Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Toys Science

Japanese Mileage Maniacs 277

Posted by Zonk from the where-did-they-get-those-wonderful-toys dept.
WY writes "Bloomberg reports on the quirky world of Japanese hybrid car hackers: 'Toyota Motor Corp. says its Prius gasoline-electric hybrid car gets about 55 miles to the gallon, making it one of the most fuel-efficient cars on the road. That's not good enough for Takashi Toya.' He managed to reach as high as 115 MPG. He is one of about 100 nenpimania, Japanese for mileage maniacs."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Japanese Mileage Maniacs More

Japanese Mileage Maniacs

Comments Filter:

  • Mileage? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Don't they use kilometers there?

    • Re:Mileage? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by darkitecture ( 627408 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @02:20AM (#18643907)
      Don't they use kilometers there?

      Well if you want to get that technical, yes we use kilometers here. But even in English speaking countries, mileage is commonly used because "kilometrage" would just sound silly. Mileage or simply "fuel efficiency" is acceptable.

      But just for the pedantic, the japanese characters for "nenpi" (I'd type them here but Slashdot doesn't seem to accept Japanese characters) are literally translated as the character for "burn" (On reading of 'nen') and the character for "cost" or "consumption" (On reading of 'hi' or in this case, 'pi'). Mileage is just the (American) English equivalent. Fuel consumption would probably be more widely accepted.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by bytesex ( 112972 )
        "kilometrage" may sound silly to you, but I can assure you that on mainland Europe, it's a perfectly normal word (where, of course, some languages make their local variety of it).
      • Yes, but the mileage could be expressed in km per litre.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by suv4x4 ( 956391 )
        But even in English speaking countries, mileage is commonly used because "kilometrage" would just sound silly. Mileage or simply "fuel efficiency" is acceptable.

        We use kilometrage here :( I think it comes from French.

  • Good enough for me (Score:5, Funny)

    by MMaestro ( 585010 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:23AM (#18643663)
    In a country where gasoline costs more than $4 a gallon, at least $1 more than the U.S. price, enthusiasts tweak their cars and hone driving techniques to cut fuel bills and gain bragging rights.

    Cutting down on fuel bills AND bragging rights? Where do I sign!?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tftp ( 111690 )
      You may sign at your local Toyota dealer, of course.
    • If you find out where to go, e-mail me a link.

      As a 20 year old jobless college student coasting by on earned savings (and what little remains of my previous job) I don't exactly enjoy spending money on gas. Of course, I have a Chevy Cavalier with 32 mpg, and gas prices aren't nearly as high as Europe or Japan, but still... Wouldn't it be nice if all cars could get that mileage? (It's not like Oil Executives are starving to death)

  • How "real" is their driving? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by xmas2003 ( 739875 ) * on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:23AM (#18643665) Homepage
    The article is a bit light on details, but my guess is a significant factor is they are driving on fairly flat terrain, they really minimize accelerations, and probably stay below typical highway speeds since air drag becomes significant. I.e. I'd like to see 'em get 100+ MPG driving over some Colorado mountain passes. [komar.org] Article also doesn't talk about this, but I bet for long trips, the savings in gas that is offset by the extended driving times ends up valueing their time at a pretty darn low $$$/hour.

    Sure, I'm all for more fuel efficient cars and less fossil fuel burning, but there is a tradeoff.

    • Re:How "real" is their driving? (Score:5, Informative)

      by kanweg ( 771128 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:48AM (#18643771)
      Well, on the way up, the fuel efficiency drops. But you build up potential energy, so you hardly use any energy when the car goes down. Any braking power is passed to the batteries. Driving with my dad's petrol car in mountainous regions in France and Italy, I was always surprised that I managed to get a mileage better than regular (probably helped by the fact that the average speed was lower). The first rule of fuel efficiency is: BREAKING IS FOR LOSERS. If you have to brake, you're not good at anticipating very well. Cross-road or round-about coming up: lift you foot from the peddle. Second rule: KEEP ROLLING. You must make sure you keep on roling. If a traffic light is coming up, I may brake well before the traffic light, then roll along. In all likelihood, the light is green when I reach it, and I may have left a speed of 15 miles per hour. If I had stopped, I would have been slower too, because I'd have to start from zero. It is one of those things people fail to understand (just like: the fastest way to overtake another car is to keep a distance from him (much safer too), instead of tailgating. You can see the opportunity for taking over earlier, you can start making speed, if it doesn't work you break, if it does work you're having a first speed difference in comparison to a tail gater). Lastly, I may drive behind a truck (we have laws here that forbid them to pollute too much so it is OK). Saves up to 10% (more if I were closer, but as long as we don't have a connection between braking and distance control, that is out).

