My real world consumption figures for my Prius in NJ is a reliable 50+ MPG in the winter and 52-55 nowadays. Blocking the front grille slats in the winter keeping the engine warmer goes a long way. So my real world consumption figures for my Prius in NJ is higher than the EPA rating. Tomes
Grille blocking enhances the Prius' mileage significantly. Tomes
For reference here are my facts: My '95 Concorde now has 140k kms on it. The engine runs perfectly, gets the original fuel mileage, goes 8k on a liter of oil and the auto shifts as new. The only repairs on the engine were a set of plugs at 95k, and replacement of the rubber parts on the engine external , associated with the fuel and PVC system, in '06. Engine service is oil changes at 5 to 8 k, always twice per year, plus a few air filters. The only transmission service has been oil changes every 50k plus a flush at 120k. A friend of mine has a '94 of the same car going strong at 210k. I've read the design was for 200k miles (300k kms)
This is not unusual, but typical of this engine transmission. Transmission failures from '94 on are usually due to lack of adequate service.
Oh I should mention that although I often drive on severe winter roads to the ski hills, the body is rust free and stil shines lovely. The body has had no special treatment, just washed with Turtle wash and wax.
On a Goodyear test in the UK for 5,000 miles on run flats, they changed those tires every 50 miles. Kind of useless for highway drives in parts of NA I'd say.
I'd think that Toyota would know that and have a thermostatic louver rather than risk having people block it when too warm.
Actually, this mileage is related to less transmission slippage, not gear selection. I have seen some automatics that were close in mileage, but I would like for you to point out one that surpasses the manual.
Clay
Current generation Honda Civic.
You're lucky because I have yet to see one that doesn't have any rust in my area.
"Josh S" wrote
The only one I see that get better mileage is the CNG version.
Clay
Nope. Look again.
Okay, where am I to look? I didn't see it on Honda's' site, nor Fueleconomy.gov
Not to sound condescending or anything, but I am glad you chimed in, because on further reading, I thought it should be pointed out that a major factor in automatics traditionally getting worse MPG is the torque converter. The TC represents a "fluid coupling," whereas the manual tranny's clutch etc. are a mechanical linkage. Energy transmission losses are greater with the liquid linkage. As many of the pros here know. (I am just an amateur who works on her own car and reads like crazy to understand it.)
But this has changed somewhat with the advent of the "lock up torque converter."
Optimal gearing is still said to be a factor, though. Several other factors are said to play significant roles, as well. So my post did not do justice to why older automatic trannies were less efficient than manual trannies.
Sure.
From this survey, I think we could argue that newer automatic trannies seem to do better at highway speeds, even though it often has fewer gears. The lock up converter (used only at higher speeds) is the first area I would explore to explain most of this higher efficiency. I see the lockup converter started gaining in popularity around the late
1970s but ISTM only recently did all models start having them. I see the 1995 versions of the cars above never saw the autos beating the manuals for miles per gallon. Granted other improvements may have been implemented, like continuously variable transmissions (CVT).The Sentra is interesting, since for the two versions I compared, the big difference is the variable gearing in the auto. It's the only model that beat the manual version in both city and highway.
Toyota OTOH seems to consistently have no models where the auto does better than the manual under city or highway conditions.
Again, just an amateur here.
My Chrysler 4 sp automatic, which came out in the early 90s, has lockup on the top 3 gears. In effect it has 7 gears. The fuel mileage is excellent.
Yep, I wish Toyota would have put that in as well. I a car as sophisticated as this one is, it should also be automatically driven. Tomes
You are rightly concerned about the batteries.
These 270 or so volt batteries have a list price in the $2500 range. They have 228 cells in series and only one needs to go bad to ruin your battery assembly. Newer models only use 201.6 volt batteries, ;)
Besides you have the $3400 list price for the inverter and $1100 for the generator module.
Though the warranty should do good, imagine getting hit with the prorated prices.
