Prius a paler shade of green

damm.. shame........
ok gen4 prius .. where are you.. want beter MPG not less then possible.

 

Maybe they should build the Prius XFE like Chevy is with the Cobalt haha....

 

Everything in life is a compromise. I'm sure that by making the Prius smaller, lighter, with less features they could have made it more economical also. They could have used composite panels and frame, thinner glass, fixed glass in the back doors or even a 2 door shell and cut weight while adding cost but would you want it then? The solar roof is heavy, so is the air conditioner, air bags? more weight, I'm sure with weight reduction 165, 16 tyres could have been fitted on composite rims at huge cost to lower rolling resistance at the cost of handling but economy at all costs, right?

I think they got it right myself. Also I suspect a smaller engine would not result in lower highway MPG.

 

Any car CAN be designed more green. This is not a shock that the new Prius could have been more green.
The gen 2 Prius COULD have been more green, the Hummer could have been more green, my bicycle COULD have been more green.
If people want want more mileage at the expense of less power, they need to tell auto companies that fact. Once enough people are doing so, we will more and better options.
For now, the Prius, even though it isn't as green as possible, is about the best option for a mass produced vehicle.

 

This may just be one person's opinion, but if it is true, it reflects worse on Honda and the Insight. Toyota are openly admitting that the car could have been produced with a better mpg and that economy was compromised for better performance. The Prius beats the Insight for economy and performance. Honda couldn't beat a compromise from Toyota.

 

I heard that the larger engine wasn't for performance per say, it was to help the lot of us highway drivers to get better mileage. This new engine is said to get better mileage at highway speeds.

 

It's no secret that the Gen 2 was weak at faster than 60mph (100km/h). Relatively speaking of course! Westerners have both higher speed limits and a tendency to speed, leaving oversized diesels often coming out with better volumetric fuel economy than the Prius - and Prius doing worse than the government's estimates in most drivers' hands, because the tests don't reflect drivers' behaviour.

As a result, the new car needed to do better, something Toyota claim to have achieved. We're yet to see what it will actually do at higher speeds. Which? magazine in the UK (rough equivalent of Consumer Reports) add a constant 70mph test to the EU standard driving cycle, using the same other conditions, so this should show whether the goal has been reached.

Personally I find the Gen 2 acceleration plenty and have never been near the top speed.

The car is still primarily built from pressed steel. It's high-tensile steel, which means it can be thinner than mild steel, but it's still heavier than aluminium alloy. The hood door and rear door (hatchback) are aluminium because they're not stressed pieces. However aluminium alloy can't be pressed, so it's much more expensive to produce and assemble. The original Honda Insight was aluminum, but it cost £17,055 in 2000, which is £21,515 in 2008 pounds. For comparison a new Prius T Spirit (top of the range) will be £21,230.

 

Hmm...seems like that is something the japanese always assume. That's what ruined the XB in my opinion. The assumption that it has to be made bigger, faster and stronger.

But what was all the talk about how the bigger engine made less RPM's at a higher speed thus helping with MPG's? If the truth is smaller engine would of been better for MPG's, then was that all just smoke and mirrors BS?

Right now, 50 mpg is the benchmark for a commercially produced and marketed automobile, so I don't care. But it makes you wonder what type of MPG could of been obtained if boosting up the horsepower hadn't been a priority.

 

Uh, I highly suspect that Toyota, trying to further expand the demographics for their Prius, increased the power output of the Prius to sell more of them.

They've obviously done quite well with current power levels. But hey, if they can improve power by 15-20% and still improve fuel economy by 10% they can please both sides of the isle:

The ones would would buy a Prius if it only had a bit more passing and acceleration power.

And the ones who buy a Prius because it is the most fuel efficient mid-sized sedan in the world.

The author of the article is full of it and he knows it.

 

Aha,

The truth will out!!!

 

The dart 2010 strikes the bull's eye with the balance of more power, lowest fuel economy, lowest emission, better handling, more interior volume and more hybrid exclusive premium patented features.

If anything, it is a greener shade.

 

The Prius gets better mileage than a Smart. Just consider what a Smart class car could get with Prius technology. 100 mpg?

 

Of course he might have been playing a 'mind game' with the Honda engineers whose Insight just got beat. This could be a little 'zinger' like when I was in college and running laps. One night Tim, my running buddy, and I overtook some ROTC cadets.

Longish haired me and my rock'n roll style haired, English running buddy would follow behind them to get them to 'pick up the pace.' They would see us and were not about to let some long-haired hippies over take them. Then my running buddy and I would start to breath ... 'gently' ... and pass them as if we weren't even breathing hard. . . .

I would not want to play poker with Otsuka-san.

Bob Wilson

 

Well, what they really should be getting ready for with that larger engine is something like a true 6 passenger vehicle. Whether it is a station wagon, etc. it should be possible to create a very high mpg option in the next passenger size range.

And for the smaller engine...Toyota should be putting together a true Insight killer for those who really only need a 2 + 2 seater with the highest overall mpg, and lowest hybrid cost. Might be tricky on cab set up with the short hood and therefore short footwells; but a lower sports car like seating position, lower clearance, and maybe shaving 6 inches off overall height might be possible.

For this latter I'm thinking of something more like my 240SX hatchback which had a .29 Cd despite the long nose that would not be needed in a small engine hybrid. (Didn't have much of a back seat, but it could be used when needed.) Should be possible to get it to ~0.26 Cd, along with the smaller cross section, and a curb weight of around 2600. I base the curb weight on the 240, removing the 2.4L, dropping in the smaller engine and hybrid drive train, reducing the length of the nose and size of the gas tank. With the batteries in the rear, weight distribution should be decent. Light weight, smaller cross section, and the GenII engine should be able to get it in the 55-60 mpg EPA range, and it would do really well on the highway.

 

ok, still got a lot of driving to do to really make a definitive statement and also have to check the results for colder weather driving, but and this is a big but,

i think everyone who either has a classic or traded in one to get a 2010 will see a much higher than 6-8% increase in gas mileage.

with adding different modes, Toyota has given the power people the extra kick they want, but also has provided the tools for hypermilers to do much better.

like i said, just prelim info here, but i just got my 3rd 60 mpg tank in 2000 miles. (granted a few short tanks there) my SPM only had 5 of them in 40,000 miles.

granted i am not a hypermiler by any stretch, but its all relative here.

 

<COUGH COUGH> Everyone? <GRINS>

Now here is something I can't do with my 2010, yet:

Of course very few other could either. This was a 30 mile, round trip, and though it really doesn't matter, the display showed a value higher than my vanity plate. <grins>

Bob Wilson