      Bert

      • Re:How "real" is their driving? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by arivanov ( 12034 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @03:01AM (#18644061) Homepage
        You are absolutely right except the "behind the truck bit". I would not do that as I may end up "between the trucks". Unfortunately, your advice is hard to apply (at least in the UK).

        Unfortunately at least in this country (UK) you are likely to cause a case of road rage. All driving schools teach a completely different driving style. Namely, you are taught to go close to the roundabout without deccelerating and switch 4-to-2nd or 5-to-3rd for the big ones to kill your speed right away with the engine while helping yourself with the breaks. Same for traffic lights, stopping, etc. Even if it is absolutely clear that a traffic light will go green any minute, the average british driver will go all the way to it, break, stop and wait. As a result if you deccelerate early the one bihind you may end up smashing into you or uses breaks to deccelerate early and gets pissed off.

        Most of the population drives like that. I used to drive the way you describe (and I still do if I am more or less alone on the road) and I had idiots behind me flashing lights at me all the time.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by mickwd ( 196449 )
          "Unfortunately at least in this country (UK) you are likely to cause a case of road rage. All driving schools teach a completely different driving style. Namely, you are taught to go close to the roundabout without deccelerating and switch 4-to-2nd or 5-to-3rd for the big ones to kill your speed right away with the engine while helping yourself with the breaks. Same for traffic lights, stopping, etc. Even if it is absolutely clear that a traffic light will go green any minute, the average british driver wil
          • That's why vehicles should have deceleration lights as opposed to those activated by brake foot pressure. Also, the lights should blink progressively faster depending on the rate of deceleration.

            Downshifting more than one gear tends to upset a car's balance and that's generally something you don't want to do if you want to maintain control of your vehicle.
      • I like your idea but in the aforementioned Colorado Mountain Passes, that I drive every weekend, there are a number of places where I have to brake: the car coasts to well over 120 km/hour if I don't, and that's not so great when it's a narrow two-lane road with sand and dirt on the road surface, no guard rail, and a 30 meter vertical drop into a rushing stream...
        Check out this pic [coloradoguy.com] -- the road's obvious in the left-hand side, but you can also see a fragment in the right, and another in the upper right. Tho

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by kanweg ( 771128 )
          Well, obviously I'm not trying to promote a variation of playing chicken. Sure, in situations as you describe one has to break or change to a lower gear to keep the speed of the car in check. The good thing about a car capable of charging its batteries when breaking is, however, that break energy goes to the batteries and can be re-used fairly efficiently, whereas in regular petrol cars you're heating the air and go for early replacement of the brake pads. My main point is merely that the way one drives is

      • The first rule of fuel efficiency is: BREAKING IS FOR LOSERS.

        This was also the first rule in kindergarten.

      • Re:How "real" is their driving? (Score:5, Informative)

        by Jay Carlson ( 28733 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @06:18AM (#18644807) Homepage
        The first rule of fuel efficiency is: BRAKING IS FOR LOSERS.

        Absolutely, and that's still important in vehicles with regenerative braking.

        The Prius has a bar graph of your MPG per five minute interval. It overlays cute little green car icons to show how much energy you recaptured through braking during that interval as well. But you shouldn't think of those car icons as part of your score. They're more like the bonus you get when the ball drains out of the pinball machine.

        Consider this: when you step on the brakes in a Prius, you convert kinetic energy to electrical energy, which is then stored in a battery, which you then use to regain kinetic energy.

        But oddly enough, the most efficient way to store kinetic energy is as....kinetic energy. Regenerative braking is a consolation prize for when you had to step on the brakes. Better not to do that in the first place, if you can manage it while being safe and courteous.

    • Re:How "real" is their driving? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by anagama ( 611277 ) <obamaisaneocon@nothingchanged.org> on Saturday April 07, 2007 @02:02AM (#18643837) Homepage
      Japan is pretty mountainous -- obviously not as high as the rockies but lots of up, down, and around.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by PetrusMagnusII ( 309326 )
      You do realize that only 11% of Japanese land is arable don't you? There are a lot of mountains in Japan. Perhaps it would not be possible to achieve such great millage driving through the Rockies in the US or the Minami-Alps in Japan, but the Rockies are only a small portion of the US, and everything between the Rockies and Appalachian is essentially flat.

      Heck, all the land speed records are set in America for a reason, completely flat and no resistance.
    • Sure, with careful driving I can easily use 2/3 the fuel that my wife uses (with a normal never-meant-to-be-special car). And that's without any modifications, just careful driving.

      Surprisingly, you want to accelerate as quickly as possible up to your desired speed, then engage the cruise control. I use the cruise control even for city driving, and only use the brakes the last bit to a stop line, otherwise it's just releasing the throttle. And unless I'm in a real hurry, I usually stick a bit below the spee

  • well.. that xprize went fast! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by plasmacutter ( 901737 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:25AM (#18643673)
    he just won that multimillion dollar xprize [slashdot.org] for 100+ mpg from a practical car!

    damn he's lucky.. if he knows about it and turns it in that is.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Venerable Vegetable ( 1003177 )
      From your own linked article:

      "The guidelines specify that the car must be appealing to buyers and easy to mass produce -- warning that concept cars or "science projects" won't qualify.

      The vehicles will compete in real-world driving tests, in two categories -- mainstream (four or more passengers and four wheels) and alternative (two or more passengers and no requirement on the number of wheels)."

  • I also wonder whether the driving techniques they use are applicable in traffic of any density. It sounds like they speed up and slow down a lot, which may be fine on the open road but not as traffic becomes denser. A minor point is that in most of the United States, at least, it is illegal to drive barefoot.

    • Similarly, if they have to pay close attention to extra gauges, they probably can't drive safely in heavy traffic or bad road conditions. Maybe what they are doing can be automated, but if not, it may not be practical for general driving conditions.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by JanneM ( 7445 )
      A minor point is that in most of the United States, at least, it is illegal to drive barefoot.

      What? Serious?

      So, what counts as "not barefoot"? Does it have to be shoes or is socks sufficient? What material is allowed for the socks - could you just use nylon hose to count as "not barefoot" or does the foot cover have to be opaque? Who defines what counts as "shoes"? or "soles"? How much of the foot does the "shoe" have to cover? If you're driving an automatic, do you still need shoes on both feet? Where do y

      • Re:driving technique (Score:4, Informative)

        by belmolis ( 702863 ) <billposerNO@SPAMalum.mit.edu> on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:48AM (#18643775) Homepage

        This is what I have always been told, but I just googled it to check, and it looks like [tafkac.org] it is an urban myth in terms of black-letter law. The police often consider it dangerous and may ticket you for reckless or negligent driving, which you could then dispute in court. In some states it IS illegal to ride a motorcycle barefoot. Driving barefoot is illegal in some other places, such as Hong Kong.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by anagama ( 611277 )

          In some states it IS illegal to ride a motorcycle barefoot.

          It certainly is retarded -- but then you always see kids riding their crotch-rockets every summer with shorts, flipflops, and a flapping tank top. Go out someday and rub the pavement with your bare hand. Then imagine sliding along at 50 mph with nothing separating limb from road. Dumb as it is however, people should be allowed to foolishly take themselves out of the gene pool.
          • It's the same reason as seatbelt laws: it's not taking yourself out of the gene pool that's the problem, it's you taking someone else out *with* you. Sealtbelt laws arent there as a "nanny-state" precaution as so many of our laws are, they're to stop you from flying through your widshield and causing more damage to everybody else! Remember, driving on public roads is *not* a gaurantted right, you need a license to operate your several ton motorized weapon on public roads. If some idiot wants to ride their

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by dustman ( 34626 )
              Sealtbelt laws arent there as a "nanny-state" precaution as so many of our laws are, they're to stop you from flying through your widshield and causing more damage to everybody else!

              I call bullshit.
              • It's enough to have one person without a seatbelt in a car and a rather minor crash can send that person flying all around the car, hitting others in the head and killing them.
                Also, if you hit someone head-on and they fly into YOUR windshield, they can break it with more force than otherwise, sending glass shards into your face.

