Comparison Test: 2012 Honda Civic Hybrid vs. 2011 Toyota Prius Five

Good win, but I wonder how the Prius ended up with less than 40mpg overall.. Did they average the figure from their performance test or what?

 

they stated something about a very empty highway.... that means high speeds... a prius only get 25mpg or so while doing 100 in an open desert... or so i've heard

 

I was about to post this article until I realized Tideland had already done and I'd thanked him before it. Whoops.

Yeah, I'm puzzled. The Edmunds people must be really terrible drivers for mileage (and with a way out of alignment car w/underinflated tires?) given that

Yeah... I was thinking too that they must've been driving 85+ mph. For the rest, who knows what they were up to? Very short city drives and driving it wrong for mileage (e.g. misusing EV button and babying the throttle all the time to stay in EV)?

 

they lost me at 38MPG, meh

 

or tire pressure simply low.

 

Honda's hybrid technology is second-rate. No matter how they dress up that pig it will remain so until they drop this hybrid assist nonsense and integrate properly.

 

How could you get a 2011 Prius to do under 40 MPG?

Load it to the max, drive it with high cabin heat, lower tire pressures under 30 PSI, drive it like you stole it?

 

We have an Insight and a Prius 2. The electrics are different (series vs parallel), but the result the consumer sees isn't that much different. Gas mileage: Insight 42 mpg, Prius 47 mpg. Both cars similarly quiet (Prius slightly quieter). Both same CVT transmission. The Green eco readouts on the Insight are a bit more advanced, but it's a later model, 2010. The Prius is higher inside(more spacious feel), slightly smoother ride. The Insight handles better and has more pickup.

The biggest difference? the price. Insight was about $18.5K in 2010; Prius $23.5K in '08.

The Insight is a better value at that price, though I prefer the Prius.

 

I tend to only get below 40mpg when I'm towing my 6x8 trailer. Sometimes I get up to 48mpg while towing though.... I'm sticking with high speed runs and jackrabbit starts as the cause... basically never coasting or cruising below 70mph (then again, my bro gets 50's in his 05 with 200k while at 70mph). Maybe Cwerdna is right about 85+

 

Actually, I like Honda's approach: they don't push too hard on any one facet of achieving better mileage, it's a a lot of smaller nudges. At least with the second gen, gas engine displacement was a paltry 1.3 liter. That, coupled with off-the-mark heavy lifting being liberally assisted is the cornerstone of their mpg effort.

Then they added autostop, sequential dual sparkplugs per cylinder, and dual lift valves (mild for the most part, agressive only under heavy acceleration needs). The underside has aeropanels, there's aluminum suspension components.

Where they tripped is expecting too much from the diminutive Integrated Motor Assist battery. Where they did a face plant is their corporate reaction when the IMAs (and to a lesser extent the Continuously Variable Transmissions) started packing it in.

Anyway, I notice after the article, the first comment says in part:

Toyota perpuates the delusionalism with their in-dash mpg fudging.

 

Yeah... at CR, they got 55 mpg on their highway portion of the test at Most fuel-efficient cars on the 3rd gen.

http://www.consumersunion.org/Oct_CR_Fuel_Economy.pdf says

On the 2nd gen, they got 50 mpg on the highway portion per Most fuel-efficient cars.