2010 Prius warms up cabin 1 minute faster... plus more juicy info

75% of what? 0-60 time? Fail. MPG. Fail. Emissions? Already nearly perfect. Fail. Battery life. Same one. Fail. EV time. Fail. Sticker price? Fail.

Not to say that the 2010 isn't wornderfully improved, but the 75% figure is meaningless.

 

<AHEM>I believe it preheats the engine block. Thanks for the 'heads up,' I'll pass on that source.

Bob Wilson

 

Great, that means that it would take me 9 minutes, instead of 10 for me to get cabin temp to 74, at 5am, and 41 degree outside air temp. on my 15 minute drive to work!

The rest of you all who live in the real ICEBOX, well you can gauge your results accordingly!

 

Isn't that part of the chain towards getting cabin heat?

Considering how little attention most people pay towards engine warmup, cabin heat is another way to advertise this improvement.

 

I get decent heat by the time the second 5-min segment appears on the consumption screen. That's from a garage at about 20°F in outside temps below 0°F on the highway about 3 blocks from my house.

My guess is the advantage will reveal itself more for those that do lots of non-highway driving. But then again, at 70 MPH, the chilling affect on a car is well pronounced.
.

 

one minute faster on warmup sounds like a near 75% improvement on that. which in turn, reduces the inefficient segment of the early morning drive by a similar amount meaning that people with short commutes like me (me 7.1 miles, her 5.5 miles one way) may see a very significant overall improvement. on both our commutes, the max speed is 35 mph... makes warmups as slow as they can be.

and i think the 75% improvement figure is based on several different parameters... power is 7%, gas mileage is 6%, etc.... add it up, might not be all that far from 75% after all

 

Yup, we could see a big bump in efficiency during that first 5-min warmup segment.

It will be fascinating to hear the first ownr reports coming in. Of course this time, we have a summer debut... which will be quite different from the winter debut last time. Remember that? Reporters took advantage of the cold weather MPG to give the impression the Iconic model didn't deliver as promised. But then when the weather warmed, all the criticism vanished.
.

 

One, I don't think that addition was what was said.

Two, that is such astonishingly bad math thinking, I don't know how to respond. If I take 10% of the federal health budget, 10% off the military, 10% off education, 10% off welfare, 10% off foreign aid, have I reduced the Federal budget by %50?

 

No, but everyone who heard that is now 50% more stupid for having heard it!

(My apologies to Dave and some old movie script writer. Was it in Tommy Boy?)

 

Vague statement yes, but I believe the effort for 75% improvement probably went into other factors of the car as well, i.e. space, comfort, and performance.

 

Most politicians would say yes. :-p

 

I suspect the "75% improvement" is a "translation error". They probably meant "reduce inefficiency to 75% of previous model", or a 25% improvement in efficiency.

Just getting rid of the thermos, electric coolant transfer pump, and fuel tank bladder is a real benefit as far as I'm concerned!

During the Edmonton "meet the Prius" event, I was explaining to another participant the bladder was gone and one engineer commented to me "that bladder reduced your tank capacity by five litres in the winter, right?" My answer was no, because there was never any way to figure out if or by how much it was/is reduced. It was/is inconsistent at best.

I won't comment on the time taken to get the cabin temp up from a cold start, because unless I drive Pearl for more than 30 min. the cabin never fully warms up. We don't have a thermometer inside anyway (though I had one stuck to the dash for a year, but discarded it as it was garbage). I do get nice hot air blowing out of the vents after about 5 min. of driving. Of course our ambient temps are a little low right now (STILL!!), currently at -27C, "warming up" to a nice -21C this afternoon.