            • they're to stop you from flying through your widshield and causing more damage

              I think it is more of a liabilty waiver,
              IE if I lose control of my car and am at fault for a accident that would have involved no injuries, but your face now required 70 hours of surgery because you wouldn't wear your belt. You can now say they are at say 30% fault for not being safe in their car.

              I wish they would do the similar for high dollar cars, IE if you drive a car with a million dollar emerald on your rear bumper I touch

      • In many European countries, the rule is you must have rubber soles, in order to create good grip on the pedals. It makes sense really, you don't want your foot sliding off the instant you need to brake hard; same as not keeping loose items on that part of the floor, as they might slide and lodge underneath the pedals.

        So yes, that technically rules out driving barefooted, along with the fancy leather-soled Italian shoes. Anyway, most car pedals aren't meant to be used without stiff soles, so they're just too

        • In many European countries, the rule is you must have rubber soles, in order to create good grip on the pedals

          I am prepared to bet that my toes have better grip than any pair of rubber soled shoes.

          This is the best laugh I have had since a friend called me to say he had been at my place and knocked on the door but I didn't answer, and by the way, he wanted to call the cops because it is illegal to leave your keys in the ignition when your car is parked in your own drive way.

          He is the kind of person who wo

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by pla ( 258480 )
      It sounds like they speed up and slow down a lot, which may be fine on the open road but not as traffic becomes denser.

      Although not quite the same pattern, in heavy traffic, you have no choice but to speed up and slow down a lot. Thus the term "stop-and-go traffic". ;-)



      A minor point is that in most of the United States, at least, it is illegal to drive barefoot.

      Absolutely false [tafkac.org]. Not a single US state actually has laws against driving barefoot, except Alabama and only for Motorcyclists.

      Another

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Sanat ( 702 )
      it is illegal to drive barefoot.

      Alabama:
      Barefoot Driving: Operation of a motor vehicle by a driver with bare feet is permitted. Exception: motorcycle rider.

      Ohio:
      Barefoot Driving: Operation of a motor vehicle by a driver with bare feet is permitted but not recommended.

      California:
      Barefoot Driving: Operation of a motor vehicle by a driver with bare feet is not prohibited.

      Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware,Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, K

  • Called Hypermiling in America (Score:5, Informative)

    by CliffSpradlin ( 243679 ) <cliff.spradlin@g ... minus physicist> on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:35AM (#18643729) Journal
    We have people who do the same thing here.. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypermiling [wikipedia.org]

  • Why only 55? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Brad1138 ( 590148 ) * <brad1138@yahoo.com> on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:47AM (#18643769)
    It is good to see people getting "real" good mileage. The Prius gets 55 MPG, the Geo metro and Honda civic in the late 80's and early 90 got mid 50's. I heard some GM exec on the radio yesterday talking about the new 50 MPG small cars they were bringing to market, what, "used Honda's"? If a regular engine can get 50+ MPG it shouldn't be hard for a Hybrid to get 70 or 80+, if not 100+.

    • Re:Why only 55? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by janek78 ( 861508 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:58AM (#18643829) Homepage
      Good point, our regular turbodiesel Skoda (a European car) gets 70-80 mpg even if you not trying. It's always fun comparing American and European cars. Other point is - they all have one person in them anyway, so theoretically, they should all do like 200 mpg, right? It seems so wasteful to be dragging around two tons of metal to transport one person.

      • Re:Why only 55? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Mr. Flibble ( 12943 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @02:40AM (#18643987) Homepage

        It seems so wasteful to be dragging around two tons of metal to transport one person.


        I really wish around here in BC they would change the licence/insurance laws. I used to drive a truck (until the head gasket went and leaked all the coolant into the oil pan) and I now drive a tercel. However, I would like to insure both under a single licence. Why? Because there are times when I could use a truck, and I used to use my truck to fill a need about 1 time every week. The rest of the time I could have got by with a much more fuel efficent car. However, licencing 2 vehicles offsets the value in having more than one. If I could have swapped plates from truck to car, I could have driven the truck 1 day a week, and the car the other 6. But this is not legal here. Hell, if I could do that I would rather have a truck and a smart fortwo car. Because on my own the fortwo would work great, and for those times where I need more space, I can drive the truck.

        Changing insurance methods could save gas in situations like these.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by vux984 ( 928602 )
          I agree completely, almost.

