Prius Chatters Revolt!!!! 38.7mpg

We live at the top of a six mile twisting mountain road, and consistently average 36 mpg with 205/60X15 Michelin Pilot Exalto A/S tires filled to 43 and 40 psi.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(koa @ Mar 10 2007, 01:05 PM) [snapback]403413[/snapback]</div>

That's great and all, but I'm sure most people don't live on top of a mountain.

 

I live in a mountainous area and my year-round fuel economy is ~49 mpg.

(Composing an email now.)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cubbyg @ Mar 10 2007, 11:23 AM) [snapback]403367[/snapback]</div>

Have you considered switching to decaf? The article didn't leave me with the impression that the author is a muckraker. Your recommendation though is sound. Since they count e-mails, sending an e-mail is a good idea. I also directed the author to greenhybrid so he could see more data.

Drive your Prius to Alaska and see if you get 38.7mpg.

 

I have owned an '04 Prius and now have an '06. I have driven from Washington state to North Carolina and back with an average (calculated)of 50.9 mpg. Much of that was at a higher speed than I prefer. Going up the Rocky Mtns my mileage dropped to 44 mpg but going down the other side I frequently averaged in the mid 60's. I have driven to Hyder, Alaska and on that trip on back roads averaging in the 45-50 mph I averaged over 52 mpg for the trip. Around home with suburban and country driving I consistently get over the 52 mpg average even in the winter. Once while in the city in N.C. making many short trips about town I averaged 46 mpg.

I drove with someone recently that complained of bad mileage. He never stopped steering the car even on very straight roads. I finally talked him into letting go of the steering wheel and showed him the car traveled straight if he allowed it to. He also hovered his left foot on the brake pedal and constantly braked a bit because he tailgated. Glad to get out of that car.

 

I think this 38.7 mpg comes from the test that's referenced at http://priuschat.com/index.php?showtopic=2...mp;#entry396451.

 

That 38.7 isn't at all far off from what I get in my normal, short-hop usage of the Pri, and is about as good as I ever got until my late Oct-mid Dec 8k+mi roadtrip (which moved the odometer from about 3400 to over 11k, and included up and down Canadian AND US Rockies). And I don't oversteer. I DID put on better tires just before the trip.

Yeah, I'm embarrassed as hell at having to admit it, but there it is. And those who email such info are a self-selected sample--not scientifically valid (see HERE, in particular the sections on Selecting Your Sample and Avoiding a Biased Sample).

Another way to look at it: when whomever/whatever was looking for data, those who are unhappy (as is often the case) would be the most likely ones to respond. Also, do we know the wording of the original query that sparked the emails? And/or in what forum it was placed?

 

Basically, unless the data spans an entire year, it is not truly representative of real-world. It's that simple.

The complete annual cycle must be taken into account. There are so many factors of influence involved, just a short sampling won't do. It will inherently have some type of bias... even if the intent was to be objective as possible. Of course, they could qualify it by stating exactly what the conditions were, but that rarely ever happens. Most write-ups portray their results as if they were general expectation for everyone all the time.

In other words, unless you are looking at a minimum of 15,000 miles of data, you are probably being mislead. So the question instead becomes, was it from the person being poorly informed? Sadly, sometimes it is not.

 

The problem is not the numbers he posted, but that he posted EPA estimates for all cars but the Prius, and Prius was the only car he posted "real world" usage stats for.

It didn't seem like Prius-bashing to me, just slightly sloppy journalism.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Mar 11 2007, 09:26 AM) [snapback]403749[/snapback]</div>

It's worse than that. EPA estimates were never intended to provide a MPG expectation. They were created for the sake of new vehicle comparison. Those numbers established a standardized baseline to assist with the purchase process. That's it.

There was no method of measure before that. So, something was far better than nothing. But decades later, people now treat the estimates as the final word, rather than just fact to begin research with.

Real-World data should not only be included, it should be given far more importance weight than the estimates. Instead, we get heavy emphasis on the estimates and a misleading test sample.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Mar 11 2007, 11:26 AM) [snapback]403749[/snapback]</div>

Hi Ichabod,

Some people might consider that a "Lie of Omission" .

 

That was exactly my point. He ignored the standard "fair" method of comparison when he could either have only used (flawed) EPA numbers, or could have done a little more research and produced some real-world numbers for all the models reviewed, which might have resulted in an even less fair comparison, considering they probably wouldn't have gone to the trouble of accurately testing FE over a long enough time period (as mentioned before, a full year is the minimum to get it right).

I say it was sloppy journalism because it seems like he wasn't intentionally bashing the Prius, but that he was following the path of least resistance on at least a couple counts:

1. It's super-easy to see the difference between EPA and real-world in the Prius because of the real-time display and graph of FE.

2. Because of that and other biases in reporting regarding the Prius, it seems to be that the general media opinion of Prius FE is that its EPA numbers are inflated.

So he did what everyone else does. It's sloppy. Journalists have a tendency of using other journalists as source material, and while it works sometimes, the end result is that a lot of what we hear through any media outlet consists of rumors and hearsay.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Mar 11 2007, 10:42 AM) [snapback]403772[/snapback]</div>

That's called reporting.

I've been interviewed enough times to see the differences. Reporters call wanting a quick brain-dump from you and something to quote so they can whip out an article in a few days.

Journalists take the time and research in-depth, delivering stories worthy of attention... quite different from the slop we routinely end up reading.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(john1701a @ Mar 11 2007, 01:59 PM) [snapback]403842[/snapback]</div>

What I found disturbing was he quotes EPA ratings on the 4 other cars in his article but leave that out about the Prius. Not to mention everything else was a compact. :angry:

 

I'm new to all this, but all the comments I read convinced me purchasing a Prius was the right thing to do. I drive almost 100 miles everyday commuting to and from work. Since I bought my Prius in January the worse MPG I had is 48.3 and the best was 54.8. Most of my driving is freeway, but we have a lot of hills!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cubbyg @ Mar 12 2007, 11:25 PM) [snapback]404680[/snapback]</div>

Again, I feel compelled to point out stuff like...How new was the car? Where and for how long did they drive for each test? For how long, in fact, did they run their tests? Tire pressures? Temps? Terrain?

Overall, due to my driving patterns (generally short hops), my mpg is pretty close to theirs. Yup, it ended up better during my 8k roadtrip, but it's dropping like a rock again now that I'm back to my normal routines.

You need to know exactly ALL of the test conditions to judge something like this.

I am NOT defending them, as such--just trying to explain how, perhaps, they might have come up with their numbers.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cubbyg @ Mar 10 2007, 11:23 AM) [snapback]403367[/snapback]</div>

You're absolutely correct. I was NOT getting 38.7 in February; I WISH it was that good, but sadly, it usually wasn't.

 

Prius chatters revolt? Ask a non prius car owner & they'll tell you we're revolting enough :lol: