Mileage maniacs hack Toyota's Prius for 116 mpg

In a presumed attempt to prove questionable reports about the Prius' true fuel efficiency dead wrong, a Japanese group of mileage maniacs (or nenpimania) have assembled to push their hybrids to the brink and utilize a sly combination of hackery and zen-ish ways to elicit extreme miles per gallon figures. One such enthusiast burns his gas money on special tires, cardboard surround for the engine bay (saywha?), and blocks of foam rubber that occupy the grill, and somehow manages about 100 mpg by "hacking into the Toyota's computer" and carefully manipulating the accelerator with just his large toe. One upping even him, however, is a fellow mpg freak dubbed Teddy-Girl, who has reportedly become such a master of the "pulse and glide" method of driving that she can crank out 116 miles on a single gallon of fuel. Of course, sustaining such numbers on even mild inclines is entirely unlikely, and we're fairly sure you're hearing best case scenarios with all these gaudy numbers, but until we're all cruising in purely electric whips, this doesn't sound like a half bad approach to keep those trips to the pump at a minimum.

[Via The Raw Feed]

[Logan @ Apr 6th 2007 6:03PM]

Crap...mine gets 46.2 mpgs...

[yellowjeeperman @ Apr 8th 2007 6:59AM]

And to think those numbers aren't very true to begin with. Those tests are done at 55 or 60mph I believe in "perfect" conditions. How often does that happen? The new method of testing these vehicles' mpg in their true form with bring your 46.2mpg down to probably around 35mpg. That will be a more realistic and accurate reading.

[kingofwale @ Apr 6th 2007 6:11PM]

apparently those people don't slow down when cornering. Now, I'm all for better mileage and cleaner environment,

but should them be charged with reckless driving?

[Deezee @ Apr 6th 2007 6:49PM]

I have a fully loaded Prius. Trust me, even if they dont slow down for corners, theres nothing wreckless about it. These things are far from fast or wreckless haha.

[Alex @ Apr 6th 2007 6:14PM]

How much is that in KM/L (Kilometer per Liter) ?

[kaztm @ Apr 6th 2007 6:29PM]

100MPG(US) = 42.5km/l
116MPG(US) = 49.3km/l
46.2MPG(US) = 19.6km/l

[Shadyman @ Apr 6th 2007 7:04PM]

You mean, "How much is that in L/100km"?

[Matt Welke @ Jun 23rd 2007 3:56PM]

100MPG(US) = 2.35 L/100km
116MPG(US) = 2.03 L/100km
46.2MPG(US) = 5.09 L/100km

[Matt @ Apr 6th 2007 6:19PM]

Man, am I sick of people telling me what great mileage hybrid cars get... *IF* you do x, y, and z. I've got enough to worry about while driving to keep myself and others safe. I'm not about to throw in new "big toe" techniques.

Give me a zero-emission vehicle with its own powerplant that lets me drive the way I've always driven. Yep, I'll wait for the GM Sequel, thanks.

[aeo @ Apr 6th 2007 6:28PM]

Oh man... these guys must be a real joy to follow down a busy 2 lane road. "Look honey, we're up to 43 MPH in this 55 zone".

[Oknarf @ Apr 6th 2007 6:31PM]

I'll wait for the Mr Fusion thank you. Often forgotten in the myth of the hybrid is the fact that the batteries need to be manufactured, and that aint pretty, plus plug in's use emissions from power plants.

Having said that I am all for not exporting my money to the middle east. Part of that has to be local prodcution combined with conservation and development of alternative solutions. How come the nut jobs only want to focus on part of the picture. (retorical question eg definition of nut job)

[Ignatius @ Apr 6th 2007 6:45PM]

Not always true, if you set up some solar panels and got an electric car, you'd be self-sufficient. :P


Though it'd be a pretty damn expensive investment.

[Skippy @ Apr 9th 2007 12:54AM]

Mr. Fusion only powers the time circuits.

[david @ Apr 6th 2007 6:31PM]

where i drive, good acceleration - and brakes are essential to ones survival. mileage is only second when looking at cars.

[Deezee @ Apr 6th 2007 6:52PM]

Oh and I get about 50mpg driving normally. And 48mpg driving with Air conditioner on. Still very good compared to my accords and other cars. Also a lot smoother. Its fun seeing how good milage you can get out of these things sometimes.

