Toyota claims plug-in Prius averaging 65 mpg
By Paul Miller 
posted February 3rd 2009 9:43AM
posted February 3rd 2009 9:43AM
posted February 3rd 2009 9:43AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Your choice: ugly car or bad MPG?!
My choice: good looking diesel^^
shh don't tell em it's diesel, then they'll all use it and make the price go up
Haha, good one. But it doesn't really matter in Europe, the prices are high anyway^^
Too bad then that the mileage rating for the 2009 Jetta TDI, which is a car comparable in size and price to the Prius, is rated as 30mpg city by the EPA compared to the 50mpg in the new Prius.
http://wot.motortrend.com/6252546/green/epa-sets-mpg-rating-of-2009-volkswagen-jetta-tdi/index.html
http://www.hybridcars.com/news/2010-toyota-prius-breaks-50-mpg-25414.html
A few of facts about diesel:
1) From the Union of Concerned Scientists (http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/technologies_and_fuels/gasoline_and_diesel/the-diesel-dilemma-diesels.html): "Since Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards give credit to vehicles based on fuel economy rather than oil use, and a gallon of low-sulfur diesel fuel requires 25 percent more oil than a gallon of low-sulfur reformulated gasoline, putting more diesel vehicles on the road without also raising fuel economy standards could actually increase U.S. oil dependence."
2) Diesel is about 19% more expensive per gallon when compared to gasoline in the US at the moment (http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/gdu/gasdiesel.asp). This is a US-centric fact, though. IIRC, some countries subsidize diesel. That's one reason why diesel is more popular in Europe.
3) A lot of diesel proponents point to the Jetta TDi as their vehicle of choice over the Prius. They were making claims that it would get 60 MPG. In a Popular Mechanics article last September (http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4284188.html), it was shown that the Prius significantly beat the Jetta TDI in city driving (44.7 to 32), and the Jetta TDi was only slightly better than the Prius in highway driving (45.4 to 44.8).
Well, you have valid points. All I am saying is: WHY DOES IT HAVE TO LOOK SO UGLY!
I think they could put that technology in every car, but they don't?!
Ugliness is a subjective measure. The Prius has sold well enough, even after the US federal tax break expiration, to prove that point. What isn't subjective is the fact that its shape allows it to have a drag coefficient of .26. The only mass-produced car I know of that was recently made to have a lower Cd was the Insight, and its overall shape is very similar. Look at the 2010 Insight, and I doubt there's any way you can deny that. The 2010 Prius will have a .25 Cd. It may not look very sporty to you, but it's definitely very aerodynamic.
A few facts about fuel refining in general:
They take a barrel of crude, vaporize it, and let the vapor flow up and down a cooling tower so the temperature gradually reduces, and collect the portions that condense at various heights, with corresponding temperatures. This is called fractional distillation. (It's actually rather more complicated, as you don't get very good separation in one pass, so you feed most of the resulting fractions back into the column to be reseparated further, but that's the idea.) Key points: you take off your choice of temperature ranges, so you can widen or narrow the temperature range (and thus the amount of product) for each cut.
The top cut, stuff that doesn't condense at all (in the temperature range of the column), is called naphtha, and used to be practically industrial waste. Of course, the gasoline engine changed that, and demand for gasoline eventually exceeded supply of naphtha, so chemical engineers had to find other ways of making good fuel for gasoline engines. Naturally, they did; lighter hydrocarbons can be made by cracking heavier hydrocarbons, so feedstock that would otherwise be used to make fuel oil, diesel, or kerosene can be broken down into feedstock suitable for gasoline. (You can also stretch gasoline by cutting it with non-hydrocarbon fuels, most notably ethanol. Ignoring the tremendously bad political fracas that's developed around it, petro/alcohol blends actually have substantial benefits, technically. Chemical compatibility with seals on carburetors and fuel injection systems limited the adoption of this for a while, but all vehicles are now good to run on 15% ethanol.)