          In my case for example I drive a 911, which is neither remotely fuel efficient nor inexpensive to maintain -- but it has a lot of the same disadvantages as a smart car so bear with me. It's lousy for transporting even moderately sized items, you can't haul a boat, or fill it with relatives, or bricks, etc... While I knew I'd love the car I thought I'd *really* miss having a larger vehicle. Turned out its not the big deal I thought it was.

          Sure I *could* own a 2nd vehicle, but it tu
          • in my case for example I drive a 911

            So which wins out, having a 911 babe magnet, or being a babe repelling /.er?

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by wrecked ( 681366 )

          I really wish around here in BC they would change the licence/insurance laws. I used to drive a truck (until the head gasket went and leaked all the coolant into the oil pan) and I now drive a tercel. However, I would like to insure both under a single licence. Why? Because there are times when I could use a truck, and I used to use my truck to fill a need about 1 time every week. The rest of the time I could have got by with a much more fuel efficent car.

          I don't know where you live, but if you are in Vancouver, you might want to try the Co-operative Auto Network [cooperativeauto.net]. It's a co-op where you pay a one-time $500 membership fee, and per hour fees (as low as $2/hr) to sign out various vehicles for short periods of time.

          It's ideal for folks like you where you have a primary vehicle, but occasionally need a secondary. The co-op fleet has trucks and vans. My wife signed up, and it's better than purchasing (and insuring) a second car. Plus, she gets to satisf

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by castlec ( 546341 )
        Part of the reason that there aren't many diesels on the road in the US is a lack of clean diesel in the US that is available in Europe. I don't remember where I originally read that but it remotely makes sense. Overall though, you're right. There is no real reason that the majority of cars available in Europe shouldn't be available in the US. When I move back to the US (I'm an American living in Prague), I may just take a car with me.
        • - Sorry, not sure how it's spelt in the US. I think what you mean is Low Sulphur Diesel (LSD! makes for an interesting till receipt). Back to the OP with the Skoda, I'm using a heavy Ford Mondeo with a 1.8 litre Turbo-Diesel and it can go from Watford to Aberdeen and quarter of the way back on a single tank of fuel - a range of about 800 miles. The article mentions a user aspiring to a range of just over 700....
      • Do you have any links about these cars?

        I did a quick google for skoda turbo diesel and mpg, and didn't see any sites that claimed above ~50mpg.

        just curious.
        • You have to poke around a bit as AFAIK, the European rules mean that they only give the 'combined cycle' in mass literature.

          The Skoda Fabia 1.4tdi, for instance, has a quoted 61.4mpg figure for the combined cycle but if you dig through Skoda's literature, they claim 70mpg in the 'cruise' and a quick google around owners forums turns up some drivers seeing close to 80mpg in the cruise.
          • Interesting, looks nice. Looks rather small (I guess, unsurprising)--wonder if I could even fit in it (I'm about 6'4 / 193cm). I find a lot of smaller sedans uncomfortable, mainly in terms of leg room and my knees hitting the steering wheel etc. I'm not even THAT tall either.. oh well.
            • You might prefer the Fabia vRS

              All the Fabias have plenty of head/leg room (in the front at least).

              The vRS however has the looks and performance. It's still a turbodiesel but can keep up with an Elise 111R from 20-40mph and outrun a BMW 330i from 50-70mph. It also gets the nice sports trimmings, 6 speed gearbox etc.

              The vRS still returns 50mpg. There is a definite trend in the EU to build flagship models around turbodiesel engines now. For example SEAT offers their flagship Leon CUPRA with a turbodiesel optio
      • But isn't diesel a more dense fuel than gasoline? Maybe the burn process is more efficient, too, but just comparing on volume is misleading, isn't it?

        Also aren't Imperial gallons larger than American gallons? Or do they use the same gallon when talking about fuel?

      • Re:Why only 55? (Score:5, Funny)

        by bl8n8r ( 649187 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @09:32AM (#18645667)
        "so wasteful to be dragging around two tons of metal to transport one person."

