Euro/UK numbers are in: 72.4 MPG (British), 89g C02 - 14% more efficient

If the EPA numbers were to increase by a similar percentage, then the combined 46 MPGs for the 2009 would translate to a 50/51 MPG for the 2010. This is exactly what Toyota has been claiming will happen.

 

Is that the old style EPA mpg calculation? Like the one that told me I'd get 61 MPG City driving?

 

I've been saying all along that you shouldn't compare UK numbers with US, as they're based on a completely different test driving cycle and parameters. The EU NEDC test is highly flawed as there is virtually no high-speed driving - there's a burst of a few seconds at 75mph but most of the test is below 60. However, it's the test we have. The high-speed consumption is reportedly improved on the new Prius, so we might have a better competitor to the diesels. I'm hoping the hazardous pollutants (CO, HC, NOx) will be proportionally reduced, too.

Toyota's announced 50mpg estimate for the US EPA test is about 8% higher than current. 14% higher would be nearer 52mpg. This is a direct result of the difference between the tests. IMO, the EPA should not combine the warm city, cold city and A/C tests into one 'city' result as those three conditions don't overlap; this actually makes it easy to beat the EPA result if you're driving in warm conditions with A/C off.

It will still be beaten on CO2 by one model: Smart's fortwo 33kW, 800cc diesel (without particulate filter). However, it will accelerate more than twice as quickly and have twice as many seats! For fuel consumption you have to adjust for diesel's greater energy value (nearly 11% more) - the Prius would consume more energy than the Smart but less than the Fiesta ECOnetic that everyone's touting for some reason. The actual cost to run depends on the price of the fuel; the UK has an equal fuel duty for petrol and diesel fuel (50.35 pence/litre for ultra-low-sulphur petrol and diesel) but other countries in Europe in effect subsidise diesel by taxing it at a lower rate. Here, currently diesel costs 10-15% more per litre than petrol at the pump.

 

If you look at the complete data set, you can see that the testing is done in litres/100km, rounded to one decimal place, for EU-wide results. The UK government then converts to imperial miles per gallon for display purposes, due to our half-assed uncompleted metric changeover. There are no results between 64.2mpg and 65.7mpg (4.4L/100km and 4.3L/100km), for example.

 

If the UK test cycle resembles the old US EPA, then the Prius has improved about 10% -- right about what Toyota has been saying, and incidentally inline with the improvements seen in the Japanese test cycle.

So although *some* differences will crop up between test cycles heavier in high speed driving vs city routes, the old saw that cars, and different models of the same car, can be compared so long as the the same test is being applied is still a pretty good rule of thumb -- EGR or not.

 

Rounding to 0.1 is OK when the cars consume 10 L/100Km; it's the Prius that is making the Imperial Gallon blush.

 

I think this is great news for the 2010 Prius in the UK. Getting below the 100g barrier and into free road tax is very important. It's a big problem for the Honda Insight that it failed to do this IMHO. Whilst the free congestion charge in Central London is a great help to the current model (and the Insight) in that market, this will help it sell across the whole country.

What will matter now is the motorway fuel economy at a typical 75 to 80mph cruise. How will it compete with the diesals like the BMW 320/520d and the forthcoming and even more hyped VW Golf Bluemotion? (which will also have a CO2 rating below the magic 100 level). What will also matter is how much of a compromise people feel they have had to make over "normal" cars as well. This lack of dynamics is a problem with the current car and I think this is one area hopefully Toyota will have closed the gap considerably.

I look forward to the first reviews. I'm personally very interested in one of these cars.

 

At least, Mike, the UK has gone some way to converting over to the far more rational metric system. Here in the US we had a so-called Metrication Board set up By President Ford to "coordinate the voluntary conversion to the metric system". The 17-member Board was dissolved in 1982 by President Reagan, having achieved absolutely nothing, since it consisted of an almost equal division of people both pro and con conversion, which ensured failure.

As a result here we are, a so-called technologically advanced nation in the 21st century, still stuck with a system of weights and measures dating from before the 18th. We lost a multi-million dollar Mars probe some years back as a result of a units mix-up between Lockheed and JPL.

Ol' King George III must be laughing in his grave!

(Pet rant over!)