Correct-- Sorry not to have included that. The biggest variable between my tanks has been air temperature. It had been unseasonably warm in the Boston area (hardly needed a jacket when I took the avatar photo on Plum Island two weeks ago) but it was just 20* at fill-up this am. One thing I have noticed about the display MPG (for total miles driven) is that while it settles in on a rather accurate number, it tends to bounce around more than the math would suggest possible.
What I actually want from Toyota is a competitive plug in car. In terms of fuel economy testing, it doesn't matter to me if Toyota tested another Prius with larger wheels. I just thought it odd that they took the step beyond required testing with the Camry hybrid, and reverted back to playing withe rules like everyone else with the new Prius. They do require testing of each wheel size in other markets, and, IIRC, Toyota tested the battery types separately in Japan. Your car isn't broken in yet. Along with the ECU learning your driving style and local fuel mix, worn tires have lower rolling resistance, and the manufacturer is allowed to use tires with 4,000 miles on them under the new rules for the EPA test.
I have the data, but haven't done the math in a long time .... Broadly speaking, the numbers on my first 2016 tanks are what we aspire to get with the 2010 in the summer. We never come close to breaking 50 in the colder months on the 2010. Not a fair comparison, though. The 2016 includes at least 400 rush hour miles per week on 'Route 495', and the 2010 is driven in a very mixed bag of conditions. BTW-- If you ever come up behind me (my white 4 has a Whale plate with a beautiful black frame and a black oval sticker next to it) , I expect 2 short flashes of your head light, then one long so I know its you. I will gladly get out of your way.
We had some warmer days and here is what our 16s been getting so far. Each day was a round trip with about 10 highway miles each way @65 MPH over to the next town. The rest was in town averaging from 25 to 50MPH. To give a comparison, the best I could get out of my 05, when really trying, was 56 MPG on the same round trips .
I am still somewhat confused on the 2016 Prius. Does the computer generated MPG reflect the same as the calculated MPG? Or is it like the 2010-2015 Prius where the MPG figures computer generated are always reading over 3-4 mpg or so I recall Wayne Gerdes (cleanmpg.com) testing the 2016 Prius and in his testing the mpg gauge was accurate.
In my first two tanks of my 2016, the MFD gas mileage is more optimistic than real-world calculations. (small sample size for sure).
Wayne along with all of the other initial first drive reviewers tested prototypes...they were not full production vehiclas, in fact the second one he drove arrived with some body and underbody damage that Toyota let him remove with a sawsall, because it was going to the crusher in a week...his reported accurate MPG on their displays. So far it seems with the small sample size production 16's report slightly optimistic results; not as egregiously previous gens.
So do the gen 3s have a bladder in the tank like the 2s? Am I correct in assuming the 4s do not have one? I gave up trying to accurately calculate the mileage in my 05 as it would be both higher and lower without rhyme or reason with the bladder. With my Tacoma I could fill until fuel was at the bottom of the cap so I knew that the pump never shutoff early.
no. gen 2 was the last and only bladder. my 2012 is spot on, with 8 fuel bars each representing one gallon.
We don't have to dig much to find truth in the lower MPG claim with the 215-17" vs 195-15". Toyota Europe 3Gen Prius NEDC splits both MPG.
After reading this and a Road and Track article, I went back and realized I had not included polar moment of inertia . . . the momentum of a spinning mass like the wheels and tires. Wiki shows the effect varies by the 4th power of the diameter and both wheels and tires have most of their mass in the outer diameter. In effect, every car has four, road contact, flywheels. I wrote it up in another thread. Bob Wilson
First tank under 50MPG. 9.4 Gallons for 423 miles = 45 MPG Most days during this 45MPG week showed 52+/- on the MFD, but last weekend we had record low (-8 F at one point) temps and I drove shorter trips. Those 2 days both showed 28MPG on the MFD. Never saw anything that low before or since. Not sure whether it was the cold or my route that had more impact. Over 2999 miles I am now down to 49MPG (yea, that 1 mile really hurts ;-) ) Want to trade cars (and states) krmcg?
LOL. I can see ther difference that early morning 30 - 40 degrees makes versus the afternoon 60 - 80 degrees. I'm sure that the drop into lower temps is exponential... I have years of experience hypermiling with my 2008 Prius. Got a few 600 miles tanks with 60+ MPG. THAT was an accomplishment - even in Southern California. A big advantage that I have is that I am almost never in a hurry. I am willing to drive slower than I need to, and remain ambivilant about the scornful looks from other drivers that don't seem to understand that there is more to the trip than how soon can we get there. As I pass 2000 miles this week and get my third fillup (estimating 725 miles on this tank) I do appreciate the advantages that I have living in Southern California and tip my hat to those that are not as fortunate...
Yeah, for those about to freeze, we salute you! I took off the snow tires in exasperation, about a week back. The crocuses and daffodils are pushing up, trees are budding, our Shiba Inu is shedding like crazy.
