Pete, what were the typical speeds driven along these routes? Also, how many passengers/cargo? Did conditions call for no or very little a/c use?
One way to keep the headlight covers (and front end paint) in good shape is to have the car filmed with 3M Paint Protective film. Insight-I's headlights were notorious for hazing and scratching with age. There was an involved protocol involving various compounds to restore them. Instead I had my 2006 filmed, and 10 years later the headlight covers (and the paint too) looked like new. I just had the same thing done to my Gen 4. The pricier kit includes covering the headlights, a broader band on the hood, the fenders, the side view mirrors, and they may do the doorsills too if you ask. Another area that gets a lot of nicks is a band several inches wide at the front edge of the roof. It's hard to see the film on the car if you don't know it's there.
Ahh, I didn't know you could apply 3M film protection on the headlights. I would've done that to minimise the impact force of pebbles on the headlights moreso than protect it from fading.
Around how much does something like that cost? I see the dealer has this as accessory but I think it is only the hood. I would consider it rather than using touch paint.
I paid (gulp) $750 for the 3M Pro 7-year warranty self-healing stuff. As zojja says, if I keep the car 10 years that's only $75 a year.... There is also 3M Ventureshield film, which would have cost about $100 less. If you are anywhere near Longmeadow, MA, I highly recommend Protection Plus. I thought I was a car nut until I met those guys.... The $395 package offered as a Toyota accessory covers a smaller area and apparently is subbed out to a local installer that the dealer contracts with. Filming is not something I would dare to try on my own.
Not a bad price worth it rather then having paint chips. Wonder if anyone has done a darker or smoke tint on the head and tail lights? Try it myself the hood is not bad the real problem and will not try it again is the bumper.
I just realized that I saved $395 by getting blue rather than red, so if I apply that against the $750 it comes down to $355, which feels far better! Personally I wouldn't darken the head- or tail- lights. I want to see where I'm going and have people see me better from the back. II'd rather align the headlights a bit downwards if necessary.
Are you sure the "---" means Zero? In another thread, someone suggested it meant 'less than 40 miles'. In my Forester, it means 'less than 30 miles', it quits counting down well before the display gets to Zero.
The 3M vinyl film used on headlamps is different than the stuff they put on the body. Thicker and clearer. More expensive too. About $300 for both light housings last time I checked. I passed on that. When new, I had the 3M body film put on Pearl S. So far only one "paint chip", and that was from a rock large enough to dent the hood and tear the 3M film. Of course, as the hood is aluminum it won't rust. Not too upset about it though, as it missed the windshield. I got the second most complete "standard package" for about $1100, which includes the front, most of the hood, the fenders, and the mirrors. I'm now sorry I didn't get the next package up (for an extra $150) which did the entire hood. Reason is the stuff I have finishes about a foot before the end of the hood. No chips up there but if I look closely I can see the line where it ends. Others don't usually notice. You can also get the doors done and just about any other body panel. They download the templets from their source and their machine cuts out the pieces for them to apply. They also do "wraps", decorative appliques etc. Firestorm in Edmonton. And yes, they give the term "car nut" meaning! I also now buy my car "wax" from them. It's a combination Carnuba wax/synthetic polish liquid. Easy to apply and very effective. Lasts about half a year. Great people.
Thanks very interesting about the headlights. With my Gen 3, I'm somewhat disappointed in how "dim" they seem at night. I do a LOT of night driving. I wouldn't define it as a legitimate flaw or problem just a characteristic. I wish mine were brighter. Maybe Toyota overcompensated with the Gen 4? I'll be curious to find out if many other early purchasers of the Gen 4 report this "too bright" characteristic.
Cruise ranged from 65 to 80. Mostly 67 to 72 I'd say though. At 80 I'd get 46-47 MPG. 70 would be low 50s. It was just me and maybe 150 pounds of cargo. Sorry. No AC use on this trip. It was rather cold. It would count down mile by mile to 1 then 0 so that indicates zero. But it's not, obviously, an empty tank. There is a light that comes on with about 2 miles to go. And the dashes at 1.5 or so. So they just build in a generous reserve to minimize dry tanks as much as they possibly could.
Being curious about such things, I would have had a spare, 1 gallon can, and run it dry to find out what happens. However, this should be done in an urban area where plenty of gas stations are within a 1 gallon range. Bob Wilson
Possibly nothing the first time. Legend has it that modern cars use in-tank fuel pumps, and that the gas in the tank cools them (hopefully they don't get very hot?). According to the legend, running your tank dry repeatedly may cause the in-tank fuel pump to fail. There's such a small downside for me to filling when a gallon is left that I do that rather than run even a small risk of a very expensive (?) repair. If I were striving for a "miles per tank" record I might carry a gallon container of gas in the car. Though a hatchback like a Prius doesn't have a proper trunk, so it makes me nervous to be sharing space with a gallon of gasoline.
Fortunately, the non-bladder fuel tanks have replaceable fuel pumps. The Gen-1 and Gen-2 bladder tanks had to be replaced as a unit. Bob Wilson
Considering how many times Bob has intentionally run his tanks dry, I've decided to use him as a canary to test that legend. Based on my expected lifetime number of very low tank events, Bob's reported experience thus far is leaving me quite unworried about it. P.S. FWIW, both household Hondas, past and present (one really an Acura), did require fuel pump replacements. Both at ages of approximately 20 years. Both were run low (never out) on fuel numerous times. So maybe there is some truth to that 'legend'. No other household cars ever needed a fuel pump replacement. But all of them needed the entire car replaced before 20 years.
Ah, the old "the gas cools the fuel pump, so don't run your gas low". Probably comes from a time when gas quality wasn't as good and you didn't want to stir up any funk in the bottom of your tank which your fuel pump would ingest if you filled an almost empty tank. Just an anecdote, but my 2004 Passat has been run down to fumes probably 95% of its fillups over 356k miles. I'm gonna say fuel level does not shorten fuel pump life in modern cars. However, running out of gas in a Prius can have other negative results (at least for 3rd gen).
Self-levelling does not equate to self-aiming though. It simply maintains the current aim, regardless of loading, ie: if you have a lot of cargo in the hatch it'll detect a difference in the front-to-rear-slope and adjust. But, they still could be aiming high from the outset.