        You must be new here. Our Hummers weigh in at much more than a measly two tons. Besides, American women with 1 or more children are forbidden to be seen in anything with four doors unless it's an SUV. (It's federal law; kind of like that big cloth bag they have to wear in the mideast). American males with premature balding, premature greying, limpdickosis and/or shortpeckeritis are also required to own at least one SUV and a Harley Davidson. The SUV must have at least 8 cylinders and you get a tax subsidy from Exxon if you upgrade to Hemi-anything. On weekends, most people take their Hummers out and rear-end anything that gets more than 25 mpg.

      • our regular turbodiesel Skoda (a European car) gets 70-80 mpg even if you not trying.

        Diesel fuel isn't remotely comparable to gasoline.

        You might as well say your fission powered car gets 10,000,000 MPG (eg. on Uranium), or your electric car gets infinite MPG.

        It seems so wasteful to be dragging around two tons of metal to transport one person.

        First: smaller cars are around 1 ton (half that).
        Second: Is there some physical law I don't know about, that makes it possible to be safe in an 80MPH collision, without

    • aerodynamics and rolling friction, not engine tech (Score:5, Interesting)

      by SuperBanana ( 662181 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @02:22AM (#18643921)

      If a regular engine can get 50+ MPG it shouldn't be hard for a Hybrid to get 70 or 80+, if not 100+.

      Highway mileage has nothing to do with hybrid vs. non-hybrid. You're still getting energy from the same fuel, in the same way. Even with a hybrid's electric motor helping with acceleration for passing, guess where energy to charge the battery back up again comes from? Ding, the gasoline motor (some regenerative braking, but most of the hybrids don't wait that long before they start charging the pack.)

      Take a look at the Insight. It gets noticeably more mileage than any of its hybrid siblings- I think it's in the high 60's or low 70's. Why? It's super-streamlined, complete with wheel skirts over the rear wheels. Now, notice that the shape is quite reminiscent of the Honda CRX, a car that got 50MPG, in the early 80's?

      If you completely switched off the hybrid system in a Prius or Honda Civic or (snicker) that hybrid Lexus SUV, guess what- highway gas mileage wouldn't change. The overwhelming factors for highway mileage are aerodynamics and rolling friction (tires, bearings, drivetrain components.) Lowering weight helps too; less energy required to accelerate and go up hills- and hybrids have that working against them because the battery packs, extra electronics+wiring, and traction motor all add weight.

      Diesels like the VW TDIs get 45-50MPG on the highway, and they do it with the same aerodynamics as standard VW's AND the extra weight of the heavier diesel engine, because diesels are more efficient. Put a diesel engine in a Insight, and you'd probably get a similar boost in mileage as between an gasoline Jetta and a TDI Jetta. Heck, you might crack 100mpg without breaking a sweat.

      • Reducing weight would help a lot. I seem to recall reading on fueleconomy.gov that if all the current vehicles kept their drivetrain technology but had the same vehicle weight as the average car in the late 1980s, the US fleet fuel economy would go up by about 33%.
        • The problem with reducing weight is that the majority of the increased weight is due to increased safety requirements. While crumple zones don't have to be heavy, there are still mass requirements.

          Oddly enough; I blame CAFE standards for driving people to SUVs. By requiring such high milage requirements, the car companies economized in ways that drove many people away from them. Simple things like sitting too low for somebody with limited mobility* to comfortably enter/exit them. The increase in availab

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by RzUpAnmsCwrds ( 262647 )

        If you completely switched off the hybrid system in a Prius

        Do note that this is entirely impossible. The Prius transmission is the hybrid system. It neither resembles nor behaves like a conventional transmission - it is far more mechanically simple and has far more electronic control.

        Note that the Prius hybrid system also replaces the starter and the alternator as well, and (from the 2004 model onwards) also runs the air conditioning.

        The overwhelming factors for highway mileage are aerodynamics and rolling

      • Diesel (Score:2)

        by k2r ( 255754 )
        > Diesels like the VW TDIs get 45-50MPG on the highway,[...] because diesels are more efficient.

        What many people forget is that Diesel has a higher energy density, so a Diesel per se engine should have a better mileage.

        k2r
    • Then you've missed the point of a hybrid. You could just buy a tiny car with poor acceleration and a low max speed and have great mileage. You won't even pay a lot for it.

      But a lot of people want a heaver car for real or perceived safety reasons, good acceleration, and a price-tag they can brag about. Hybrids deliver on all counts.

