Prius overall MPG shows no improvement in the 3rd generation according to Consumer Reports tests

ya, ATT has rollover, verizon allows you to increase minutes at any time to prevent overage charges (this has saved my nice person more than a few times!!) so ATT you pay for more than you need, (otherwise you would not have an extra 8000 minutes..obtw, you have a year to use them !!) with Verizon, you pay the minimum to need to get by and upgrade on those occasions when you need the extra minutes, IF YOU ARE PROACTIVE ENOUGH TO MONITOR YOUR USAGE since you must make the request to upgrade your minutes before the billing cycle ends.

Bob, granted i have a lot of people on my account, (5 lines) but my cellphone bill is $250 a month. but i have investigated a TON of prepay options and for me to get half of what i get now would cost me a fortune. plus, t-mobile is pathetic around here so dont even look at them

verizon 83 M cust,,, ATT 73 M... they control over 60% of the US market and they know it. both have nearly identical billing and price plan structures and both change instantly to match the other.

as far as phone models, they recently introduced a Casio. they no longer have ANY palms... and STILL NO SONY/ERRICSONS!!!! why is that?? wish i knew

 

Funny how the thread drifted into cell phone service. Still it is a question of requirements:

• prepaid ($8.50/mo) - works great if you are not a heavy duty user. It replaces the rapidly disappearing pay phones and works in the car and by the side of the road.
• internet away from home (whatever free WiFi is available) - using an iPod Touch, which has Skype backup for VoIP. I'm not happy with Skype for quality of service but the calls are cheap and conference calls work OK. Mostly I'm checking news, weather and scanning forums.
• home ($50/mo) - xDSL with POTS line. It isn't fast but it is price compatible to a second POTS line so we can still take calls.

I just hate to spend money for something I don't use. Yes we have cable TV but they cost too much for internet access regardless of the speed. When they offer internet access at permanent rates compatible with xDSL, we'll consider it.

When I pay a bill, my mind see currency burning.

Bob Wilson

 

My communication bills escalated dramatically in the past year, ever since my kids turned cell phones into entertainment and I bought an iPhone for my wife. As I posted above, I hope Google/Android will help me reign it in next year with plans that appeal to internet/text users.

• Cable: nada
• Home internet: Qwest fibre 600/100 KB/s for $38/month
• Home Phone VoIP: ViaTalk $12/month for 500 minutes nationally, very inexpensive international calls. Very good web interface for call logging, voicemail.

 

I don't know what this thread is about, but my family is pretty satisfied with Verizon family plan. I like the added feature of calling 10 numbers unlimited without using minutes. This pretty much means there is no chance of us going over our minutes.

 

ATT?, will have to check on that, but last time i knew of someone shopping for service ATT did not offer rollover on the 450 plan. not enough revenue for any freebies i guess.

but that is same with verizon. their "Freinds and Family" program starts at 900 for single and 1400 for family share. i have dropped to the 1400 after they started F&F in Feb, i now only use around 600 minutes a month (was previously around 2000-2200) and of the 10 i have registered only 7 of them provide any real savings. the other 3 we dont call as much anymore.

when my usage starts pushing 1000, i will look at changing them.

as far as inconvenience for having to monitor usage and change my plan?? my bill cycle ends on the 7th of the month. i have my calendar remind me to check my usage on the 5th. since F&F its become a waste of time, but i will gladly become inconvenienced if it means saving me $70 on my cellphone bill.

 

CR city MPG test just validates the Exhaust Heat Recovery System performs as good as the Coolant Storage System it replaced. This is despite a larger engine block and heavier car in 2010 model.

 

From my experience as a fist time Prius owner with the G3, CR is accurate with there MPG results.

I know there are a lot of users with different experiences than myself, but I have to seriously hyper-mile to get 50 mpg on a tank average. On my commute I regularly get passed by another Prius (as well as most other traffic) and still get closer to 46 mpg.

Interestingly enough, my daily commute is also about 15 minutes through city and highway traffic. Maybe their test was tailored to this situation. I wish I could have read it before I bought the Prius. Not because I wouldn't have purchased it (love it btw), but because my expectations would be more realistic. It is disappointing to have to try so hard to just reach the EPA rating.

