2016 Prius - let's hear from buyers

The Avalon is obviously heavier and the ride is dampened.
The cabin of the Avalon is roomier and quieter
The Prius is more nimble.
Of course, the Prius gets 50% better gas mileage!
The seats in the Prius "wrap-around" the passengers. (not negative), while the Avalon provide more of a comfortable easy chair feeling

 

I just tried parking assist for the first time ever. It was good and will save me headaches in the future parking in between tight spaces but the car parked pretty damn close to the curb that when I turned the wheel it hit the curb. Also anyone know if it will warn me if I am close to hitting the cement block that's usually in front of certain parking spots?

 

'the seats are more comfortable than my avalon hybrid limited'. WOW! WOW! that is saying something.

 

Picked up my 2016 today. Traded my 2012 and walked out paying $32,210. I upgraded to package four and added the performance package. So far I love it! Need to read up on all the new toys this one offers though.

 

At that price, please tell me you have both ATP and PCP?

Errr, merged, you appear to be new so welcome. ATP = Advanced Technology Package and PCP = Premium Convenience Package.

 

welcome and congrats! all the best. why criticize everyone for what they paid? let them enjoy their new car without fear of overpaying.

 

No, not at all. It was for my edification and not the new owner. If it was taken that way, my apologies. It's "wishful thinking" on my part with hopes that the dealers are selling below MSRP. When I purchased my 2010 I had to pay ABOVE MSRP but demand and fuel prices were much higher.

 

Not a buyer, but I did get a chance to drive a 2016 Prius 3 today. IMHO, the posted reviews are pretty much dead on. There's a lot to like about the 2016. Decent ride quality, good pickup from 0 to 30 (lousy from 30 to 60), but I could not get comfortable in the drivers seat - no matter how much I fussed with the controls. Also, as previously pointed out, the interior bathroom white plastic trim is hideous. At least the Prius 2 has less of it. The Prius 3 that I drove also had all of the technology add-ons, which I found distracting, and the view out the rear window was pretty poor.

 

I found AAA buying service to be even cheaper than Costco - not sure you even have to be a AAA member to use it. I've used both Costco and AAA - check them both out before you part with your money.

 

I've used Costco in the past, very pleased with the results even if I had to drive 50 miles to a participating dealer. I've been a AAA member for about 20 years and had no idea they had a car buying service. Thanks for the tip!

 

I wonder why they did that ?
0-30 was allready pretty good on gen. 3 and while passing power is far from bad in the previous model,that's where they should have put the extra boost !
0-30 won't save lives but a better passing power,if underestimating a situation accidentally,might will !



Merged

On of the downsides of gen 3. Is the high level of tyre noise .
Did they improve that on the new model ?

 

Hmmm. Don't see how passing power will save lifes. Actually I do, but you have to be a really reckless driver to get into a such situation.

 

We have some metrics in: Ad Hoc 0-60 mph | PriusChat



It turns out the HP curve matches the shape found in the Toyota packages released by the engineers:

Funnily enough, the 2016 power is similar to the HP curves I'm getting from our 2010. Our 2010 peak HP reached ~118-121 HP in a maximum hill climb, above 90 mph indicated.

Speculation, the low-end acceleration, 0-30 mph, may be limited by the tire and/or transmission. Above 30 mph, @austingreen proposed that the eCVT may not be able to handle higher power blended in from the engine. This is an area I'm investigating with our 2010.

Passing on a two lane road needs careful planning regardless of vehicle power. Too much power, and punching it can find the marginal traction patches. Passing is a skill that too many people do badly.

I typically have acceleration space, 3-4 car lengths, waiting for passing traffic to get seconds away from clearing the approaching lane. Then I punch it to build up speed into the buffer zone and soon as the on-coming traffic passes, pull left, typically +10 mph faster than the car I'm passing. At the same time, I flash my lights and continue acceleration until past. Then I pull back into my lane while letting off on the accelerator. It takes skill and a brain to pass safely and I've used this with a 1966 VW microBus.

Bob Wilson

 

Maybe a lot of the improved acceleration impression is due to revised gas pedal response?

 

There is a lot going on in that graph and its a little hard for me to read it right, but here are my guesses.

0-25, hp is limited by psd and mg2. Here the best you can do is set the engine to maximum torque, which will put the maximum torque through the psd to the axis. In gen III I believe this was 4000 rpm, its 105lbs at 3600 rpm on the gen IV. That should slightly improve this 0-25 mph by pushing down peak torque rpm, more can be applied to the wheels. Here mg2 has been reduced in torque from 153 lb ft to 120lb ft. Oopse, that will reduce low speed accleration. And we have a, wait and see, as one change is positive and the other negative.

From that region 25-40 mph hp increases but slower as we are off the flat torque curve. Here the engine will likely move to its max hp instead of torque rating. The limits will be battery and mg1 feeding mg2 for peak power. Power will climb slightly from here as more of the engine hp can reach the wheels through the psd as speed increases, but there are more losses moving power through the path mg1 to mg2. At some speed this will stop increasing as mg2 loses efficiency at some high rpm. The new 121 maybe around the same as the old 134, as the new number should embrace the real peak hp, while the old one just added battery to engine without figuring what speed/power level could actually achieve that.

That power curve from 0-25 looks like one from a much bigger engine as it is using mg2's torque. Over 40 mph all that extra is gone and the car will accelerate like a 120 hp model, which is not very well. The fun to drive in reviews seems all down to better suspension and steering.

A larger lithium battery + mg2 and electronics to use them might have provided more fun to drive accelaeration without really impacting gas mpg. The option for motor and battery in the base 2 is probably less expensive to produce than the gen III, but toyota has added content in non drivetrain items instead of lowering the price.

 

Toyota mentioned it in their presentations so I think it is a control law change. However, the 0-60 times are pretty much lock step with Gen-3, ~9.8 seconds.

Bob Wilson

 

how many on here are driving the 2016 now? I've seen very few posting their mpg results. I seen one 51mpg and another 54 mpg and of course the one with 88 mpg.

 

The car provides a daily log of gas mileage. (As well as monthly). So far every day I have had the car I have exceeded 60 MPG. Lifetime 360 miles and 62.5 MPG.

 

I haven't seen official 0-60 numbers. Are they out? I assume that the biggest difference in power is the way toyota is calculating it on the new ones. The gen III likely never put out 134 from the motor to the axle + engine to axle.

New engine curve hits max torque earlier, so I can see faster 0-25, but slower 40-60, yielding similar 0-60. This would not really be a control law change, but a change in software to do the same optimizations with different hardware.