      Essentially, they electric part isn't good enough to run the car, but it is good enough to provide a performance boost to an otherwise underpowered engine. In some cases, that
    • Using the official government figures at http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/ [vcacarfueldata.org.uk] , the Prius gets 65.7 mpg.

      Models with traditional engines from Toyota include the Aygo - 68.9 mpg and the Yaris - 62.8 mpg, so other than the fact that some road tolls and parking permit charges are cheaper on the Prius, there isn't really much point in getting it.

      These figures are in British gallons. There's about 1.2 US Gallons in a British Gallon, so the 65.7 mpg is comparable to your 55 mpg.
    • Lots of people talk about their 1985 Honda CRX that got 57 mpg, but what they DONT tell you is that
      1) The car was a total death trap, weighing just over 1800 lbs, it offered VERY little crash protection and poor traction in adverse weather. (even rain)
      2) The way they achieved high mileage was to make it extremely polluting. By running the gas very lean, you don't get complete combustion, and emissions of NO2 and others were dangerously high.

      To call it a practical car, you might not need 2 tons of steel

    • I've driven a Geo Metro, and it's not that surprising at all that my Prius gets roughly the same gas milage. The Geo was a miniscule car with absolutely no power and a crappy ride. My Prius is none of those things. It's not just about efficiency, it's about efficiency within a certain comfort level. Otherwise I'd just be riding a bicycle :)

  • Mileage mania? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by RyanFenton ( 230700 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:51AM (#18643791)
    Mileage mania? What does that make stretch Hummer/fuel injected racecar owners? Sufferers of Mileage Dementia/Depression?

    My favorite motorcar extremists lately are the guys strapping together thousands of dollars worth of batteries to make ultra-high performance vehicles that still get 40 mpg. Sure, they have to go light and limited to 100 miles range per charge, but they end up with a true racecar that makes no sound except the burning of the wheels. That's just damn cool.

    Mileage itself is a bit of a red herring though - there's always going to be a need for vehicles with 'horrid' milage, and 'wasting' that fuel to move earth, or just push a lot of metal - it really isn't an inherent problem to 'waste' fuel on big cars. The only real concern is the effect using that fuel in a fuel cycle. If going through that cycle returns the earth to a carbon-rich atmosphere, that's not a good thing. If the cycle doesn't involve such troublesome consequences though, then as long as the fuel is worth it's other negative effects (like on your wallet), then I don't see how it's a problem.

    We just need better fuels and energy source paths. The market's having a hard time finding a good set of somethings for now - but the dynamics look to be changing, thanks in large part to a lot of nations making some rather interesting long-term investments in fuel research. If you get the right fuel, then I'd much rather have a fuel-inneficient car that theoretically retails for $12,000 after mass manufacture, than a maximized fuel efficient car that retails for $50,000. We need fuels we can waste, so we can consider fuel efficiency completely in terms of direct cost rather than indirect environmental impact as a society.

    I look forward to being able to waste a lot of new kinds of fuel in the future. Here's hoping they come up with one that smells like rich coffee ice cream!

    Ryan Fenton
  • How fast can this Tofu driver make it down the mountain after his morning delivery [wikipedia.org].
  • I'm hearing rumors, that so many folks [in USA, etc.] have converted Priuses to 100% Electric power, that Toyota has plans to release such a variation themselves...

    Anybody know how likely this is to be true? (Is there such a version in any other market?)

    • Re:Speaking of Prius: All-Electric Versions... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Zobeid ( 314469 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @09:46AM (#18645733)
      Some people have converted the Prius to a plug-in hybrid vehicle (PHEV) and there's at least one company doing the conversions commercially. It does not become 100% electric, but it does allow you to plug into a wall socket and charge up the battery, then drive some distance (maybe 40 miles) on the battery power before the gasoline engine ever fires up. If you don't drive more than 40 miles in a day -- which would cover most days for me -- then you don't use gasoline. Yet, if you need to take a long trip, you can do that too.

      Toyota have announced they want to build a PHEV, but they haven't said when or shown any more information about it. General Motors have shown the Chevy Volt "concept car" which is a PHEV, and they want to put it into production by about 2010-2012 depending on how batteries develop.