[Nick Bicanic @ Apr 6th 2007 6:58PM]

I don't get the big deal about mpg of hybrids.
I have a Aprilia ditech SR50 (yes it's a scooter)

Laugh now but it beats most vehicles in acceleration off the line, goes 68mph with both me and my girlfriend on it...and more to the point is the most fuel efficient vehicle on the road - I regularly get 130-140mpg - and that's gunning it the entire time.

Plus I can park between cars ;)

Nick

[kaztm @ Apr 6th 2007 7:14PM]

140MPG is good even for a scooter, but nothing astonishing.

What would you say if your scooter will do around 300MPG if it was a hybrid?

[Chris @ Apr 6th 2007 11:16PM]

I believed you up until you said "girlfriend".

[Nick Bicanic @ Apr 6th 2007 11:43PM]

That's some funny shit. everyone always says scooters are totally g*y (and of course the multitude of Honda Jazz's out there keep that theory alive - but the SR50 ditech is the king.

[August @ Apr 6th 2007 11:59PM]

Beats most cars off the line, huh?

Find me when I'm in my E55.

[kingofwale @ Apr 6th 2007 7:08PM]

>I have a Aprilia ditech SR50 (yes it's a scooter)


it must take a real man to admit that.

well, since you did ask, here's why I would never get a Scooter

* when you hit a patch of ice, you don't skit out, you DIE
* cars besides you can't hear you, the change lane and you DIE
* I assume it doesn't have ABS on that small thing.. guess what happened when you trying to stop in an emergency? ... yeah. :)
* now, where's my air conditioning?? and where's my music/radio?
* can't drive when it's snowing outside.


yeah, no thanks.

[Danny @ Apr 6th 2007 7:56PM]

responding to kingofwale:

yes all of your points are half-valid and apply to all bikes and scooters (except the ones that do have ABS). These are know risks but can be heavily mitigated with a little rider skill, you position yourself so the guy in the lane next to you can see you, you know how to emergency brake without dumping yourself on your head etc. Having said that, yes bikes are crap in the snow.

On a more engadget theme; if my memory serves me correct the Aprilia Ditech SR50 was the output from the joint project with the orbital engine company in the Perth. The cool thing was the official means of accessing the engine mangement system and EFI was to plug in a Gen 1 Gameboy and you could access and tweak the bike's brains.

[Mark @ Apr 6th 2007 7:33PM]

This is a known fact and has been bested by some "hypermilers" in the US:

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2007/01/king_of_the_hypermilers.html

Wayne Gerdes, profiled in the article, got over 120 MPG in a Prius and 180 MPG in a Honda Insight.

[Falcom @ Apr 6th 2007 7:17PM]

100mpg? sorry, gas isn't that expensive to me. I'll take my 250+hp turbo powered car and leave your gas sipping ways behind me....oh and i still get 20-32mpg city-highway driving like a bat out of hell. Sure there's faster cars, but not many that go zero to sixty in the sub-6 second range and get 30+mpg on road trips.

[kaztm @ Apr 6th 2007 7:23PM]

Well...

Lexus GS Hybrid is 340hp, and does 0->60mph in 5.2 seconds.
City/Hwy=25/28

http://www.lexus.com/models/GSh/detailed_specifications.html

[willscott @ Apr 6th 2007 7:16PM]

There was an earlier article about this:

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2007/01/king_of_the_hypermilers.html

It's apparently a competition to see who can get the highest mpg.

[Falcom @ Apr 6th 2007 7:29PM]

turbo vs hybrid....and i get better mileage in a cheaper car? win/win for me... Impressive numbers for a hybrid none the less. However no clutch, no care.

[Mike Cohen @ Apr 6th 2007 7:38PM]

The MPG display doesn't go above 99, which is what you see when you're braking. I often get around 75 MPG after I've been driving more than 5 minutes. The first 5 minutes or short trips, the mileage isn't that good.

[Dave Weinstein @ Apr 6th 2007 8:11PM]

LOL... I get way over 150MPG in my in my Civic hybrid... while driving DOWN the mountain on Hwy 17. Getting back up again is another matter ;-)

These type of "experiments" would be more useful if there was a little more technology and a lot less technique involved.

-dw

[rofl @ Apr 6th 2007 7:49PM]

@Nick
And may i ask why you and your GF riding on a scooter.
A DUI perhaps.

