2012 Prius Plug-In Product Info (pdf)

But, if you don't want heat (or could live with just the heated seats,) how low of a temperature would EV mode still be possible?

 

I captured data for my commute to work (~42 miles) using Torque app. Looking at the gas engine power, I did not use more than 35 hp! I accelerated and passed a vehicle once and climbed a pretty steep hill at 70 mph. Those were the two times I used 35 hp.

PiP PHV battery is capable of 50hp (38kW) so it should rarely use the ICE.

 

FYI,
We know the prototype PiP has three battery packs and three service plugs. And, some battery packs are disconnected on the HV mode, then the prototype never be back to EV mode even if the battery becomes full on a downhill.

At Tokyo Motor Show, I saw only one service plug is available on the production PiP. Toyota staff confirmed that it has single battery pack (four modules in series) and it can be full (to the max 26.4km level of EV mode) on long downhill regeneration.

Ken@Japan

 

Thanks to ken we have some pretty good information. The prius phv needs 3kwh to charge its 4.4kwh battery. I assume that with charging losses this gives around 2.5kwh charge range or about 57%. Does someone have better figures?

Also the pack acts as a single pack unlike the demo and can go 62mph in EV mode.

The magic but gyro does not always measure well for power. It is often best to consult the specification.

That 38kw seems reasonable, we will have to wait for an official test to be sure. Thanks again Ken. Electronics or battery are limiting EV power not the motor.

That must be a magic phv, or maybe its a kit. Power at the wheels is not the same as power at the motor, and definitely the graph does not look right, but lets assume it is. 70mph>62mph and 42miles>>15miles, which means you may have over estimated the percentage of pure electric miles.

 

Li-Polymer technology and newer anodes promise to
increase the current capacity and load of batteries
while keeping the battery weight down. Hyundai's
BlueDrive Li-Polymer battery design hints to possible
performance improvement. Combined with a chassis
made out of carbon fiber instead of steel -and you
probably could keep a long range highway capable
BEV curb weight under 2000 pounds.

 

I won't comment on the lawsuite but the reason they stopped making the RAV4 EV is that they ran out of bodies. When they put the RAV4 EV on sale in 2002 Toyota had approximately 750 bodies in inventory (remember the 2002 RAV4 EV used the 1997 body not the 2002 RAV4 body) which they expected to last for two years. In the end the cars ran out in less than a year and although some 2003 RAV4EVs were delivered they were all ordered in 2002.

Once they were out of bodies production was stopped. It also happend that the California ZEV mandate was gutted at that time so there was no reason for Toyota to continue with a followup model - They had a tiny City car that the leased to fleets in California (can't remember the name of it).

 

I have to agree with " just too little actual EV for too high a price." I wonder if the 2013 models with have a big increase in EV range. If it gets bumped up to 35 - 50 miles like the Volt, Toyota won't be able to make them fast enough.

 

I think they would actually have a harder time selling lots of them because the price would be so much more and the car would not be so similar to the standard Prius any more (there would much less room because of the additional batteries and the non-EV gas mileage would go down noticeably because of the added weight).

 

Your points are very well taken. Perhaps people who "Monday morning quarterback" the car and say they wish this or that was different serve a useful purpose by indirectly telling Toyota what (at least some of) the public wants.

However, the Toyota designers/engineers go through a lengthy and careful process of triage to design a carefully balanced product which is what they believe responds to what the public as a whole will buy at a price which the public can afford. The extent that these people correctly anticipate what the market will buy amazes me!

Take one feature, the liquid cooled battery. It never occurred to me that this could result in fires if it is compromised as appears to be the case in the Volt. So air cooling of batteries (and the related design) may be the better and safer system.

Most of us are simply not prepared to fully understand the considerations which are made in the design of a car. But it is like us to try.

 

The PiP HV mode fuel economy on the JC08 test is better (31.6km/L) than normal Prius (30.4km/L).

Ken@Japan

 

I wouldn't say "much less room" since the luggage capacity looses only 40litres of the 446 litres avaliable in the standard Prius. 10% less, keeping same room/seats in the cabin.
PiP is a valid option, with no drawbacks, except for the price.

 

I am not arguing against the PiP in it's current form (I have one on order). I am saying that if you multiply the battery capacity by 2 or 3 THEN you have significantly less storage capacity (making it less desirable). Don't forget, to squeeze in the current 2012 PiP battery they got rid of the spare tire too. There is only one of them to get rid of!

 

Thanks! That is awesome!

 

I was hoping more power coming from the inverter combined with the ability to capture more energy from regen when braking would offset the 123-pound increase. Finding out that it actually results in an efficiency gain is fantastic! That certainly wrecks the "dead weight" arguments against Toyota's choice of battery-pack size. Of course, I didn't notice a difference with the early model. But now, I'm looking forward to getting mine more than ever. Having such an abundance of real-world data to compare to, including video, firsthand witnessing how the production plug-in delivers after depletion will be fantastic. Expectations are high and Toyota has repeatedly delivered well in the past.

 

I'm sure we will see an improvement in battery and motors. Toyota can downsize the engine, but really since its likely to stay a blended hybrid dropping the hp will hurt cs performance which already isn't great. Adding some of the tricks like di and longer strokes may be able to get a down sized but more efficient motor with the same hp. I would expect an improvement in the 1.8L though and not a smaller engine. It would be nice to have a sport mode that gave us more hp from the battery though;-)

Although JC08 mileage is improved on the phv, toyota estimated 49mpg on the combined test for the phev. A small decrease that might be the same as having a passenger or inflating the the tires differently.

 

More weight doesn't really lead to much of a hit in fuel economy since the regenerative breaking recovers most of the additional energy you spend accelerating that extra weight, and of course, it makes no difference at cruising speed.

Also those specs have to be a mistake. If the battery really could only handle 27kw, then it would make no sense at all to have a 60kw motor since it could never operate at more than half of its capacity.

 

That's not true, the maximum regenerative efficiency is 50%:
HowStuffWorks "Regenerative Braking Efficiency"

Not true, b/c that is forgetting there are two electric motors, MG1 and MG2. MG2 can get power from the battery and MG1 (when MG1 is functioning as a generator) at the same time to max out MG2 power.

 

Thanks! Very useful.