My MPG Observations on Stock 15's vs. Aftermarket 17's

Thank for doing this, man. I know it's hard to swap back to 15s when the 17s make the car look so much better.

I'm in the same boat right now. I see about a 3mpg loss between my LRR 15s and LRR 17s. The gap was more like 6-7mpg vs. the Energy Saver A/S tires and the LRR 17s! A 3mpg loss is easy to swallow but 6+ is a lot tougher.

I bet you're happy to have the bling back!

 

That is one of the arguments going on in my head right now.

Keep the 17s because it looks cool but I only get to see them while entering or exiting the car. You can't see them while driving.

Keep the 15s because the mpg is so much better as is the ride comfort. You spend more time behind the wheel than you do standing outside the car admiring it. How much do you really care what others think about your wheels?

With the 17s you have to struggle to achieve good mpg. With the 15s you can drive faster and with less effort yet still achieve great mpg. So it comes down to looks vs. comfort and less stress... Hmm

 

Even if the wheels look crap, you'd feel even more comfortable with the fact that the safety level has been raised much much higher than the standard wheels.

 

Ahhhhhhhhhhh! What?

 

I hear ya, bro.

I'm doing the two sets of wheels thing right now but when the 17s wear out I will not be using these wheels again. I'll sell me cheap on Craigslist of something. I would like to sell my Ascends for Energy Savers just because I enjoy seeing big mpg numbers with little effort. Right now a 3mpg or so difference doesn't justify the look or handling do the 15s.. You know what I'm talking about.

 

It's just how you value 3mpg vs looks/safety. Sure my 17" makes my Prius look not-so-cheap-looking, but being able to corner/stop better ranks higher than fuel economy. In actual fact I've only lost maybe 0.1-0.2L/100km which I could reduce further by just trying harder or driving slower but even 0.5L/100km poorer economy which is not possible, on a tank and even if I get 1000km out of a tank, it's 5L extra which is only A$7 a tank (at today's fuel price here that last almost 1.5 weeks), $250/yr at the absolute worse case. I won't lose sleep over $250/yr if it's going to give me better safety margin for me and my family. But I get where you're coming from too. It's an addictive game to see how low (high in MPG numbers) you can go.

 

See the problem is you could get even higher mpg with the 15s if you tried harder because 15s are easier to hypermile with or you could further increase the gap by using something like the Energy Saver A/S if they are available there. So while you are comparing your old numbers with 15s to your current numbers with 17s, those are not absolute. You could do better or worse with different tire choices and driving techniques. I see approx. 3mpg loss comparing the 17s and my 15s but when I borrowed a set of Energy Saver A/S tires the loss increased to 6mpg-8mpg depending on how I drove. So there is a certain potential that you have to take into consideration. I agree completely about the increased safety, however. The 17s are simply a safer tire for this car. As usual, the economic losses may be minor if you don't drive many miles per year.

 

I agree it is hard to duplicate the exact driving conditions. In my case it is because with the 17s I simply cannot glide down overpasses and small hills that I normally could with the 15s. The car simply will not hold speed and I end up having to light the ICE to maintain speed. That is a good indication that the 17s do not roll nearly as easily as the 15s despite being labeled LRR. IMO the LRR label gets applied to tires that should carry the label. lol

 

But wider wheels roll better than narrow ones.

 

They don't in this case. Even capriracer (well known tire expert) found this out. Theory didn't agree with practical math an experience. If you are referring to wider tires in the trucking industry this is a totally different application. We do not run double tires on our cars.

 

What a great mod! A dually Prius, with fake exhaust stacks sticking up, naked lady mudflaps, an upgraded air horn, and a set of "balls" to dangle from the tow hitch.

I like the look of the package 5 rims (although the car looks goofy with the gap between the top of the tire and the wheel well, it needs to be lowered to be in better proportion), but I went through the same mental argument F8L discussed (looks vs driving comfort). The gallons per year difference wouldn't be that much between the 15" and 17", but we are so in tune with MPG (instead of gallons per mile) that it makes the difference hard to swallow.

Are there any good looking 15" aftermarket rims that you can slap on that will provide the improved look for the car yet not punish your mileage?

 

Codyroo, maybe look at the wheels/covers on the PIP? I kinda like those. They resemble the wheels on the CT200h a little.

I agree with everything you said above btw. It's hard to swallow the MPG difference but gallons per mile is easier unless you drive 30k a year like me and can run the Energy Saver A/S.

 

If you do 30,000mi a year, that's a lot of driving and "added" risk being out on the road longer than most people. I'd say go save money elsewhere in your life (cheaper phone, eat less takeaway food...) At the end of the day, given the choice of being able to avoid an accident unharmed vs saving a bit of coin and be in an accident, which would you choose? Treat it as an insurance.

 

Thanks for the info. 6 MPG seems like too much for me. I'm still considering the DR-34 or DR-19 (maybe DR-33 too). They all come in 15s or 16s. I'm thinking the 15s with Avid Ascends or 16s with Energy Saver A/S. I hope either combo would get me close enough (1-2 MPG drop) to the OEM 15s.