[syadasti @ Apr 6th 2007 8:36PM]

Here is some realism for you - EPA sticker is BS and the biggest losers for stock productions vehicles are hybrids for the new 2008 ratings which are much more realistic. Hybrids are getting there, but they still aren't justified unless you drive a lot of miles not to mention US based vehicle assembly and recycling infrastructure will have to improve before its really the ideal eco choice vs. a small cheaper PZEV ICE compact car.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/ratings2008.shtml

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/ratingsNewSticker.shtml

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp

Toyota Prius 2007
New EPA MPG
48
City

46
Combined

45
Hwy

Old EPA MPG
60
City

55
Combined

51
Hwy

Average based on 28 real world vehicles.
44.6

20% combined average lower in the real world!

[NuShrike @ Apr 8th 2007 2:39PM]

syadasti: The biggest losers from the new EPA stickers are not the hybrids, if you do the math, but all the other vehicles lower in the MPG numbers.

Because MPG is a 1/x equation, (a slowly flattening curve) MPG to MPG changes deeper into the curve, the less consumption changes. A 12MPG change from 60MPG still costs less than a 2 MPG change from 22 to 20. Look at how much it costs to your pocket book at the end of the day instead of spinning meaningless percentage change MPG numbers.

And even with the new EPA changes (which just reflect realistic driving conditions), the technology under the hood didn't change, and you can still get the original MPG numbers with conservative driving.

And to top it off, 48MPG is still better than anything else on the market in the same weight class. It's here now and you can buy it! The rest, enjoy your "future technologies are coming" sour grapes.

As I understand it, Toyota already recycles 100% of their hybrid batteries (because you don't burn/use up a battery; Toyota also pays $200 bounty). I don't understand what this "ecological superior low emission ICE drivetrain you're talking about is. The Toyota drivetrain is basically a differential. You don't get anything more mature, as well as ecological with that.

Thanks for continuing to shatter the shilling environmental Hummer comparison that only stupid people easily believe. There's also the continuous comparison that hybrids don't make economical sense when they actually cost the same as most other vehicles, pound for pound, feature for feature. Yet somehow, paying way more for a Hummer, a bigger engine, European luxury car, GPS navigation never make economical sense either. It's a personal choice and personal satisfaction. Hell, with the price difference between a Hummer and a Prius, one can buy oneself 10 years worth of gasoline for the Prius and drive 30K miles a year. Think about that!

I also fail to understand why some people ignore the here-and-now environmental benefits Toyota/Honda hybrids already provide, but instead continue to wave the mythical carrot of other technologies such as hydrogen, or better "new technology" PZEV ICE engines. Start now; do what you say instead of saying what you'll do.

[nick @ Apr 6th 2007 9:43PM]

Didn't some guys out of Berkely do this a year ago to the Prius?

[Matt Hadder @ Apr 6th 2007 11:19PM]

Honda Accord hybrid has 20hp more than the standard model and gets better mileage. I bet Honda's version of the hybrid system will be a hit with people who want performance... since you get the torque of the electric boosting the gas engine.

OshKosh heavy trucks have the right idea; they have a smaller diesel engine as a generator and electric motors on the wheels. This hybrid configuration makes them lighter gives 20% better mileage, quieter and have a lower center of gravity... all of which would benefit any car on the road. Good article here: http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/automotive_news/2674491.html

Next step will be plug in electrics... no, not anemic little golf carts either. See here: www.teslamotors.com A plug-in EV or hybrid with efficient solar roof, hood/trunk panels would be good... imagine if your regular car's tank would fill up a little on a sunny day.

[Justin @ Apr 6th 2007 11:20PM]

How about I'll just take a diesel. BMW's new generation engines get astonishing mileage (how about 40+ mpg) and don't sap the fun out of driving. In fact, 0-60 in 7 seconds is just fine with me, especially when midrange acceleration demolishes anything this side of a Corvette.

[Nick Bicanic @ Apr 7th 2007 12:17AM]

alright alright - enough of the scooter jokes - as someone said the risks are known and can be mitigated. If you want to minimise the risks you can always get a B6 level armored vehicle and then ram everyone off the road...but that's highly impractical - as it happens the other vehicles are a turbo diesel new beetle and a wrangler jeep (oh and a lifted 89 Ford Ranger). both are fine (no DUIs he he) - but for summer days driving to tennis, beach, grocery shopping, cinema etc etc (delete as applicable) they can't be beat. They are definitely an urban vehicle - as for the people who don't get guys+girls on scooters - on your next trip to anywhere in europe pay attention to where the hottest girls are sitting with their hair blowing in the wind.