So now the portion of a barrel of oil is shifted, with more going into gasoline, because the demand for gasoline is higher. The rest of the oil isn't simply discarded, it's simply made into other products. If demand for diesel were to increase, less diesel-grade fractions would be cracked and used for gasoline, and a greater percentage would go to diesel. Also, the diesel cut could be widened slightly to get more feedstock at the expense of lower and higher cuts. _All_ the crude gets sold in the end, and you can bet the refineries will try to fulfill all demand in the most efficient way. (That's how you make record profits!) The model implied by your "fact" implies that if demand for diesel goes up, another thousand barrels of oil will be refined, and whatever portion isn't crude will be wasted, and that's just silly. All the "fact" really means is that less diesel fuel is less popular. (Well, it might also mean that the Union of Concerned Scientists is almost as reliable as one might expect scientists to be on engineering issues, which is not much.)
Finally, even if it were valid to suppose that the extra is discarded, here's a clue: You can use _any_ fuel with the diesel cycle; not with a stock modern diesel engine, but it wouldn't be hard for the manufacturers to tweak it so it would run on gasoline, or at least a gas-heavy mix with some diesel for lube, if desired. (I've heard most modern diesels run fine on jet fuel or up to 50% gasoline, but gasoline's non-lubricating/solvent nature kills the fuel pumps and seals; never tried either personally.) Unlike the Otto cycle, the Diesel cycle doesn't require good knock resistance, because the fuel isn't compressed with the air, and a (properly designed) diesel engine will get better fuel economy on low-grade gasoline than a comparable gasoline engine, because of the crazy compression ratios attainable.
hybrids have to get their batteries replaced after a while. a pretty long time, but still, it's very expensive.
I would take diesel (i.e., Jetta TDI) over a regular gas hybrid any day. I suppose it somewhat depends on where you're located...it's hotter than hell where I live most of the year, and situations where the AC in a hybrid must always be running means no full-EV mode [ever]. Forget any advantage a hybrid might have had if you don't live somewhere that is nice enough most of the year to just roll the windows down.
@maveric101: I believe that upon the 10th anniversary of the introduction of hybrids, one of the big automakers (think it was Toyota, not sure) said that they had never had to replace a single hybrid battery because it had worn out under normal use. So that isn't really a concern if you don't use your car outside the normal lifespan. If you want to use your hybrid for longer than 5 or 10 years, it's probably not unreasonable to need a new battery.
So the 2010 Prius will only do 55mpg and this new fandagled one will do 65mpg.
Really impressive when my 1.8 Petrol Citroen averages at 58mpg....
Diesel all the way however.
@sam
if only US gallons were the same size as imperial [UK].
65 mpg US = 78 mpg imp
doh!
How many cubic feet of space does your car have?
What's that in rods to the hogshead then?
@Rob
I think you meant to say "How many cubic millimeters of space does your car have?"
I agree Deisel is the way to go. However, all responsible car manufacturer should starts using greener diesel catalytic converters that contain gold (http://www.goldkings.com/gold-used-diesel-emission-control/) to help reduce toxic emissions and increase performance.
Plug-in is the new hybrid.
i.e., the latest BS technology falsely fooling people into sustainability, while actually having very little impact, and ignoring the fact that the real problem is that there are too many people on this planet!
If you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem. Why don't you off yourself and help make the world a better place?
@Spiny Norman
The problem is with medicine and Chinese. Too many Chinese. And too many Indians who don't die of diseases and have like 10-15 kids per family. They used to die out before they get older but now its not the case. But they don't plan to control their birth rates...
@iEye
Your parents should have know that !
I'm not going to make the mistake of having kids like my parents, lol!
So to handle the problem of over population and high gas prices, Throw a ma duce on top of the prius and you've got a winner
As for for bitchin about all these technologies not working and people shouldn't adopt them because they don't impact, is total BS. Discouraging anyone to do something to help save the enviornment is a quick ticket to extinction.
The main idea is that our society is realizing that there is a problem and something needs to be accomplished.I'm not saying we should all buy hybrids and live in huts made of adobe. But as long as each person does what she/he can do, whether that be recycling, engery conservation, buying a hybrid we pay rent on this planet just a little bit longer.
if smart people that know about overpopulation stop having kids then the world will be overrun with stupid kids.
