2010 pulse and glide and other tech. still works?

a64pilot,

When you speak, I pay attention. I was very impressed by your mileage on your last tank! It's inspired me to see how well I can do, but I'm in a holding pattern until I can find a gas station with ethanol-free gas.

Bryan

 

Only have the 2010 I think the glide works pretty swell.

 

Although I've only had 7 fill ups so far, I've been experimenting with different techniques on the last three tanks with pretty good success. Here's my Fuelly page. On my current tank I added limited use of Neutral to my testing. I don't get a lot of opportunity to use it on my daily commute but there are a couple of places where it seems to work pretty well. It's all around 35mph and towards the end of the drive so the ICE is warm and the battery is charged which makes it fairly ideal. This is all happening at 5:30am so there's little traffic. I try to accelerate in the 3/4's area of the HSI range and P&G from there 100% ECO mode. My tires are 37/35 PSI and I only burn non-Ethanol fuel. I'm currently holding around 65.7 MPG on the HSI and I now seem to be able to repeat that level consistently at least until the weather changes. P&G seems to work for me even if I do "occasionally" catch myself holding my breath as if it would help when I'm trying to get that extra 1/10 MPG.

The biggest barrier I've seen (beyond technique and mental attitude that day) to maintaining a high MPG average is the traffic around you and what methods it will allow you to use safely. Some days are much harder than others.

 

My thoughts on P&G in the Gen III compared to Gen II

Gen III is just as easy to enter Glide as the Gen II. The technique is
the same. The difference I have noted is that the HSI and Energy screen is more sensitive then Gen II, so it is harder to hold a no arrows condition. To keep from constantly working and refining the pedal, I have gone to using N once the glide is established.

The obtainable MPG in P&G with the Gen III is noticable lower then the Gen II. I think that this is because of the larger ICE. The glide distances seem to be a little longer in the Gen III, so the difference in MPG between the Gen II and III are not as great at the higher P&G range and at highway speeds. At slow speed P&G between (15-22 MPH), the Gen III is not even close to the Gen II. So the really high MPG's (130+) that we sometimes put up at picnic and MPG challenges, I don't think are obtainable in the Gen III.

 

Bryan,
You shouldn't, I really don't know what I'm doing, I'm very much a neophyite here. Many others do MUCH better.I'm leaning from reading Their posts. I've got maybe a few thousand miles and a couple months experience compared to their years and tens of thousands of miles.
All I did was to merely conserve momentum, brakes are the enemy and also contrary to Toyota's recommendation, I use the electric motor only for acceleration, anytime I'm at constant speed, I try to keep the ICE lit. It's my opinion that if use the traction battery to maintain speed, you'll pay for it eventually.
People like Ken @ Japan are I believe getting twice the mileage I am, but I'm honestly not hypermiling either, just driving normally for me. A little slower especially on acceleration when the absence of traffic allows, but nothing extreme.
On edit: Don't worry about E10, it's effect is small and the actual amount of ethanol will vary wildly from one day to another. I get all my gasoline from the local Chevron Jobber that sells it to fleets. My reason is so that I can burn it in an airplane and still be legal. Ethanol is not allowed to be used in airplanes, not because it would harm anything, but because nobody will spend the considerable amount of money to prove that it won't harm anything. Sort of like cell phones in commercial aircraft. They really won't harm anything, there have to be thousands of them on now in aircraft flying, not everyone remembers to turn them off and there has never been one single accident from them, but you must still turn them off.
I copied this from Wikipedia
Fuel economy
In theory, all fuel-driven vehicles have a fuel economy (measured as miles per US gallon, or liters per 100 km) that is directly proportional to the fuel's energy content.[39] In reality, there are many other variables that come in to play that affect the performance of a particular fuel in a particular engine. Ethanol contains approx. 34% less energy per unit volume than gasoline, and therefore in theory, burning pure ethanol in a vehicle will result in a 34% reduction in miles per US gallon, given the same fuel economy, compared to burning pure gasoline. Since ethanol has a higher octane rating, the engine can be made more efficient by raising its compression ratio. In fact using a variable turbocharger, the compression ratio can be optimized for the fuel being used, making fuel economy almost constant for any blend. .[17][18] For E10 (10% ethanol and 90% gasoline), the effect is small (~3%) when compared to conventional gasoline,[40] and even smaller (1-2%) when compared to oxygenated and reformulated blends.[41] However, for E85 (85% ethanol), . Actual performance may vary depending on the vehicle. Based on EPA tests for all 2006 E85 models, the average fuel economy for E85 vehicles resulted 25.56% lower than unleaded gasoline.[42] The EPA-rated mileage of current USA flex-fuel vehicles[43] should be considered when making price comparisons, but it must be noted that E85 is a high performance fuel, with an octane rating of about 104, and should be compared to premium. In one estimate[44] the US retail price for E85 ethanol is 2.62 US dollar per gallon or 3.71 dollar corrected for energy equivalency compared to a gallon of gasoline priced at 3.03 dollar. Brazilian cane ethanol (100%) is priced at 3.88 dollar against 4.91 dollar for E25 (as July 2007).

 

I'm new to all of this (this if my first Prius and I've only had the car a few days) but when I was out driving around the first night (with my Scangauge II connected) I noticed that EV mode goes up to about 43mph (as indicated on the SG II) and higher than that I assume it's in warp stealth because the ICE is running at about 1000rpm but the MPG gauge still shows 100 instant. To know if the engine is in fuel cut, the SG II will show open loop (this works on any car) --- but I didn't have that gauge showing, so I'm not 100% sure if I was indeed in warp stealth.

Of course the question is can you keep up zero fuel consumption on flat ground with the ICE turning over at 1000rpm at say -- 48mph? Don't know, but I don't see why not.

My daily commute has 35mph speed limits the entire way so I can't test unless I drive out of LA like to Malibu on the PCH...

 

Pretty sure it's known that above 46 MPH the ICE is running. I think voltage to the fuel injectors was monitored to be sure. I would think warp stealth would not be desirable. I would think using battery to spin the ICE would deplete the battery pretty quick. I would think just burning enough fuel to idle the engine would surely be above 100 MPG?
No, I think you can't sustain 48 MPH on flat ground and not burn fuel.