Nick

p.s. you are right though that drivers are much worse in the US than in Europe for indicating when changing lanes and...er...pretty much anything else whatsoever - so maybe I should be more worried driving around LA

[August @ Apr 7th 2007 12:46AM]

Sigh...

Yeah, I'm sure I'd probably have more fun in, oh say, an SL65 than a scooter, as far as the wind blowing in my hair.

The hot chicks in Europe would probably agree.

[Foof @ Apr 7th 2007 3:04AM]

If they drafted behind a a SUV, they could probably get that close to 200MPG!

[syadasti @ Apr 8th 2007 1:09PM]

You didn't bother to read my data or the updated 2008 EPA testing methodologies. 2008 EPA is 46 mpg combined. Real world reported on 28 vehicles is 44.6mpg combined, not 35mpg.

I forgot to mention in my post above another major flaw in the CNW marketing studies - they show the Hummer lasting 300000 and the prius 100000. I'm sorry but GM's average vehicle lifetime doesn't even come close to that - they must have reversed Toyota and GM by accident LOL. Plus repairs and flaws on GM products will higher over the vehicle lifetime, so you'll be wasting more energy with your poorly designed fake Hummer.

Hybrids do get better mileage but they need to switch to domestic production and improve the recycling system before they will be ecologically superior to low emission ICE drivetrains. They don't make financial sense unless you drive a lot miles but that is changing as production increases. I think the technology is there right about now and always getting better - lithium batteries, etc. A low emission hybrid diesel would be great - hopefully BMW adds hybrid options to their newly introduced diesel drivetrain lineup - awesome performance and mileage.

[yellowjeeperman @ Apr 8th 2007 7:02AM]

Honestly when it comes down to it. The Hummer H2 over its life is more energy efficient than the Toyota Prius. Notice I say energy efficient and not fuel efficient. Two completely different things. Go check out this link for more information and explination.
http://www.reason.org/commentaries/dalmia_20060719.shtml

[syadasti @ Apr 8th 2007 12:55PM]

Honestly are you that gullible. I suppose you think Fox News is fair and balanced too.

That article is BS and a later article they retracted the H2 and rolled back to an H3 which is also still BS.

The truth lies somewhere inbetween. Hybrids are fledging technology and obviously when it becomes more mainstream and matures it will improve. Traditional ICE drivetrains are about as mature as they are going to get.

Here is a response from the otherside of the coin:

>>Building a Toyota Prius causes more environmental damage than a Hummer that is on the road for three times longer than a Prius. As already noted, the Prius is partly driven by a battery which contains nickel. The nickel is mined and smelted at a plant in Sudbury, Ontario. This plant has caused so much environmental damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used the ‘dead zone’ around the plant to test moon rovers. The area around the plant is devoid of any life for miles.

Okay a quick search on Sudbury reveils that mining has been going on there since the late 1880's. There probably wasn't much thought of pollution back then. The search also revealed that NASA did use the area during the time of the Apollo missions because...The area is a 1.85 billion year old meteor impact site where there are shatter cones present. What the hell are shatter cones? Well they are rare rock formations that occur from meteor impacts like you would find on...oh I don't know...maybe the moon. So if you were planning on going there you might want to familiarize yourself with what you might see. Now the dead zone is from all the acid rain, but like I said there wasn't a whole lot of thought to environmental impact back then. However, in the 1970's an effort was made to clean up the area and over 20 years they planted 3 million trees. They even won an environmental award for their efforts from the U.N.

>>The plant is the source of all the nickel found in a Prius’ battery and Toyota purchases 1,000 tons annually. Dubbed the Superstack, the plague-factory has spread sulfur dioxide across northern Ontario, becoming every environmentalist’s nightmare.

1,000 tons sounds like a lot doesn't it. It certainly did to me. Until I looked up the mines figures. Last year the mine produced 80,000 tons of nickel same as the year before, which was down from the previous years when production was 110,000 tons. So check my math, but I'm pretty sure that's 1.25% of their total production. And wait they have actually mined less since hybrids became more popular? Huh. Also, as you might think the Sudbury mine is not the only nickel mine in the world. As a matter of fact the worlds production was 1,000,000 tons last year. 42% of that goes into specialty metals like Stainless steel, 38% into nonferrous alloys, 14% into coatings, and the remaining 6% into coins, NiCD & NiMH batteries, coatings and colorants.

