These new rule changes will see the Prius' mileage rate drop to around 45 mpg in the city..

http://www.motorauthority.com/news/i...rop-in-the-us/

I yhink these new figures much better reflect real world conditions..

Bah. Lower the standards lower the expectations. If people expected higher mileage they would question why they don't get it and it might cause some introspection. I hate lowering the bar. Maybe if people learned how to drive according to the epa tests we could get those numbers. I say raise the bar. Make people question the epa numbers and learn how to beat them!

My hydroponics experiment

You ever notice how hard it is to lip read cartoon characters?
"Crazy is what the sane call Delta Flyer"

While I agree with Tom, I hope that the new fuel economy standards will put more pressure on the manufacturers. Vehicles will have to become more efficient in order to claim the same numbers that we see today. Not only that, but the lower numbers on the window should serve to drive new car buyers to a more efficient vehicle than they otherwise would have purchased. Rather than going for the compact SUV and thinking that they are going to get 28mpg, they may see 23 or 24mpg on the sticker and decide that a smaller sedan or wagon that actually gets 28mpg will do the job.

It's a little give and a little take, but ultimately I think that changing the test specification is the right thing to do. Some of us are acutely aware of the fact that driving behavior is the primary reason that cars fall so short on the current standards. Unfortunately, I don't have much hope that the general public will make significant improvements on that front until things get pretty dire. Encouraging smaller vehicles, smaller engines, and new technology is probably going to make the bigger difference.

GROAN . . . now everyone will be a hyper miler! Worse, we'll have to start treating the low-mileage folks like AOLers.

Bob Wilson

Operation Iraqi Oil Freedom:

Automatic, stock, project car.

My other 1500 cc car:

Automatic, stock, backup car.
Free speech, dialog and knowledge thrives without the poison of SPAM.

That very funny..

Smug alert

Mini-miler: [embarrassed shrug] I don't know why I can't get above 42 mpg.
Hyper-miler: [semi-gloat] Let me help you understand what you're doing wrong. ( thinking: if you can't get over 42 mpg in a Prius maybe you weren't meant to walk on two feet )

As I am in Japan, I am still trying to beat the Japanese 10-15 mode mileage of 70mpg (29km/L) for Prius 99.

Best of Luck

Andrew

I think the hybrid cars, sub compacts and compact sedan and coupes are going to do alot better than folks think. The SUV's and Trucks are going to take a beating.

I still think it's funny that you have to "learn" how to drive a hybrid to get better milage. When it should be the other way around. The hybrid should have a mode that maximizes FE with very little input from the user. I should be able to mash on the throttle within this mode and the car should figure out the best and most efficient way to accelerate (for example).

In this we agree only I can do something about it:

1) computer controlled ICE warm-up, NHW11
2) computer controlled auto-glide, NHW11/NHW20
3) computer controlled terrain driving, NHW11/NHW20
4) performance tuning NHW11

I'm already testing the control laws for #1 and with a semi-manual system, it looks pretty good. I have the parts for #2 and know the interfaces. I've already made progress on #4 and that leaves just #3, which will be the most fun to implement.

Bob Wilson

Operation Iraqi Oil Freedom:

Automatic, stock, project car.

My other 1500 cc car:

Automatic, stock, backup car.
Free speech, dialog and knowledge thrives without the poison of SPAM.

The way to accomplish this would be to use a much more powerful electric component. That way, under hard acceleration, the motor, whose efficiency will not change much even when driven at high output (unlike engines, that are efficient in a narrow "band" of operating loads) would handle most of the work. Alternatively, under heavy braking, if the motor/battery components were more powerful, they could regenerate a much greater portion of the braking energy, as well. This would also open up the door for a plug-in option to only running off battery power on short trips, and only running the engine for long trips, or when the heater is needed.

I am in favor of the EPA adjusting the tests to better reflect the way most people drive on the roads out there. One change that I know will be introduced is the effect of temperature, including running air conditioning -- the weather is something out of the control of even devoted hypermilers, however, one thing that this will mean is that there will be an incentive for manufacturers to design cars with more efficient climate control systems. For example, equipping the cabin of the cars with thermal insulation, and infrared-blocking window glass would dramatically reduce the AC load for drivers in hot climates. As of right now though, such a change that would make a real improvement in fuel efficiency is not reflected in the test.

The only thing that is unfortunate about the fuel efficiency standard is that MPG as a unit is not as intuitive when it comes to determining true fuel cost. A hybrid that "drops" from 50 to 40 in the new standard looks like a big hit -- 10mpg, or 20% of the original value. On the other hand, an SUV that drops from 17 to 14 doesn't look as bad (3mpg drop, 17% of original). For the hybrid owner however, that means buying 5 extra gallons each 1000 mile, for the SUV owner, that's 13 extra gallons each 1000 miles, more than twice the difference in true cost.