Hybrid Car – More Fun with Less Gas

Question about MPG - Page 13

register ::  Login Password  :: Lost Password?
Posted by mrv@kluge.net on August 4, 2006, 6:20 pm

nospam@nospam.org wrote:


As you have found, the EPA tests no longer accurately reflect most
American's real-world driving.  The tests were set up in the 1970s
(with a minor mathematical correction applied in the 1980s), and the
vehicles do not use heat or AC, run at 68-86^F, and never go faster
than 60MPH.


However, the same tests are applied to all vehicles, so it is still
your best choice to compare one vehicle against another.  If you know
what your real-world fuel economy is with another vehicle, use that
model year and trim level's MPG from http://www.fueleconomy.gov/  and
find the % difference from the EPA MPG to your own MPG.  Then apply the
same % difference to the EPA MPG of the vehicle that  you're looking at
to get what you may expect in your own real-world driving.  (Everyone's
"real world" driving is different...)

Other sources of Prius information:


Posted by dayoff53@gmail.com on August 5, 2006, 5:20 am

nospam@nospam.org wrote:

We have had our Prius for nearly 3 months and have been driving it
mostly around town and short trips in Boise, ID.  Temperatures started
in the 70s when we got it, but were in the high 90's to 110 through the
month of July.  We use the AC constantly.  The first tank, we got 48+
mpg, but it steadily declined with the hotter weather, to where we got
a little over 45 mpg on the last tank in town (with high temperatures
over 100 every day).
Then, we took a trip from Boise to Newport, OR, from which we just
returned today.  I avoided the freeeway, driving over on US26 and back
on US20 (they are the same highway for a ways at both ends, but 26
takes a more northern and mountainous route across central OR, whil 20
takes a faster but ugly, desert route).  I stuck to the speed limit (55
almost all the way, with a bit of 65 in Idaho) and used the AC the
entire trip with the exception of the time on the OR coast.  On the way
over (the mountainous route), we got just over 54 mpg.  On the way back
(flatter route), we got 55.7 mpg - and that was with a net increase in
altitude of 2800 feet from Newport to Boise.  Most all the trip, I used
the cruise control set to exactly 55.  Where the speed limit was 65, I
typically went about 62.  I could improve my mileage by not going so
fast up the hills, but my wife gets nervous when the big rigs start
pushing us...
Net economy for the trip (over 1300 miles) was 53.3 mpg, but that
includes 250 miles of short trips in Newport and up and down the Oregon
coast, where we were getting under 50 mpg.

Posted by =?iso-8859-1?Q?mark=5Fdigital= on August 5, 2006, 11:19 am

You realized a net economy of 53.3 mpg. Good for you. It's the overall that
counts. I find it interesting your mileage is much better than mine was in
the same area but it's explainable.  Had I stayed longer the car would have
adjusted.  If you want to see eye popping mpg's come out to New England
where most of the major highways, on average, are not too much above sea
level. I live in Agawam, MA.. My home is about 200 feet above sea level but
most of the town is barely above 60 feet. Denser air, better performance.
You'll probably see high 80's (LOL) until your computer catches on and makes

This Thread
Bookmark this thread:
  • Subject
  • Author
  • Date
---> Re: Question about MPG Michelle Steine...08-04-2006
| |       `--> Re: Question about MPG richard schumac...08-16-2006
| |--> Re: Question about MPG Michelle Steine...08-14-2006
|--> Re: Question about MPG =?iso-8859-1?Q?...08-04-2006
---> Re: Question about MPG dayoff53@gmail....08-05-2006
  `--> Re: Question about MPG =?iso-8859-1?Q?...08-05-2006
please rate this thread