The CNW marketing study (funded by players in the auto industry) which is the basis for the CCSU article's conclusions appear to be very different from the results of several other rigorous, scientifically-reviewed studies of the lifecycle impact of vehicles including those from Argonne National Laboratory and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. These studies conclude that the majority (80-85%) of the total lifetime energy use of a vehicle comes from the driving stage, with the remainder coming from the remaining stages of a vehicle life, whereas the CNW based article shows these percentages to be reversed.

[kizane @ Apr 8th 2007 12:28PM]

I had an old 81 Caddy Coupe DeVille with a 6.0L 140hp/265lb-ft V8 and non-overdrive automatic. Had a "MPG Sentinel" that would hit 99.9 going downhill in neutral! Going up a 'slight' incline, it would achieve a big fat 0 (yes, ZERO!). Of course, that's all instantaneous. Best average I ever saw was going 55mph getting 10.8MPG! Oh, did I mention that car did 0-60 in something like 20 seconds?

[Matt @ Apr 8th 2007 3:02PM]

@ syadasti: You don't know what you're talking about. Come join the rest of us in this century... GM vehicles are engineered much better, and last a LOT longer than they did decades ago.

I have a 1995 Chevrolet Monte Carlo that is pushing 270,000 miles. Other than regular gas, oil, fluid, and brake replacements, the only maintenance it's needed was a new serpentine belt, water pump, and shocks. The water pump is a cheap and easy fix (I did it myself, actually), and the rest are to be expected of any 10-year-old vehicle.

GM vehicles are, on average, much less expensive to maintain and repair than other brands, both foreign and domestic.

Also, the days of bashing GM are coming to an end... the Hydrogen Economy is already a reality and GM is leading that charge. Hybrid cars will be a joke once it's in full swing, when zero-emission, fuel-cell-electric vehicles are readily available.

[syadasti @ Apr 8th 2007 3:20PM]

Nustrike: The biggest losers for the more realistic 2008 EPA standards are hybrids:

http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/420f06009.htm

"How Fuel Economy Estimates Will Change from Today's Labels

Under EPA’s proposal, the new fuel economy estimates would be lower for most vehicles. This is not because auto makers have designed the same vehicles to be less fuel efficient—it is because our new test methods take into account factors that have been missing or not fully accounted for in the current tests. Because some vehicles are more sensitive to these factors than others, the impact of the proposed changes will vary from vehicle to vehicle. The city MPG estimates for conventional (non-hybrid) vehicles would drop on average by about 10-20 percent from today's labels, while the highway estimates would drop by about 5-15 percent, depending on the vehicle.

For hybrid vehicles, the city MPG estimates would drop 20-30 percent from today's labels. For highway MPG estimates, the change is about the same as for conventional vehicles. The nature of current hybrid technology—the addition of a battery as a second source of on-board power, sophisticated control systems, and sometimes a smaller engine—makes a hybrid’s fuel economy more sensitive to certain factors, such as colder weather and air conditioning use. However, many hybrid models will remain among the most fuel-efficient vehicles on the market."

Conservative driving applies to all vehicles, so you have no unique gain. Its 44.6 according to the 28 real world samples, 46 was the 08 EPA estimate. Real world mileage range was 34 to 61.

A toyota yaris manual (manual is the eco and drivetrain wear best choice) is 36.3 mpg from the real world samples - that is less than 20% lower. Real world mileage range variability is smaller than prius 30 to 43 - about 15% smaller than the Prius.

Edmunds.com TCO over 5 years:

Yaris Manual Base
True Cost to Own $31,685
Total Cash Price $15,467
Average Cost per Mile $0.42

Yaris Auto Base
True Cost to Own $32,475
Total Cash Price $16,321
Average Cost per Mile* $0.43

Prius Base
True Cost to Own $36,408
Total Cash Price $24,410
Average Cost per Mile $0.49

So your financial argument doesn't pan out - Prius cost about 13-15% more than similar ICE drivetrain offering from Toyota's lineup.

To lower the eco/energy cost of the vehicle more of the components and assembly will have to be completed domestically. There are a variety of ICE PZEV drivetrains currently available on the market right now. Hell even Mitsubishi makes a V6 ICE PZEV available in their new Outlander. Toyota was also slower to adopt safer paint technology the domestic had been using a long time ago.

Whats up with all the new big trucks Toyota is pushing so much - their H3 bandwagon FJ Cruiser (I'm sorry but it shares more with the H3 with than the old FJ) and new Tundra full sized. They have so many Toyota and Lexus SUVs - step up the eco and thin out those monsters. Honda overall fleet is better though their hybrid technology doesn't seem as mature.

[syadasti @ Apr 8th 2007 3:37PM]

@Matt: A sample size of one does not lead to any valid conclusion, so your single car is statistically meaningless. Look at JD Powers, Forbes, Edmunds, Consumer Reports, etc...

The reality is domestic vehicles may have caught with the Europeans but fall below that of the Japanese.

GM is finally coming out with a two mode hybrid - their mild hybrids are a joke.

Hydrogen economy isn't an option without a major breakthrough in production efficiency and storage technologies not to mention the huge hurtle of switching all the infrastructure.

On the other hand the fully electric Ariel Atom gets the equal of about 240mpg based on the energy it requires and can beat many supercars in handling and at the drag strip - just imagine if it was optimized for mileage and utility.

They have prototype electric cars with newer lithium battery that can charge in around 3 hours with 300-400 mile range. Electric cars would move the burden of emissions to already heavily regulated centralized more efficient powerplants rather than millions of autos on the road. They would be more viable option if fuel cells do pan out. BTW, fuel cells are not new technology - they've been around since the early-mid 1800:

wikipedia:
"The principle of the fuel cell was discovered by German scientist Christian Friedrich Schönbein in 1838 and published in the January 1839 edition of the "Philosophical Magazine".[4] Based on this work, the first fuel cell was developed by Welsh scientist Sir William Robert Grove in 1843. The fuel cell he made used similar materials to today's phosphoric-acid fuel cell. It wasn't until 1959 that British engineer Francis Thomas Bacon successfully developed a 5 kW stationary fuel cell. In 1959, a team led by Harry Ihrig built a 15 kW fuel cell tractor for Allis-Chalmers which was demonstrated across the US at state fairs. This system used potassium hydroxide as the electrolyte and compressed hydrogen and oxygen as the reactants. Later in 1959, Bacon and his colleagues demonstrated a practical five-kilowatt unit capable of powering a welding machine. In the 1960s, Pratt and Whitney licensed Bacon's U.S. patents for use in the U.S. space program to supply electricity and drinking water (hydrogen and oxygen being readily available from the spacecraft tanks)."

[NuShrike @ Apr 8th 2007 5:57PM]

syadasti: Okay, let's break down your numbers:
You're comparing the larger, more luxurious Prius to the smaller Yaris, a pure apples-to-oranges comparison. Okay sure, let's break that down, even though it's unfair.

First, we have to throw out depreciation since the Prius Gen2 has been around 3 years, and Edmund's depreciation "estimates" have been widely inaccurate. Example, a 2 year old Prius will depreciate $6272 in two years versus $5644 for a Yaris? The Yaris hasn't even been around 1 year yet. Come on! Kelly Blue Book has a 2005 33K mile Prius with the default features at $24,300. That's a depreciation of only ~$1K over two years.

Also, where does Edmunds get its maintenance numbers? It shows $453 for the Yaris, and $513 for the Prius. Does that make sense when the only maintenance that really gets performed is oil changes and tire rotation? Why would the Prius numbers be higher, if it's only oil and tire maintenance?

My real world numbers for two years in a Prius is $11K in costs (I drive 30K a year) or $0.18 a mile. Where does $0.49 come from and why would Edmunds list the Prius having higher per mile costs than the Yaris when there's no significant maintenance involved? It should be $270 first year, $470 second year, when you drive 30K a year.

A Yaris is a 2326lb (0.01333 MPG/lb) vehicle w cubic wheel-base space of 100.4*66.5*56.7 = 378563.22 cubic inches (EPA 87.1 cu.ft.) with trunk space of 12.9 cu.ft. A Prius is a 2932lb (0.01637 MPG/lb) vehicle with cubic wheel-base space of 106.3*67.9*58.7 = 423683.10 cubic inches (EPA 92.2 cu.ft.) w trunk space of 16.1 cu.ft., an obviously larger and heavier vehicle.

