2010: How do I make PWR mode default?

That usually happens when you have the AC going at high or even the seat heaters on....... things that pull heavy loads on the electrical trigger the engine to come on to keep the traction battery from draining too much.

Next time that happens, reach over and turn off whatever AC you or seat warmer you have running and see if the engine doesn't immediately stop again.

 

Normally that makes sense to me too... but Mazda wasn't the one mentioning the 47mpg.. it was the guy test driving it.. and while you may say he's in their pocket... he's known to be pretty straight on, nice or cruel, he tells it like it is.. otherwise he would have no credibility and he would have to shut down his show.
Ed Wallace with inside automotive.

I think the new engine is a breakthrough... especially if they combine with hybrid.. but I doubt mazda will since they subliminally put down hybrids in their advertisements..........

I guess we won't know till we drive one or check out the mazda forums.

 

The only time the AC runs is when husband is in the car, and while he is a bit of a heavy load, he's usually not in the car. I did get to try the heated seats today (it was 45 outside, and hail!) which was kinda fun until it got uncomfortably hot. This eventually lead to an epic battle with the automatic climate control. It's like a magnet, I have no idea how it works.

 

Yeah ... I know it was his report not Mazda's. But ... the Skyactivs on fuelly have been getting low 30's from the reports I've read. Typical Mazda. Their non-Skyactv 3's were supposed to get 30, and they get 26.

Don't get me wrong ... I really like Mazdas ... especially the 3, but 40 MPG in a 3 under anything but the VERY BEST conditions is a pipe dream.

From Motortrend ....

"To put the new Skyactiv's lofty 40-mpg highway fuel economy number to the test, we loaded up a Mazda3 i Grand Touring model with long-weekend gear for two people and drove from Detroit to Boston. The route included 1500 miles of mostly expressway driving posted at 65 mph, and we maintained pace with the left-lane traffic at 10 over. While in Boston we probably racked up 20 miles worth of frustrating maneuvering around the horse-era network of mainly one-way (usually the wrong way) streets and tunneling freeways.​

Our mid-October timing meant the fall colors were at their peak and the temperatures were crisp enough to leave the A/C switched off. Steady speeds, minimal accessory loading, and mostly dry pavement make this trip a pretty ideal test. The onboard computer read 37 mpg at an average speed of 57 mph for the entire trip, and after the final fill-up our off-board calculator spit out a figure of 35 mpg. OK, maybe the difference is attributable to the roughly 7 additional horsepower we expended per mile by running above the limit. Perhaps 40 mpg demands greater driver patience."​

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests...activ_g_first_test/viewall.html#ixzz1ngoCPexS​

​

REV

 

Good to know.. I haven't done any further homework... thanks....

I do appreciate the 3 different modes as it custom fits a larger variety of drives... just which it would stay where you put it last..

 

I have less meat on my butt than my wife.. so she like it hot... I usually can only use the seat heater for about 5 - 10 minutes before I feel like I have a fever... lol!

I general, the car is quite efficient once it decides its up to operating temperature it will not use the engine unless needed for heavy loads...

Using the power mode button is more likely to trip the engine on if your not very careful with the pedal.

If you look at your display screen "pull up the slidebar" you will see as soon as your power goes beyond the halfway mark "noted by a tiny thin mark, you will see the engine come on indicating its no longer in battery mode but the engine will engage too to help out.

Its much easier to run around in eco mode to learn the software because things don't happen so fast or at least aren't as touchy.

As that becomes boring you can go to normal or power mode and accomplish the same thing.

 

This is about as useful as the hordes of haters (elsewhere) saying that the Prius can never hit its advertised EPA fuel efficiency.

Where did you get your numbers? I see that Consumer Reports found that the Mazda3 Skyactiv beat its EPA highway rating. Reality check: Will your car actually achieve the advertised 40-mpg?

Clearly the Mazda 3 is no Prius, and the Prius is no Mazda 3. Trash talking other cars for their mpg is as useful as others trash talking the Prius for its lateral G's, steering feel, slalom speeds, or track times.

I will admit that while it's fun to drive our Prius for fuel efficiency, it takes more self discipline to drive my Mazdaspeed Protege for efficency. The Mazdaspeed is also a hoot to drive fast. (I have no such temptation with our 2006 or 2012 Prius.) Still, I consistently beat the EPA estimates. That doesn't say much compared to a Prius, unless my wife is driving the Prius and getting 35mpg!

