Quoting also the second part of the owner manual, i see the possibility that the blue bar is nothing else than the PID of accelerator pedal position. It could be a way to teach how to avoid excessive acceleration (staying in the ECO area), which is different from what we can undestand from the powemeter, just think of how different an eco-acceleration must be starting from a stop or already at some speed. If this is the case, an easy test with Torque can spot it. Very sad not a single Torque user is popping up with a Prius 2016.
FWIW, the estimates have been spot on with a fill of 9.91 gallons after 541 miles (estimated 54.1). Best was ~70mpg on a 30-mile round trip and the trend seems to be settling down into the high 50s - 60, after being somewhat low initially.
I read some where the 3 modes (ECO, NORMAL and PWR) where "shifted" with gen 4. So that ECO in the gen 4 is roughly the same as NORMAL was in gen 3. Can anyone corroborate that?
Another update on my 2016 eco. As usual, a good mix of 79 miles an hour highway, 65 miles an hour Highway, and about 50% city. Total miles on the car are approaching 2000. 415.9 miles. 8.334 gallons. I calculate 49.9 mpg. Guage indicated 52.4 mpg. Grumbles.
I would say it's the 79 mph that is the mpg killer. Just for fun try a few days of commuting at 60 mph (55 if your brave enough) and report back pls I'm certain you will add at least 10 mpg to your average..
I think his problem isn't the 49.9 mpg but rather the discrepancy between that and the 52 displayed/indicated on the trip computer.
I thought his grumbles were that his Eco was getting sub advertised Mpg?.... Anyways... 5% variance seems on par with what others are reporting with the Gen4. Does not seem too far fetched. I know we were hoping it would be more accurate than the Gen 3 but seems that it might not be? My Gen 3 averaged 7% variance so 5% is an improvement I guess.
First fill up! 476 miles on the odometer. 9.32 gallons of gas. 51 MPG calculated. Gauge indicated 53.1.
Just confirmed that our PiP is nearly 4% off in mph (actual speed 77 instead of 80 as shown) via my handheld gps. So an 800 mile tank is really a 770 mile tank. Mpg mixes in electric miles so I have no idea how much the mpg is off. In testing your 2016, check the mileage posts on the highway for both distance and time it takes. I think a +/- 3% difference is considered normal/acceptable. Do it for 10 miles if you are worried the posts aren't always at the exact right location.
What Mendel didn't want to post was the speedometer is -designed- to read high, as in, the govt. wants it to. It's the -odometer- that you should be checking, not the speedometer. And finally, what -I- have not wanted to post but will now anyway. Please chill out people! It's a Prius, not a lab instrument! I doubt very much that it would be -possible- to build something that would be more accurate than what we are seeing, keeping in mind the different driving styles of so many people operating the car. 5% is phenomenal, I would expect 10% average accuracy on fuel economy with all the variables.
The early Miata speedometer was set to 3 to 4 mph higher to seem going 0 to 60 mph faster. My 20 year old Miata will read 60 mph and my GPS will read 56 mph. This will not affect the odometer reading just means instead of traveling 60 miles in 1 hour will take 1 hour and around 5 minutes.
Yeah sorry. High reading speedometers are pretty much mandated. I believe the rules are it has to be accurate or a bit high. Never low. So manufacturers aim for slightly high. The reasoning is commendable: to try to get people to slow down. Odometers are mandated to be reasonably accurate, for various obvious reasons, warranty claims for one. Mpg display is a relatively new factor, and the only accuracy limits are customers' credulity. Some manufacturers keep it fairly accurate, even slightly pessimistic. Toyota, not so much.
When you realize the speed and distance comes from the brake controller, the errors become trivial: odometer and tripmeter - off by the tire size error (revs/mile) mph - off by the tire size error (revs/mile) MPG - off by the tire size error (revs/mile) NHW11 tire size study | PriusChat Specific for 2010 Prius, Gen-3: How to improve gas mileage in this situation? | Page 2 | PriusChat Using: P205/65R15 (Yokohama, @787 rev/mile) Bob Wilson
Half way through my first tank of gas. Driving normally around town and on the highway, and I'm averaging 56.4mpg in my two Eco. If I tried to get more, I bet I could be in mid sixties.
Actually another reason is so that when people upgrade their wheels, it'll still read over and meet legal requirements. European manufacturers tend to have the larger discrepancies (I guess due to the higher highway speeds and tendency to upgrade wheels and suspension?)
That is a good question. I Drive on the highway two days a week, otherwise I Drive around a pretty typical small American city, and when I'm in town then gauge reads usually between 55 and 60 mpg. My commute drives are usually less than 50. But as tideland Prius said, my posts are more a minor complaint about the inaccuracy of the gage. Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy with the MPG, & I have to say it handles so much better than my 2010, I love the car. I just wish the gauge was honest.
Cool, thanks. I might do that. I'm actually okay with the bar graph that shows up in the radio display, it shows me if I'm over fifty or not anyway. Good advice though thank you.
