Red Alert - Battery Mileage Varies on Prime Models

the problem is, we don't have any measurements yet. it is likely larger in volume due to lower hatch floor, but the roof may slope down more, idk.
and we don't know what's under the hatch floor

 

Of course it does. New PHV will have quite a smaller boot compared to HEV variant.
Floor is "considerably" lower compared to PHV 2016->2022 making boot more spacious, but roof is lower as well. IMHO there will be small boot space gains, something like +50 liters (compared to 2022).
Which is totally fine in my book
We have to wait for official numbers.

 

Range is a factor of energy consumption and tank or battery size.

Changing unsprung weight in the wheels and suspension has a bigger impact on efficiency and performance than a same amount of weight in the body of the car. Some high end sports cars have moved the brakes from the wheels to the axle to just move that weight from the unsprung region.

The bigger wheels add weight to the worse spot. They also might increase drag with the spoke design. The covers on the 17in ones appear to be aero ones. A difference in rolling resistance could also be present. Then the added features also add weight. The 17% difference isn't all wheel, but it is likely the majority.

Softex is not zero cost over cloth. All items in the higher trim that you want in the base aren't zero cost. Toyota was not going to put them in lower trim for free, and a higher base price reduces sales.

It was a general PHEV vs NoPlug statement. Batteries take up space; rear passengers of the Camry hybrid lost headroom because of the battery under the rear seat. A good design will minimize the impact of adding a battery, but more EV range means a bigger battery to find space for.

We know the new PP has put the battery into a location that isn't used by people and their stuff. We don't know if it is zero impact yet. The lack of AWD for the PP could be because of where the battery is.

 

Where did you get that figure from? I got the entire set for $300 or so.

 

Apology, figure I am posting in wrong area. Though it does seem nice the shorter charge time to fill the Prime battery. Granted it may only take you 38 miles. Thinking, for many trips that would be ok for around town tasks.

 

that's what a phev is all about. even at 12-14 miles, 90% of my driving is ev.

 

When you can find said MPGs of other brands at all on the manufacturer's website. Try to find me what the mpg is for an F-150 on Ford's website... Luckily there is fueleconomy.org for the USA, but I doubt that most US drivers ever go and look at it, considering the boxes they buy.

 

The mpg for the F150 is right here, plus under the specs listing(though it appears the 2023 numbers haven't been certified).
https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/models/f150-xl/
There are at least 8 engine and drive train combinations for the F150. Putting the best, which is what everybody does, on the main F150 page could be called misleading.

 

If you use your Pip for the long travel down south annually, then your number is likely to be less than 90% by the miles driven. I looked at my driving pattern over 5+ years on my PP and found that over 95% of the daily trips are less than 100 miles, but the 5% of trips for more than 100 miles represented close to 30% of total miles driven.

 

Incidentally, a pal of mine purchased a new Ford F150 hybrid...and is really disappointed with the MPGs. He can't even get close to the EPA for some reason. I'm thinking the hybrid battery is just too small for such a large vehicle.

 

And how did he compare to EPA with his old vehicle?

Most people don't actually track their fuel use. They only have a vague sense of it. When they get a car for fuel efficiency, they start paying closer attention. But not knowing exactly how badly they were doing before, could mean the results with the new car look poor.

 

thanks @pakitt It took me a while to dig down to the find a vehicle feature on the sister site fueleconomy.gov than a bit longer to find new model Plugin Hybrids so here is the list of 2022 - 2023 Plugin Hybrids
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSearch.do?action=noform&year1=2022&year2=2023&vtype=Plug-in+Hybrid&srchtyp=newAfv&pageno=1&rowLimit=50

one and two were no big surprise and the top 5 are still showing the 2022 numbers

 

absolutely, that's why we take the hycam. quieter, more comfortable, more storage, and who can complain about 40mpg average for such a large car over 4,000 miles?

and also the reason we don't own a bev. charging would infuriate mrs. b, on what is supposed to be a relaxing vacation.
there used to be an L2 here at the marriott, but that's gone.

instead, we get 8 empty tesla superchargers at the local WAWA. who is going to spend any time charging at that dump? most all the patrons are drive diesel 350's.