 

I'm new to the Prius and hybrid driving as well (only 320 miles on the ODO), but I have not had any trouble going over 50 mpg regularly.

 

So . . . the GenII was tested by EPA. And, like most other cars, EPA did not require Toyota find an older GenII to go through the new test method?

Whew! This is quite a leap of faith -- transcending logic and science, as far as I can tell. The new Prius may have a larger ICE, but the electric motors also have been redesigned, they are lighter and more efficient, and now the car will go faster (sooner) on EV. The new Prius also avoids some of the GenII oddities involving ICE runs regardless of the engine temp.

I can't begin to follow your reasoning on this one, and I'm concerned that readers may believe your statements are based on empirical data or independent studies or something other than your opinion.

I don't intend to launch a personal attach, Gokhan. I'm just a little sensitive to statements that suggest a logical conclusion to an argument -- when the logic appears baseless and the argument otherwise unsupported by fact. If we polled 10 PriusChat members who've had both GenII and GenIII cars, how many do you believe would say they get the same mileage in both cars? For those who could actually say the mileage was the same, I'd ask them the next question: Do you think fuel economy in your GenIII will go up over time or down? I think that question will make it the results a bit clearer, because most GenIII owners have had their cars for only a month or so.

 

It does not matter how big the motors are or if the car can go faster sooner. It still requires X amount of energy to propel Y amount of weight to Z speed. The differences wil be in efficiency. I am sure the Gen III is more efficient but it is also heavier. The two tend to cancel each other out and you have a car that gets about the same MPG as a Gen II. I have no probem with that.

MPG was the strength of the second gen Prius. The weaker areas of the car have been improved in the III while keeping the strongest area about the same. Sounds good to me. Maintaining your strengths while improving your weaknesses is a recipe for a great car.

 

I think the age old statement "Milage will change based on driver, route, and driving conditions". I have a new V(2 weeks old) at first fillup MPG was 52.62. that was my first tank wth a trip to 10-11k mountain range. some testing(playing) with power mode upthe hills and B mode down them. Trip computer est 54.6 for same tank. I by no means are a skilled MPG driver. I'm a Happy one

 

Here are the numbers I got from the EPA web site.
The Gen3 has about the same mpg as the the Gen2 from the owners inputs. So CR's claim that Gen3 does not improve FE is not without merit. Interesting, the new Insight also reported similar mpg as the Prius.
One more thing I noticed, the passenger volume of Gen3 is smaller than the Gen2 94 vs 96, but the luggage volume is bigger 22 vs 16.

 

The only thing "no-brainer" about it is that it is based on assumptions only. You do not have a situation where "all other things are equal" and you compare a 1.8 liter to a 1.5 liter. I'll agree that if all other things were equal, then the argument would be worth consideration. I won't agree there is a no-brainer going on here.

Real data is what will show the difference in performance.

I'll agree the mileage tests done by CR, like the ones conducted by EPA, are based on specified protocols. This doesn't mean the results are truly indicative of someone else's experience.

The way you are stating this, though, you'd believe a short-track, short-timed, low mileage test conducted by a few drivers as compared to the numbers I have from real-life use for more than 6,000 miles? Or the numbers produced by others across thousands of miles? Particularly when such numbers are being compared to those same drivers' experiences with long-term use of GenII vehicles, I think those are valuable data points worth full consideration.

From what I've seen and read, the EPA numbers are based on tests with fewer points of departure and fewer points where individual interpretation or driving style can/could or would interfere.

Don't forget that the sample size on the EPA site is pretty small yet. Also, the fact is that fuel economy increases as the engine breaks in, and we haven't had enough miles on the GenIII cars to break them in. These are two reasons why the mileage numbers could look similar.

If you are willing to trust self-reported numbers like these, then perhaps it would be better to ask GenIII owners who've also had GenII cars to report comparative fuel economy numbers.

 

The best people to solve this dilemma are those who have owned or currently own both gen 2 and 3 for a while, so they have a real feeling whether or not there is improvement based on their routine driving. I think most people in that bucket are confirming a considerate improvement in gen 3 vs. gen 2.