Can someone post a link why diesel is "the way to go?" I would like to think that Engadget is a shill free blog? (one can dream, right?)
http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=diesel+vs.+gasoline
Give it 'ere.
I'll give it some "real world" MPG testing.
Let's see if it gets 65 mpg after that!
It's a shame apple doesn't make cars, huh?
I think I like this car because I too poop rainbows and chill out with unicorns. I live in San Francisco so theres lots of rainbow poopers here.
i guess you've probably also acquired a panache for smelling your own farts.
@Nayasaki or whatever.
Panache? is that like french or something? Because I only speak American. I do like pancakes though.
its from a south park episode ;) no harm (probably) intended
I always wonder what the "real" MPG is on these things - the stories are written like the plug electricity is free and that there is no pollution involved with its manufacture. Or perhaps I am missing something. Regardless, gotta agree with Frauhottelmann: it is butt-ugly...
lol an Apple car would be the first where you couldn't open the hood to repair it!
poop rainbows?!... scented or unscented?
What is so freaking hard about making an all-electric car that will go 100-200 miles between charges with a top speed of about 75-80? That's all most people need. Make a car like that in the $20-30K range, and gas will become a thing of the past. Quit dragging your feet carmakers!
Absolutely correct - I would find it difficult to classify 65mpg, a mere 20% efficiency boost over the non plug-in version, as newsworthy. It is absolutely certain, however, that it doesn't warrant the positive coverage given above. Can has editorial integrity?
1 kWh of lithium-based battery capacity = 4-5 miles.
Large-format lithium battery packs are still over $1,000 per kWh
And you can only use half the total capacity (otherwise you'll kill the battery quickly)
You do the math.
Still electricity (hydro, solar and wind) is better on short term than burning fuel.
Lets go electric!
True, but it's too bad that the electricity this thing uses will most likely be produced by coal-fired plants, as is most of the wattage at present. Yeah, the tech is definitely promising, but let's talk about the actual energy usage. Unless you have a wind turbine in your backyard, you're still burning fossil fuels with this little beastie.
The answer, however, IS blowing in the wind.
The electricity will most certainly come from coal power plants. Plus there will be an extra charge in fuel costs from charging the car, which detracts from the 65mpg splendor. No thanks.
And to those who drive a Prius, could you slow down? I see people driving 80+ on highways in those things... they aren't performance cars.
I wonder how quick would the battery charge
http://www.jaiderbertoli.com
I wonder how quick you'll get low-ranked for plugging your website.
@Trevor
Hope not! If Apple did the engine compartment and battery would be sealed up which they only have access. Apple will have you by the balls by selling you parts that is pretty much the same parts as other cars... theirs just has better packaging.
If only it wasn't so f**ckin ugly.
Disdainful of this poorly performing publicity stunt though I may be, I've gotta say: I'm okay with the shape. The simple, unassuming, and unimposing design of the Prius and Yaris lines and the sleek, conservative, out-of-the-way interior design of new Toyotas on the whole seem quite appealing to me.
@YoYoYo
Are you from the Neutral Planet?
Zapp Brannigan says:
"What makes a good man go neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?"
@frauhottelmann
Kind of like the Audi A2 then.
@frauhottelmann
"an Apple car would be the first where you couldn't open the hood to repair it!"
Top comment but...
The Audi A2 was designed not to be 'repaired' by anyone other than Audi in as much as there was no need to lift the bonnet (hood, for our american cousins) to carry out routine checks (oil, water, other fluids) which were accessed from the front grille panel (which I guess you could liken to software updates) and of course adding fuel in the normal manner at the side (call it recharge if you like) It was regarded as a bit of "Style Over Substance" so...
65 mpg just doesn't cut it for me.
That's just 18% increase over the 2010 Prius that will not be using the lithium battery.
Once the regular Prius moves over to lithium, that gap will shrink even further.