was the example I went with because I knew it had low sales, but it also applies to the Camry. Hybrid sales only make up around 10% of total Camry sales in the US. Even now with a 15 to 20 MPG improvement, and no loss trunk space.

Average annual miles for Fueleconomy.org calculations is 15,000. My current average MPG in the Camry is 33.9, or 2.95gal/100mi. Which would you rather do in your head?

 

It depends on how you use it. I know that I buy gas by the gallon. If I buy 10 gallons I will be able to go 339 miles at 33.9 MPG. On the other hand, If I put in 10gallons and use 2.95 gal per 100mi.... That's 10 gal / 2.95 times 100. That requires long division, so I'd rather go with MPG.

P.S. I always round these numbers in the real world. 34 MPG is easy to use and the rounding is insignificant. Rounding small decimals can have more impact. Rounding 2.95 up to 3 is insignificant, but rounding 2.75 is almost 10% even though it looks like almost the same thing.

 

You need at least three significant figures for the fuel economy in MFD. Does it only show 0.9 L/100 km? That's only one significant figure, and if that's the case, it is wrong, and it sucks. mpg wins over L/100 km because of proper number of significant figures then.

 

My previous car's mpg was reported nicely with two significant figures. A figure after the decimal point was needed in this case.

 

IIRC the original Camry hybrids only got about 37 mpg. I think that sealed their sales fate. I was just walking around the dealer lot waiting for my 2012 PiP to be serviced and noticed that the hybrid Camry SE now gets 47-50. I was genuinely surprised to see that. My favorite car I've owned so far was my 2007 Camry SE. If I needed a larger car again I would definitely consider one.

15,000 / 30 = 500, so 15,000 / 33 = ~450.

15,000 / 100 = 150 so 150 * ~3 = 450

I think they're both about equal.

 

It just shows 0.x L/100km. You can see it on yours by switching the speedo to metric and looking at the eco history.

I remember our 1998 and 1999 4-cylinder Camrys getting about 35 mpg on the highway. I would definitely think about a hybrid Camry SE for my next car if I felt like getting something a little roomier and more luxurious. There's a member here who's averaging well over 50 mpg with his. But I don't think the SE has all the safety stuff available in a Prius Prime Limited, which is what I'd probably get next time.

 

I have decided that MPG is interesting, but not worth obsessing about. We have 3 vehicles; a 2017 Prime, a 2002 4Runner and a 2000 Lexus ES300. I found that in extreme conditions: 3000 mile trip with cruise control on 93 MPH when available, the Prime got 45 MPG. Under normal driving conditions I can expect closer to 50 MPG. Since the Prime is the daily driver, and 90% of its driving is with EV, the mileage is a non issue. The 4Runner probably gets 15 MPG. Since it is a utility vehicle and is driven about 1000 miles a year, that is also a non issue. The wife's car is a Platinum Edition Lexus she bought new in 2000. It presently has 48K miles on it and I doubt she puts 1000 miles a year on it as she now prefers to drive the Prime. So the issue with the Lexus is has she driven it enough to keep the battery charged?
The Prime is now nagging me to go to the dealer to get the oil changed and rotate the tires. I am not in a hurry to do that for two reasons: The oil was changed about 5000 miles ago and the dealer wants $70. plus tax to change it plus I have the ability to do it at home.

 

Yup, it's totally useless to have the fuel economy displaced with only one significant figure with the L/100 km units. Toyota is being illiterate being with significant figures.

 

You like an old and ancient car better than the state-of-the-art car you own now??

Moreover, there is a huge difference between the LE/XLE trims and the Limited trim. The add-ons like blind-spot monitor are what makes a car a car. I would never own a car without these important safety features after having them now.

 

Give me strength...

 

Yes, absolutely. I could drive that car over 70 mph without even a hint of squealing tires on roads the Prime can barely take at 50. Not to mention it was a manual transmission. I don't even think you can get that now.

Meh. Marginal utility. My cars don't even have blind spots. Just adjust the mirrors correctly. More stuff to break. No thanks.

 

Your assessments are not objective.

According to Consumer Reports, 2007 Camry has a 3/5 rating in emergency handling with a 50 mph maximum emergency maneuver speed, whereas Prius Prime has a 4/5 emergency handling rating with a 55 mph maximum emergency maneuver speed. 50 mph is pretty pathetic, whereas 55 mph is considered excellent.

Every car has blind spots. You cannot get rid of them by adjusting the mirrors. Safety experts consider the blind spot monitor indispensable.

 

Is that the Camry SE? They're totally different cars with different suspension, cross bracing, and tires. It doesn't get much more objective than reading a speedometer.

That is incorrect.

How To Get Rid of Your Blind Spot - Defensive Driving

 

They tested the LE, but they made a note saying that "The SE version comes with firmer suspension and heftier steering, but it doesn't make the car athletic."

The sales guy told me that he bends all the way forward to look at the mirror while changing lanes to eliminate the blind spot. I'll stick with the blind spot monitor. It works in an excellent way and without requiring a bend-over.