 

First ... I SAID that I liked the Mazda 3 ... a lot ... and I do ... I wasn't 'badmouthing' it or hating it. CR says 32 MPG is 'impressive' ... really ?? My 05 Corolla with 156K miles on it has gotten 33-35 MPG every tankful since the day I bought it ... an equivalent Mazda 3 of that vintage gets 25 MPG ... so now ... 8 years later .... 32 MPG is 'impressive' ??? I sure don't think so .... it would have been 'impressive' 8 years ago. Who drives 'highway only' miles anyway to get those numbers ? As soon as you get off the highway .... you're getting 32 .... actually .... far less than 32, since 32 is a combined number.

Second ... I subscribe to CR online and this is what they say about the Previous 3 ... and the Skyactiv 3 ... and the Speed 3 ... just what I said in my previous post ...

Powertrain: The 3's 167-hp, 2.5-liter, four-cylinder engine feels smooth and refined. Expect 25 mpg overall in mixed driving with regular fuel. The five-speed automatic transmission shifts quickly and smoothly. A slick six-speed manual is also available and complements the car's sporty demeanor.

This is what they say about the Skyactiv 3 ....

The pleasant, practical, fun-to-drive Mazda3 has a 2.0-liter engine that got some tweaks and is now called Skyactiv. It gets an impressive 32 mpg overall. The punchy 2.5-liter is a carryover. Handling is precise and responsive, and the ride is firm and comfortable. Road noise is pronounced. Interior quality is very good, but rear-seat room is tight. The hatchback increases versatility. The sporty turbocharged Mazdaspeed3 is very quick but has too much torque steer and a harsh ride, and is noisy. IIHS crash-test results are impressive.

And about the Mazdaspeed 3 ....

The Mazdaspeed3 is very quick and agile but is overly taxing on a daily basis. Acceleration is brisk, cornering is capable, and the manual transmission is smooth. Also, the cabin is well finished, and the hatchback brings useful versatility. But the current version falls short of its predecessor, as well as key competitors. Cabin noise is relentless and the harsh ride is fatiguing. There is also plenty of torque steer, the tendency to pull to one side when accelerating, hurting the car's handling finesse. Every pebble and tar strip announces itself, and road bumps and ridges pummel riders with stiff, rubbery shocks. The jitters persist even on a smooth highway. Constant road and tire rumble, as well as engine boom make normal conversation difficult and it becomes wearing on long trips. The 263-hp, turbocharged, 2.3-liter four-cylinder engine provides abundant power, pulling strongly in every gear. We averaged 26 mpg overall on regular fuel.


REV

 

I'm sorry that I didn't read your full post carefully enough to see your respect for the Mazda3 with Skyactiv.

I'm glad to hear that you are beating CR's overall mileage of 29mpg estimate of your generation Corolla's MPG. Heck, you are even beating the EPA's current estimate of it's overall fuel efficiency (29mpg if it has an automatic, 25mpg if it has the 6spd manual and is aspiring to drive like a Mazda3.) I believe that how one drives can sometimes be as important as what one drives, when in comes to fuel efficiency. I commend you.

I guess I mainly hoped that you or at least others can accept that people can drive other cars efficiently, even if they aren't driving a Prius, a hybrid, or even a Toyota. I missed that when I read the first paragraph of your earlier post. Thank you for clarifying.

 

:focus:

I'm appreciating the choice of modes (eco, power, standard) and the associated accelerator pedal mapping differences while driving our 2012 Prius. While I like sporty, responsive cars, in the Prius I usually prefer Eco as I find pulse and glide a bit easier in in Eco.

What I really wish, ever since we bought our first Prius in 2006, is that there was a mode in which the car would glide (with no regenerative braking) when the driver is pressing neither the brake pedal or the accelerator pedal. Over the years, I've learned to feather the accelerator pedal of a Prius without much thought or difficulty, but this would still be much easier, especially for new Prius drivers.

It irritates me to have to feather the accelerator while gliding to get the car to stop simulating a conventional car. I understand that Toyota wanted to make the Prius drive more like a 'normal' car. We also see this with the mild acceleration from a standstill when one releases the brake without pressing the accelerator, simulating what the torque converter on a regular automatic transmission does. But, Toyota, some of us prefer manual transmissions and some are even practiced at hypermiling in them. There's no need to feather the accelerator with a non-hybrid manual transmission car while gliding in neutral.

 

I've also noticed a significant time delay between pressing on the gas pedal and actual vehicle acceleration in Eco mode, but not in Power mode. This goes beyond just the mapping difference.

 

No problem theorist .. I love a good MPG discussion !!!

Actually ... I'm doing about average for the '05 Corolla according to 63 cars on fuelly for that year, and just very slightly above average for 787 Corollas overall (all years). Overall average is 32.2.