For comparison, the 2006 Camry is a 3351lb (0.00716 MPG/lb) vehicle with 101.8 cu.ft. of passenger space and 16.7 cu.ft. of trunk.

Does the Yaris have ABS, no; traction control, no; tire pressure monitoring, no; EBD, no; cruise, no; controls on steering wheel, no; dual glove boxes, no; alloy wheels, no; rear spoiler, no. So capital costs obviously don't compare, and your financial argument doesn't add up.

If you want realworld MPGs for the Prius, just go to www.greenhybrid.com/compare/mileage/toyota-priushsd.html where you can audit people's mileage over multiple tanks. It's currently Real World Average of 47.5MPG, so even with the variability you quote the Prius consistently still gets higher MPG than the Yaris and everybody else, bottom line.

Many people don't seem to get the 1/x MPG math, so here's some. 61MPG -> 48MPG is a 21.6% drop in MPG. The Yaris auto (fairest comparison), went 36->31MPG, a 13% drop. Even though the Prius still wins, people say 21% hurts it more, but does it? 30miles commute * 25 days / 61 MPG * $3.20 = $39.34. $50 for 48MPG. $66 for 36MPG, $77.42 for 31MPG. $10.66 drop versus $11.42. Why did it cost you $1.42 more in a Yaris when it drops less MPG (13 vs 5)? It gets worse the lower MPG you go.

Of course, if a Yaris suits your budget, go with that, or even a Honda Fit.

So, hybrids are NOT the biggest losers from the new EPA standards. Want a loser, how about the Toyota FJ? It went from 20MPG to 18MPG combined. How much does that 2MPG cost you? from $120 to $133, or $13.

I'm with you in saying Honda is the real environmental company. Toyota just squeezes money whatever market they can get into.

@Matt, you're funny. Good luck on your hydrogen economy that's 10 years overdue, and another 10 years in the making. Did you know you can make hydrogen hybrids in the meantime, and there's Prius running around on pure Hydrogen already? (albeit at horrible MPG, but that's hydrogen for you).

[syadasti @ Apr 8th 2007 6:30PM]

The Edmunds are estimates based on various large real world databases with better statistical processing and I was trying to compare from the same company. We could also go with the Scion xB if you still want a Toyota of sorts (no TCO data on edmunds) with more space and decent milage - bB/xB has been in production since 2000. If you want more features and spare outside the brand you could go with a Honda Jazz/Fit (which has been in production since 2001) -

Fit Base Model - Manual
True Cost to Own $33,901 view details
Total Cash Price $15,674 view details
Average Cost per Mile $0.45

Still about 8% cheaper - I don't put as much trust these a lot of user figures from reported users on EPA, etc because people are too dumb to look beyond their sticker or correctly calculate and track when they fill up at the pump and sample size is smaller with no adjustment for sampling errors like Edmunds.

From the various sources I've seen the TCO on your Prius will NOT pay off unless you keep it for a longer period than 5 years. Most people keep their cars for around 5 years.

Sorry, as the EPA states the drop in city is greater for the hybrid on the highway its a draw:

"The city MPG estimates for conventional (non-hybrid) vehicles would drop on average by about 10-20 percent from today's labels, while the highway estimates would drop by about 5-15 percent, depending on the vehicle.

For hybrid vehicles, the city MPG estimates would drop 20-30 percent from today's labels. For highway MPG estimates, the change is about the same as for conventional vehicles. The nature of current hybrid technology—the addition of a battery as a second source of on-board power, sophisticated control systems, and sometimes a smaller engine—makes a hybrid’s fuel economy more sensitive to certain factors, such as colder weather and air conditioning use. However, many hybrid models will remain among the most fuel-efficient vehicles on the market."

[NuShrike @ Apr 8th 2007 7:50PM]

syadasti: Although the xB is a fairer comparison, I don't think the Fit/Jazz really is (different plush class), and you never save money buying any car. But, my gf has one and we swap driving either freely. Any higher MPG vehicle is a win.

"makes a hybrid’s fuel economy more sensitive to certain factors, such as colder weather and air conditioning use". Let me attack this. For Toyota's HSD, the AC is not coupled to the engine, and so is actually more efficient and less sensitive to weather and use than any other vehicle with belt-coupled compressors, and/or alternators. You can actually use the AC driving uphill and not heat up the engine or lower engine power.

