AGW deniers always mention one weather system that gave them goose bumps. There is no doubt that AGW exists & is increasing..... even during the last 12+ years of Total Solar Irradiation decrease. When TSI returns to its normal higher level, then Earth & bio-organisms will really feel the heat jump.
I’m carious to ask how is the traffic, speed, terrain, duration of most common commute and etc on a daily basis. There was a lady here on PC that had awful mpgs, turned out she live in mountain areas which I driven in that city before and can see why she had low mpgs.
I personally think a person has to be an idiot to think the Earth is flat, but here we are in 21st century with an ever-rising flat earther movement. Stupidity runs fast these days.
I too am confused by the OP comments, but I'd like to add that if he/she's getting 40+ miles to a gallon that STILL way better than the vast majority of gas cars out there, and most of them are SUVs which we all know are sucking the oil wells dry.
& you said, "And it snowed on my birthday last April." Oh, I see. You believe humans have ~ 1/3rd of 1% effect on AGW..... that being on one day in April.
My friend & I, amateur astronomers, had our telescopes set up in the parking lot of a grocery store, showing customers, views of the planets, double stars, globular star clusters, etc. Kids (adults, too) love this stuff & this time, there was a group of 4 kids looking through our scopes. While teaching a bit of astronomy, I mentioned in passing, that the sun was 108 times greater in diameter than the Earth, as the Earth orbited the sun. Each of the kids didn't believe us, saying that can't be true. Now the kids seemed to be good kids, weren't shining us on, & truly didn't believe us. Finally, I said, "Go ask your teachers", & they left us. About a month later, my friend & I were in the parking lot showing astronomy again. Those kids showed up & confessed that their teachers agreed with us. I think that was one of my better teaching moments.
I didn't see where the OP lives and what the temperatures were for his poor gas mileage. He must not have test drove a Prius before he bought one.
huh? I simply stated it snowed on my birthday last April. It was more of a example of just how messed up the weather is.
I suggest these mpg figures are not unusual for folks that live/work in metropolitan areas and drive "normal"...based on my 2010 II and 2015 4. Yes we all know how to play the video game to get and brag about our best tank though...mine being 61.9. Ride and noise quality depends on what you drove previously as a point of reference. The fact that you bio shows you with a 2010 and no mention of total miles on chassis might also indicate tire, bearing and/or suspension issues. Then again...you just may have buyers remorse and looking for an outlet to convince yourself to buy something else you really wanted.
So over the past few days, weather conditions had been less then conducive to good fuel economy. Lows 0-10 below F, highs of maybe 20. With the warmup penalty, being frozen solid in ice, and hiding in my car at lunch I was at 37.6 mpg on the dash display. Today started at 28 F and has warmed to 45. The result has been an increase to 40.3 on the dash display. The next 6 days are supposed to be 50 or greater. Thank goodness I can turn the heat down.
Did the OP ever say if he invested in an alignment / tune up? That resulted in an average gain of 8 mpg on my Gen 2
Unfortunately, due to contact with a deep pothole, the forward underbelly cover is missing. A lower grille block would do no good right now. LoL. But yes this is with my Gen 4 transplant.
Have a 2010 Prius II with just under 65,000 miles on it. Moved to Prescott Valley AZ from Richfield WI(just north of Milwaukee) April 2016. In Wisconsin, had to drive farther to get to almost anything, so I got better mileage. Could "work it" using country roads etc.. Last year I drove only 2,200 miles. Most of it short trips of 1 or 2 miles. So often did not reach even 163 degrees for the coolant, so no stage 4 operation. I do have a block heater and plug it in for 2.5 hours before driving when possible - that helps. In Wisconsin, I was able to get at least 50 mpg and often over 60 mpg tanks, not here. Lifetime average(bought the car new) is 53.57 mpg. My tanks here vary between 45 and 50 mpg. Oh, I had to get new tires, and bought some Hercules Tour 4.0 plus because they were fairly cheap. Rougher ride, possibly worse gas mileage. But I only fill-up(~8 gals or less) every other month, so there you have it. The traffic signals here are not synced very well, and there are hills as well. So, if I did not have the block heater, did only very short trips, drove aggressively, I would get much lower numbers too. BTW - got my wife a 2017 Prius 2, and it is getting amazing mpg. A world of difference with the newest generation.
My 3rd-hand Gen 2 did not have this undercover. Would it's absence create extra drag, reducing economy?
Fuelly is showing the 2010 Prius averaging 45.3 mpg over 1350 vehicles. That pretty much means that for every 50+ mpg one out there there's a 40 mpg or less one to offset it. Unfortunately the OP's car falls in the latter category but it shouldn't be totally unexpected. Just unlucky. The original complaint referred to three tanks. If that is all its been driven since the OP joined in August, tank #1 was filled when it was late summer here (he's in CA but we're not sure where) and tank #3 would be in winter. Fuel economy does go down some in the winter months. Also, three tanks spread over that amount of time would be an indicator the car is not being driven enough to be anywhere near its efficiency capabilities. We have no idea what his average drive is like.
This reply comes from my inspection underneath our 2012 Gen 3 but may be relevant: After carefully looking at that undercover a couple of times while I was underneath changing the oil, I would answer “yes” a lack of the undercover would cause a more turbulent air flow starting at the engine bay area and thus possibly a slight decrease in gas mileage. However, the plastic under-cladding stops short of the catalytic converter and the remainder of the underneath surface of our Gen 3 is uneven and would still create turbulent air flow. Secondly, the plastic under cladding itself is not that smooth, with many bumps, indentations, and protrusions to the extent that it would not in my judgment create a laminar air flow. I have considered trying to fabricate a replacement out of thin gauge sheet metal that would be perfectly smooth and create a decent laminar air flow at least for the first section of the airstreams ‘ traverse underneath the car, but I am not totally sure that a laminar flow would reduce tbe overall CD. In aircraft a laminar flow is valued, but underneath a car the airstream also interacts with the road surface, so the situation is more aerodynamically complex. Back to your question: at least one person on this forum posted that he had removed that plastic undercover and he perceived no impact on gas mileage.
Thank you for taking the time to detail your experience. It turns out that my car was absent of a few covering panels at time of purchase. Im finding out after the fact