I can usually beat the EPA estimates as well because I drive sensibly and smoothly. When I bought the 05 Corolla the only other car in the running at the time was the 3, and the only reason that I didn't buy the 3 was because of the mileage factor. It's obviously a better performing car. Turns out is was a good decision because the 05 3 average on fuelly was 27.6 with an overall (all years) mileage of 27.

In 156,000 miles on the Corolla ... the only thing that has needed repair other than standard maintenance items was a $7 headlight bulb. The front brakes lasted 110,000 miles, the rear brakes were just changed last month at 156,000 miles, and the engine, trans, and exhaust have never been touched.

I'd much rather DRIVE a 3, but I'd rather OWN a Corolla.

BTW ... when I look at the Corollas in CR, it shows overall mileage to be 32 .... where are you getting 29 ?

From CR .....

The Corolla is a good small sedan, although it is rather bland. The 1.8-liter engine is relatively quiet and responsive. By the standards of the small-car class the Corolla has a comfortable ride. Handling is sound and secure. The interior is put together well, although hard plastic panels and trim are abundant. We got a very impressive 32 mpg overall in our test of the 1.8-liter equipped with both automatic and manual transmissions, one of the most frugal among nonhybrids or nondiesel sedans.

Again with the impressive about 32 MPG LOL.

My daughter's 02 Mazda Protege LX is the most fuel thirsty in my household at about 25/31, then the Corolla at about 33/36, then the Prius at about 48/57 (48 overall for the first 25K miles). I've had to replace all the coils on the Mazda, the driver side halfshaft, the air intake tube, and the disc brakes every 30K. It's a tight and rattle free car to drive though ... I love it.

Take care.

PS ... to the OP .... sorry about the de-rail ....


REV

 

Did you you quote the 32mpg of Consumer Report's road test of the newly redesigned 2009 Corolla? I believe your 2005 is the same generation as the 2003 Corolla. Since CR did not test a Corolla between the 2003 and 2009 model years, I referred to the 32mpg CR published in their road test of the 2003 Corolla.

I'm sorry to hear about the repairs needed on your daughter's 2002 Protege. I hope I don't have that in store with my 2003 Mazdaspeed Protege. I just replaced the rear brake pads and rotors and took it to a shop to replace the front wheel bearings. (I guess I should count myself lucky that my Mazda hasn't needed anything beyond fluid and filter changes, snow tires, tire rotations, inspections, and washing and waxing in the last two years.)

 

Yes I did quote the 2009 Corolla now that I've checked ... still the same basic car and engine though ... I think the trans has one more speed than my 05 does ... they called it a redesign, but it really wasn't. And those numbers matched mine and the fuelly data.

Regarding the Protege, it had about 90K miles when we bought it about 3 years ago, and it now has about 135K. I did all the repairs myself, so it wasn't that bad. The two coil sets were about $80 total (yours is probably different), the air tube was about $35 (it cracked right through in the back and threw a check engine code) and the halfshaft was only about $55 (symptom sounded like a bearing going bad). I had never done anything like that to a car before, but it wasn't too hard since I have all kinds of tools and jacks. I DID have to take it to a friendly auto mechanic to get the half shaft pressed out of the hub. It took a 50 ton press to get it out ... must have been rusted in after 120K miles. Other than that it's been a great little car for my daughter's first car. As I said ... it handles like it's on rails, and has all the LX goodies like sunroof, and alarm system and mag wheels. It's really a cute little car for her.

I also bought a 93 Protege brand new, and never had a problem with it, but I only owned it 2 years. Traded it for a Mustang GT. LOL.

Great talking to you theorist !!!

REV

 

I consider that part of the mapping. The mapping is both positional and temporal. In other words, sensitivity is reduced for both position and time.

Tom

 

You mean, that in ECO mode, a determined amount of "power" (gas pedal position) will be delivered only after a "delay", while in Power the same amount of "power" (although in a different pedal position) will be delivered "immediately"?

 

Yes, apparently. Prior discussions have only dwelled on the pedal response maps, but the time delay I don't recall seing mentioned before.

The time delay contributes to the feeling of "sluggishness" in Eco mode.

 

This seems likely but I haven't heard of it before. Do you have a reference? I would be interested in knowing more.

 

No reference, just experience. It's been common for years to damp the throttle input, since rapid changes increase emissions and reduce mileage. The Prius has the advantage of doing all of this in firmware, so it's not surprising to see differences between modes.

Keep in mind that full power is always available if you step on the gas.

Tom

 

You can do it mechanically or electrically. jayvee already explained electrically in previous post. You can build a small electric motor to push the power button and strap it on top of the power button.