Otherwise, for temperature, hybrids react exactly the same as any other ICE engine vehicle where MPGs drop EQUALLY across all vehicles in cold temperatures. Hybrids are NOT a special case.

The only possible difference is the battery doesn't like to be hot (it's cabin air cooled but a tiny factor), and the ICE doesn't run enough to keep itself warm (good for MPG).

Then again, why are hybrids singled out as not paying for TCO, and not your V6+/ Lexus/ BMW/ Mercedes/ Hummer/ which all obviously never pay for their TCO ever.

Myself, I've had a Civic for 10 years over 200K miles so I saved money and gained much satisfaction moving over to a Prius, after trying to decide between Evo, Audi A4, Mazda 6, Civic Hybrid, and Corolla.

@randy: imagine having all that gas money not going to the Middle East to pay for the terrorists and the rich Arabs and their spinning skyscrapers. Imagine all that money coming back as lower taxes, higher job pay, better transit systems such as trains so you don't sit wasting time and money in traffic. Imagine it making gas cheaper (as we use less of it) so we can save it for track racing on weekends and that extra salary and lower taxes paying for car mods. Why are we so excited to spend so much more money elsewhere in the world than ourselves and at home?

[randy @ Apr 8th 2007 7:04PM]

I like gas. I like to pay for it and then BURN it. I don't care how much it costs, its price is meaningless to me. GAS IS WONDERFUL. I don't see why people hate gas so much.

[syadasti @ Apr 8th 2007 8:34PM]

NuShrike: Branding values - what you think is plusher etc has to do more with BS marketing if the feature/functionality set is the similiar and class difference isn't too significant.

Toyota and Honda are just Toyota and Honda in Japan - no Lexus and Acura (their real "plush" cars in the US). The Prius is a Toyota, not a Lexus. They have Lexus hybrids if you want luxury and their hybrid lineup is expanding though its more luxury/power biased rather than truly eco conscious - its for rich people who want to think they are making a difference when they could be making a bigger one if they bought smaller, cheaper, less powerful ICE or hybrid car.

>>"makes a hybrid’s fuel economy more sensitive to certain factors, such as colder weather and air conditioning use". Let me attack this. For Toyota's HSD, the AC is not coupled to the engine, and so is actually more efficient and less sensitive to weather and use than any other vehicle with belt-coupled compressors, and/or alternators. You can actually use the AC driving uphill and not heat up the engine or lower engine power.

Otherwise, for temperature, hybrids react exactly the same as any other ICE engine vehicle where MPGs drop EQUALLY across all vehicles in cold temperatures. Hybrids are NOT a special case.

The only possible difference is the battery doesn't like to be hot (it's cabin air cooled but a tiny factor), and the ICE doesn't run enough to keep itself warm (good for MPG).

Thats why the EPA gives a range for conventional and hybrid vehicles change in both the city and highway - it differs by make and model, still the combined dropped further in hybrids on average. Since there is no manual ICE prius, we can compare the ICE and hybrid Camry (which has the latest toyota hybrid technology - best on the market right now) drops are - 11% ICE (manual and automatic) and 13% hybrid - so yeah hybrid isn't that far off with the latest production technology in the same exact vehicle. TCO is 10(auto)-13%(manual) cheaper on the ICE 2.4L Camry and it has greater eco-friendly domestic assembly/content than the hybrid Camry.

>>Then again, why are hybrids singled out as not paying for TCO, and not your V6+/ Lexus/ BMW/ Mercedes/ Hummer/ which all obviously never pay for their TCO ever.

There are plenty of people who buy CPO/used vehicles - the vehicles will get completely used when they come off lease or are sold in a shorter ownership period - all that means is the original owners will take the big depreciation hit for you - saving money by letting some else do it is positive smart thing to do.

If being frugal and/or environmentally friendly is your ultimate goal hybrids are just around the corner for being the optimal choice, but right now you could do better with average ownership/usage with an ICE drivetrain. The new camry hybrid is probably one of the closest in the same class vehicle to come to beating ICE especially with the tax incentives and more domestic based assembly.

When lithium batteries and plug-in come into production, hybrids will probably be the way to go. Thats only a few years away...