 

Did you just slight Wawa?

 

No offense intended, but I was reminded of purgatory

 

Glad you found it. I don’t know how to get to it from the home page. On a random first-level presentation page of, e.g., the Raptor, not a word about fuel economy:
https://www.ford.com/f150-raptor-r/

The only websites where you see the fuel economy easily and upfront are Toyota, Honda and maybe another couple of brands. And it is not just the USA’s websites. If you check Italy’s Fiat website for example, fuel consumption is not mentioned up front, you have to dig there too.

The message I get from all these websites is that they have decided that consumers don’t really care what the fuel consumption of their vehicles is anymore and when the prices of fuel goes up, it is not a matter of whether their vehicle has zero efficiency, it is a political matter, that has nothing to do with what they bought in the first place.
And because of that, thanks also to registration taxes that, at least in Colorado, are not linked to fuel consumption or CO2 emitted, there is no incentive to buy a fuel efficient vehicle.

Only when gas prices go up, that maybe somebody starts to wonder if maybe their 15 mpg truck is the reason…

 

Glad you found it. I don’t know how to get to it from the home page. On a random first-level presentation page of, e.g., the Raptor, not a word about fuel economy:
https://www.ford.com/f150-raptor-r/

The only websites where you see the fuel economy easily and upfront are Toyota, Honda and maybe another couple of brands. And it is not just the USA’s websites. If you check Italy’s Fiat website for example, fuel consumption is not mentioned up front, you have to dig there too.

The message I get from all these websites is that they have decided that consumers don’t really care what the fuel consumption of their vehicles is anymore and when the prices of fuel goes up, it is not a matter of whether their vehicle has zero efficiency, it is a political matter, that has nothing to do with what they bought in the first place.
And because of that, thanks also to registration taxes that, at least in Colorado, are not linked to fuel consumption or CO2 emitted, there is no incentive to buy a fuel efficient vehicle.

Only when gas prices go up, that maybe somebody starts to wonder if maybe their 15 mpg truck is the reason…

 

Their sandwiches are good, and I love the maple harvest milkshake.

Any car site that doesn't have the specs page easily found, or is skimpy on details, annoys me. I'm going to the site to learn details, not look at pictures.

These are marketing sites. Any mpg figures presented outside of the spec page are best case for advertising. The Prius page at Toyota.com only says 57mpg with it being LE FWD city in the footnote fine print.

Most consumers don't care. A survey once presented here showed that people thought fuel efficiency was important, but not if it meant paying more for the car. That was several years ago. With gas prices relatively higher, they switched to SUVs.

 

This 100%. People see the car payment being lower and call it a day. If an EV or PHEV represents a premium of $10-15k (or $150-250/mo) over its gas equivalent, it's way more money upfront or higher payments which can be hard to swallow on tight budgets despite having drastically lower mpg. It also depends on how long you plan to keep the car or drive it annually.

Take the $15k differential for example, at $1.50 CAD per litre (or $4.24 per gallon USD), that's at least 10,000 litres (2,641gal) you'd have to use to make it worth buying the PHEV/EV. At 30mpg, that gives you total 127,654km or 79,320 miles of range over the ownership of the vehicle. Depending on how much you drive or how long you keep cars, it may or may not make sense to pay that premium just to get better mpg. The average American trades in every 5 years or so.

Even if we're just comparing gas to gas cars with a 5mpg penalty to go from sedan to SUV, annually that's only $404 USD in gas costs per year or $33 per month based on the average annual mileage of 14,263 miles and my $4.24/gallon cost figure above. That's really not much to sway people to a lower mpg vehicle.

 

Just found out the Japanese specs on WLTC, that in Japan's version should be class3, similar to EU WLTP.

The 2.0 2WD standard with the 19" is quoted at combined 28,6 km/lt - 3,5 lt/100km
In the note 4, the 17" is quoted at combined 31,5 km/lt - 3,17 lt/100km

The difference is 10%, as I evaluated in some previous post, and the same reduction on range on the PHEV for the 19" can be expected.