Gen 4 Staff Manual (In Japanese) =/ Specs/Design/Other Info

BTW visitors at the IAA in Frankfurt where told by Toyota officials that the new Prius is going to have towing capability.
If that's true,reducing PS or KW would even make more less sense !

 

They did many times !

 

ICE and EV output decreased doesn't make sense - Toyota said it is a little bit faster, even the President of Toyota US said the same *driving it*.
ICE efficiency by 4%? 38.5 + 4 != 40?
EV battery !?!? Neither the non PiP or the PiP of a 20 kWh battery - maybe the manual is hinting at an all EV model lol.
4WD options are awesome - I believe that and look forward to what efficiencies they allow here.
Li-Ion and NiMH makes sense...that was understood.
Lower center of gravity yes.
Improved rear head clearance yes.
We saw pictures of the rear suspension, still mixed though.
Battery under rear seat yes.
Gen 3 Gizmos going away? I wonder if the sun roof still exists?

I predict 8% for the AWD versions, and 10-15% for the "ECO" 2 WD Li-Ion version.
There is increased acceleration. Prius has been over time, whereas currently the Gen III goes from 0-60 in 9.7 seconds and Gen 1 did it in 12.9 (while each model increases efficiency as well) - I believe the Gen IV should be able to do it in 9.5 seconds or less...

One thing you may have forgot to mention is grill blocking....

 

40/38.5=1.039 = 3.9% increase.

That option still exists.

 

Yes but what about the solar panel ?
Well I have the solar roof on mine and it really does help,but if they don't offer that anymore then maybe it would be a good idea to give us a key with a button which is able to roll down all windows and sunroof before getting in the car .
Other manufacturers offer that and so should Toyota .

 

As for gen 3. Gizmos going away,Aisin employees at IAA which are one of the main suppliers of Toyota, aparantly said that the Nav will indeed work together with the cars system which should include HUD .
Ken said it will not .
Hard to say who's telling the truth here .
The Aisin employees or that staff manual .
I hope first !

 

as others mentioned relative to Gen3

Car could be still faster even with reduced output. They could gear it lower, or they could have traded power for more low end torque, which may improve pick up. It is also possible that new HSD has a wider range of ratios to provide more acceleration and better MPG at light load.

 

Maybe but Is that really Toyotas goal ?
I know Prius is more about efficiency rather than power,but up to now every new generation had better efficiency while even increasing system power output .
This would be the first time Toyota will increase efficiency by decreasing power output .
I am not saying that 55 maybe even 57 mpg while system power output is 122 hp isnt a great achievement,but by achieving it by decreasing power it doesn't sound as impressive as in the other generations .
People will say,ok it gets 57 mpg but their HSD has probably reached the end of the road if they now have to decrease power to make improvements on fuel efficiency !
I don't think that's what Toyota wants .
Toyota loves to impress people,especially with Prius !
If they finally reveal data on 29. Oktober and it turns out to be 122 KW and gets 57 mpg, now that would be really, impressive! !

 

Exactly, maxim power limits the maximum speed, which is already limited lower to 180 km/h-110mph, not acceleration.
Just to give an idea, when the HSI reaches the start of the PWR zone, the power output is under 30 hp.

 

I believe this thread is for the fact written on the Gen4 Staff Manual (In Japanese).

Speculations, desire and hope are off-topic.

Ken@Japan

 

Actually, I didnt forget to read that. I just didnt include that since it was abundantly was clear to me it will get better MPG.

However, with all the technological advancements the 2016 will benefit from, it still seems to me that if you made a Gen3 Prius with less horsepower, it would probably get better gas mileage anyway. I realize its a tall order to improve on near perfection, but it still seems like a last ditch effort to decrease total power (use less gas, make less power, get higher MPG).

Of course, we dont know yet what the EPA ratings are.. so I'll reserve my final judgement until then.

 

Let's do a little math, shall we?

Let's say the car, with a tank of gas and one occupant, weighs 1500kg (3,300 pounds).
Now, 60mph is 26.8m/s.
So, kinetic energy at 60mph is 0.5*1500*26.8^2 = 538,680 Joules
If you have 122kW of output, and no drag, you could theoretically add that energy in 538,680J / 122,000W = 4.4 seconds.

So why does it take nearly 10 seconds to get to 60mph?

It's not drag. Average drag during the run is maybe 5kW or so. Given an output of over 100kW, that's negligible.

It's because you can't deliver 122kW to the ground from a dead-stop all the way to 60mph. Near zero, it's much less and it doesn't get to full until you are quite a ways toward 60.

So, if the hybrid drive train is designed to deliver a wider range of ratios to get the ICE to full sooner, and a higher electric current (torque) over a wider range of that run so that you're power-limited rather than current (torque) limited during more of the run, you could get to 60 quite a lot faster that you can now, even with lower rated peak output.

My point is, there's a huge gap between what we can get now (about 10 seconds) and the theoretical limit (well under 5 seconds). The engineers could be working to close that gap using other means than simply more peak power output.

 

Many of the shots of the disguised mules show IRS. Any AWD variant has to have IRS (or a live axle, which would be insanity of an epic scale. ). I'm pretty sure it's all IRS.

 

would not be so sure. Rear is likely to be lifted off Altrus, and they sell it with both torsion beam and wishbone.
The fact that mules were seen with DWB does not exclude possibility of fitting twist beam on ECO or other base model 1? 2? In US

 

Just F.Y.I.:
Like I mentioned in #63 post of this thread
The Max. measured wheel power is around 81kW, comparing to TMC's cat. rating 100kW, in Prius G3.
The "transaxle loss" in not negligible.

Hello Ken,
I not sure whether my marks as below are correct,
but it seems that there is no reduction gear for MG2 this time, according to your close up photo?

 

reduction gear ratio = "number of teeth of yellow gear" / "number of teeth of blue gear"

Ken@Japan

 

Thanks, I get it.
MG2 now can tune the number of teeth of blue gear, get whatever reduction gear ratio wanted,
and does not need the more complex compound gear unit for transaxle like P410 in Prius G3.

 

There is one more gear-to-gear junction from the ICE side to the final drive, and one less gear-to-gear junction from the MG2 side to the final drive.

What it looks like is that there are no longer giant ball bearings that have to support the final drive ring gear from the outside. There is also the elimination of bearings that were needed for the reduction gearset planetary gears. This might be the 20%.

 

I don't really see anything going of topic here .
Yes this thread is about that gen. 4 Staff Manual,but it doesn't seem to match up with what Toyota has promised in many ways,so I think we should be able to question it .
In fact that's what keeps threads alive !

 

I thought SRU of MG2 was neat for packaging but the extra set of planetary gears add friction.

It does make sense to remove it like what Ford did and reduce 20% in friction (may include other improvements). They even manage to package it smaller.

If the weight is about the same as Gen3, reduced friction allowed lower power without compromise in acceleration, resulting in higher MPG.

It is good to see the 12v lead acid battery under the hood. They were able to downsize the inverter and HV transaxle enough.