Think about all the dead weight you carry around, pollution issues (disposing of the battery), and then, having your system repaired in case of a failure. We all have heard the stories about a battery not charging, alternator issues etc with conventional cars. Think about a system many times more complex...
With all the problems fuel cells still have, I think hydrogen is the way to go.
Edw>>that's without any freaky driving techniques.
Yet, the individual cells can be replaced.
Yet, the technology has been proven and has been in use for over ten years (although not in the US during the first few years).
Why? Hydrogen is used to power fuel cells. And there is almost no infrastructure for fuel cells. Hydrogen has the problem that to make hydrogen, CO2 is generated, as well (i.e., using hyrdogen as a fuel still results in CO2 being produced).
Fuel cells have been used for year. In fact, the O2 tank that exploded on Apollo 13 when I was about four was used in two different types of fuel cells (mitochondria in the astronaut's bodies and the fuel cells that supplied electricity to the Aquarius and Odyssey).
Group: alt.autos.toyota Date: Wed, May 14, 2008, 9:34pm From: snipped-for-privacy@spame.com (AS) You are rightly concerned about the batteries. These 270 or so volt batteries have a list price in the $2500 range. They have 228 cells in series and only one needs to go bad to ruin your battery assembly. Newer models only use 201.6 volt batteries, ;) Besides you have the $3400 list price for the inverter and $1100 for the generator module. Though the warranty should do good, imagine getting hit with the prorated prices. Think about all the dead weight you carry around, pollution issues (disposing of the battery), and then, having your system repaired in case of a failure. We all have heard the stories about a battery not charging, alternator issues etc with conventional cars. Think about a system many times more complex...
-----------------------
Given ALL OF THAT why would anyone buy a used one. And the warranty is not transferable. I saw one on a used car lot a few weeks back. It looked odd there...I can't imagine anyone stupid enough to walk onto a used car lot and buy one..
Toyota warrants the vehicle, not the owner. I guess the warranty is technically not transferable because the warranty is on the vehicle and so the warranty cannot be transferred to another vehicle.
As long as the vehicle is within the original factory warranty coverage period, defects in materials or workmanship will be covered, regardless of how many owners the vehicle has had.
Hydrogen can be produced pollution-free with solar cells. Solar array produces DC power. DC power is used to split water into H and O2. H is used in fuel cells or whatever. Heck, it burns nicely in internal combustion engines. Or externally in the Hindenburg. O2 is sold to NASA for their monkey business. What could be simpler? Alternative methods to produce energy are easy. All they require is our cleverness and industry. Tough part is the politics. Here in Houston the normal grocery-getter is an F-350 dually towing a boat. It is easy to hear its one passenger muttering about the high diesel prices to the clerk at HEB. The most gentle suggestion to this poor soul that perhaps a smaller vehicle might be in their enlightened self-interest and well.......you can imagine. We are talking about a driver who has a Ph.D. in engineering here. From Texas A&M. The best damn school on earth! Light rail, interurban, bike paths, golf cart trails, abundant plug-ins for the electric vehicles, efficient use of our rail freight system to keep the use of 18 wheelers to a minimum and a zillion other schemes (no hyperbole) will never come to fruition because we are too ignorant as a species. And too stubborn. On the topic of my 2003 Civic Si engine spinning too fast at 80mph: Is it possible and affordable to put a 6 speed in that little car? I'd be happier if its revs were closer to 2000 at 80 mph. Anyone have a referral for that project?
Just a short anecdote here...
I'm not sure what manufacturer introduced "lock up converters," but Studebaker began using its self designed automatic featuring a lock up converter for the 1950 model year.
My 1955 President, a hefty 4,200 lb sedan with 259 V8/DG-250 tranny achieved 21/28 mpg in real time road tests in that era. Not bad for a 4 bbl carb, auto and pretty good performance. My uncle used to really rub it in to Chevy/Ford owners...
In a lot of ways, we really haven't advanced much farther.
JT
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.