      The winners in fuel efficiency are always the pure battery-electric vehicles like the Tesla Roadster; it's rated 135 MPG equivalent efficiency on the EPA highway cycle, no funky "hypermiling" techniques required. First deliveries to customers scheduled for late this year. :)
  • These former record holders in the US achieved ~110 mpg in a Prius.
    http://hybridcars.about.com/od/news/a/100mpgrecord .htm [about.com]
    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05220/550484.stm [post-gazette.com]

    One of them achieves 59 (US) mpg in a non-hybrid 2005 Honda Accord by adopting crazy hypermiling techniques. See http://hybridfest.com/MotherJones.htm [hybridfest.com].
  • Help me on this one folks. Old European here. The slashdot intro says that 55 miles per gallon makes the Prius "one of the most fuel efficient cars on the road". But over here in Old Europe, a quick look up suggest that's more like about what you'd expect from your typical little runabout hatchback. Millions of them on the road, it's your typical student/ low budget / cheap and cheerful commute to work - down to the shops - off to the parents in another town at the weekend car. Does 70mph happily on the mot

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by tengwar ( 600847 )
      The US gallon is only 80% of the imperial gallon - it's not clear which units they are using. FWIW, I've got 47mpg (imperial) over 25000 miles in my Jaguar X-Type diesel without doing more than roughly keep to the speed limits, so I'm not overly impressed whichever units are in use.

    • Re:US fuel efficiency figures seem incredibly poor (Score:5, Informative)

      by Charcharodon ( 611187 ) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @07:20AM (#18645049)
      :) With exchange rate it's more like $2.00 a liter. Ouch! I can tell you why it's such a big deal in the US, all those little cars that you all drive here in the UK, well they don't exist in the US. The few little cars that are available are all petrol rather than diesel and are usually tuned for performance rather than fuel efficiency. The reason for that is usually kids are the ones buying them, so rarely do they go for the eco-box models. So pretty much the best thing you are going to find is something in the low 40's until you you make the jump to hybrid. That may be changing here soon once the govenment gets done arguing over the polution standards for diesels. Right now they are only allowed in trucks.

      And yes gasoline is so cheap for the most part that we can and do by bigger cars that do poor mpg. They sell gas at 25-30p a liter and 9p of that is road tax, so we don't have the extra payments like you do. At that price it just doesn't make much of a dent in the pocket book even when you have to commute more than 30 miles each direction everyday. The other thing we have is wide roads, lot's of parking, and big garages (you can actually get a full sized SUV into most and have the people on both sides of the vehicle and be able to get out fairly easy). The newer houses typically have room for 3 vehicles and easily fit 2 SUVs and a car. (Just to give you an idea of what I'm talking about, a Landrover Defender 110 station wagon is what I mean by an SUV.) Those things seems to have a bigger damper on large vehicle sales here in the UK than the price of gas. I cannot get my "tiny", a behemoth by British standards, regular cab Toyota Tacoma (like a hi-lux but bigger) through the door of my garage, and have to park it in the street. Of course as you know most houses in town don't even have garages. People in the states regularly drive pick-up trucks large enough to haul around the typical British car in the back and rarely ever have a problem finding an easy spot to park in.

      Hope that puts things in perspective for you. Of course my dreams of buying a new Tacoma or an FJ cruiser, both larger than I have now, are on the back burner, so I have been eye-balling one of the new Mini's. (The sad thing is it won't fit in my garage either.) It get's a respectable 35-40 mpg better than the 20 I get with the Tacoma. Of course the one I want is the S model rather the eco model. :)

      • cheers! most informative, thanks.

        hehehe Toyota Hi-Lux considered "tiny" ! yup, there's definitely a different culture in the USA from the UK then, grin! As you know most people would laugh at you in the UK if you have one of those and don't have a serious reason to be using one (farmer, builder, park ranger) - though that said there's increasingly an SUV culture here alas. I agree that it's luckily been slowed down by there just not being the parking space/manoeuvring room in most towns for monster vehicles

    • US auto manufacturers have convinced Americans that they need 4,000 pounds of steel wrapped around them to feel "safe" on the roads, and that 25mpg is the price you pay for "safety." What they can't bring themselves to say is that the best safety gear is between your ears, but that's just because most Americans don't seem to have come with that as standard equipment.

      (I'm an American, so I can speak from experience.)

  • In English, taking extraordinary measures toward achieving maximum fuel efficiency in an automobile is known as hypermiling [doubletongued.org] [self-link].

Slashdot Top Deals

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson

Close