FuelEconomy.gov official ratings posted - 58 City/53 Hwy Prius Eco - 54 City / 50 Hwy for Prius

It's just the tires, nothing else.
I got the 15'' tires on the prius 4 touring and I have the figures of the eco.

 

If I get a four (non touring) which does not come with a spare and I opt to NOT get the ATP and PCP Packages, this setup can't weigh too much more than an ECO right? in essence the only difference is softex, nav / a few electronic thingy's, heated seats, rolling tonneau cover..

I could pump up the base fours tires a few extra psi and almost be there right?

 

Weight has little to do with MPG, so I wouldn't worry too much about that. Get the ATP and PCP if those are features you want.

According to the post just above yours, the only difference is the tires. Keep the car aerodynamic by not installing a roof rack or putting those Jack In The Box antenna balls on, and keep the rolling resistance down by fitting LRR tires, and keep them a little over-inflated, and you could get the same MPG as the Eco.

 

I have the ATP and the PCP and have a lifetime MPG (calculated) of 65.5 - over 10,000 miles. The added weight does not seem to really matter.

 

I tend to completely agree with Redpoint5 - Toyota's excuse (weight) for removing the 5th seat in the Prime is foolish.
After looking at the EPA numbers, what has been achieved? Very minimal in terms of fuel efficiency, and now we have a goofy looking Prius.

I'm in the market and looking to buy .... but I see nothing on the market that causes me to remove my wallet and put money on the table. My "short-list" gets shorter with everything I read about the vehicles in this category (shorter meaning eliminated .... not selective on one)

 

The focus on the Gen IV Prius was to improve the handling characteristics and to make the styling appeal to those that want a "cool" looking car. This was likely done to shift the image of the Prius from not only being a fuel economy leader, but have wider appeal to the general car audience.

Improving fuel economy has diminishing returns and becomes increasingly difficult. For this reason, it's wise for Toyota to address other aspects of the vehicle and to shift focus away from drastic improvements in MPG. Consumers would not accept a Prius that is drastically more fuel efficient because the shape would be extreme, and probably compromise utility.

That said, Fulley shows the Gen IV as being much more fuel efficient compared to the Gen III. Time will tell if those numbers hold up, or if the early adopters just tend to be more efficient drivers.

 

I don't know. I keep trying to say it is my driving, but my mpg is just unbelievable, much better than expected and I don't feel like I'm driving ultra conservatively. Just this morning, MID showed 85.5 mpg to work (below). It does seem like the heavier the traffic, the better I do. Counter intuitive to a non-hybrid. But these numbers are even blowing away what I used to get in my 2006 Honda Insight which had a lifetime 59.9 mpg over about 115,000 miles. J

 

What do the green bubbles represent next to their respective icons?

 

From page 121 in the manual . . . the green represents your driving score in the three areas as indicated below, with the final score representing your use of AC. J

 

I'll bet that weight does affect the EPA numbers for the Eco. The probably generate the numbers using a standard formula (not empirical data) and one of the variables will be total weight. Also the aero has to be a bit different as there is no rear wiper and that will add a bit of drag.

 

Of course weight matters, but a couple hundred pounds in real life isn't very significant. The EPA numbers are mostly provided by the manufacture, with only 15% of vehicles getting randomly chosen to be government tested. They might also test a vehicle that significantly misses the EPA submitted figure due to consumer complaint.

The testing process places the vechicle on a dyno, the drag coefficient data is input into the computer along with weight, and the car is driven in a very specific set of ways to arrive at the MPG.

As stated above, the majority of difference in MPG between the Eco and Standard Prius is due to the tires. You could just equip a standard Prius with the same tires and get close to the same MPG.

 

That is inaccurate. The roll-down coefficients which are measured drives the dyno settings. The rest is handled by measuring the exhaust gasses in a large bag during a standard, reproducible, protocol.

Bob Wilson

 

I had the Two Eco for about two weeks and I'm getting 57 combined which is pretty close to the official rating. My guess it will probably go down to about 56 over time.

In 20+ years of driving, I only had one flat tire and I had a free service that came within 15 minutes. So, not having spare is no big deal for me. But there are few things that I wish the Two eco had, that's available in the 3 or 4. If I could do it all over it again, I probably would go with the 3 or 4.... The saving from better gas mileage on the Two eco is just not worth it.

But I'm still very happy with the Two Eco and I hope it's trouble free for the next 10+ years.

 

Guys, I'm sorry I didn't read the whole thread. But I want to put my comment here - I'm driving a Prius 3. It's a loaner while my 4 touring is having the rear struts replaced. I just finished a 60 mile loop to the airport with 59.6 mpg. This is 10 mpg higher than my vehicle got on the same terrain 2 weeks ago. The only difference between the 2 models that I am aware of is the tires. And maybe bad struts? I am shocked! Wanted to report here. My 4 touring is riding on Yokohama blueearth 17 touring. Hmmm....

 

Welcome James L to the forum! My name is James L, and I am from San Diego. How's the weather down there? We're getting ready for a big storm.

 

Going from 17" wider/lower profile to 15" will have some effect, but I don't think 10 mpg. Maybe some other factors too?

 

What is the trim on the loaner ?

 

I'd be mentioning it to the service department, asking them to check (maybe plug your car into the diagnostics) why yours isn't as good as the loan car.

I assume you don't carry excessive "stuff" in your car - it's amazing how a few cushions, mats, blankets, shopping bags, tool boxes, CD cases,. small elephants etc can add up.

 

Hello,
I apologize if this is a repeat question. After we pick up our 2017 Three, and it goes through the break in period locally, we need to drive cross country. I understand highway mileage is lower than city. We don't cruise very fast, usually 70-75 mph. Of course variables like how much weight is carried, strong head winds, and high ambient temperatures all make a difference.
Could some people share the MPG we can expect cruising at 70-75 mph? Perhaps, the difference between 70 mph cruising and 75 mph cruising is significant.
Thank you very much.
Peace

 

You'll probably do just fine, those 4th gens have disgustingly good mpg. But still, 70~75 is getting up there. If you can manage to stay right and stick around 55~60, you will do a lot better.