There will be a lot more HyperMilers now with these new standards..

Unfortunately - I won't be one of them...

 

What does "breaking in" entail? I recall reading something about the onboard computer learning the driver's behavior and adjusting for it - is that what you mean? And how long did it take?

I live in Winnipeg, Manitoba - cold as hell, but also completely flat. I've only had the car for just over 48 hours now, but I have been surprised at some of the long stretches of flat road I've driven along with the gas engine kicking in for seemingly no reason - like I'll go for 60-90 seconds on battery, and then without the road angling upwards at all and no braking or accelerating, the gas will kick in, albeit at very low consumption. My graph still hovers around 9, though, which is just unacceptable.

Anyways, looking forward to summer, and hopefully taking a couple of road trips - while the ideal is to drive less overall, this is the biggest and cushiest car I've ever owned, comparable to my grandpa's old luxury cars but without the gas gluttony, and I absolutely LOVE driving it.

I'm also trying very hard to keep my mouth shut around my friends about how happy I am to be driving a Hybrid from an enviro perspective. Better still would be to relocate myself somewhere that I could ride a bike year round, but in the meantime, with my responsiblities, I have to drive nearly every day, and I get warm and fuzzy every time I get in the beast. Hopefully, in ten or fifteen years, I can sell this one and get an electric or hydrogen car. Or get a Mr. Fusion installed. :>

 

Amen to that!

Sorry folks, but I'm amazed at the new MPG ratings they came up with... Yes, we all agree that Hwy should've been rated higher than City (read: 40/38 was bogus), but 33/34 as stated in this gov link? http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calcu...Camry%20Hybrid

A new "combined" avg of 34mpg? Come on! Knocking 4mpg off of Hwy was way off base. My "vent" is that:

• GreenHybrid reports 37.0 mpg average so far (although it's likely a bit off since it doesn't account for any of our winter tanks -- but that's a diff't thread).
• The few (statistically insignificant) folks who've reported on the actual gov't site got a combined 36.3 mpg. Not a scientific poll to say the least, but a far cry from to the new "33/34 mpg" mandated by the DoE.

I'm surprised so many of you are "quietly" accepting the new ratings and/or haven't chimed in to put in your $.02 cents as yet...

 

I think the new lower numbers are a good thing. A whole lot of complaining has been done by people who (for whatever reason) could not get their cars to hit the old EPA numbers.

 

Now I understand why we get an "Excellent" on the speedometer when we average 35mpg or more. Toyota knew all the time!

 

I don't know about you but it didn't change my milage in the least ROTFFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!

 

This is great news; my mileage is actually on par with the EPA estimate now. Weird! Actually I get 35-37 mpg at 80 mph from extended highway driving, but I've never driven it in very cold weather and it lowers if there's traffic on the highway.

These realistic EPA estimates will greatly enhance people's ability to buy hybrids and other fuel-efficient cars. Of course the hybrid-haters will scoff at 34 mpg for a hybrid but that should die down when they realize it's still 10 mpg better than the equivalent non-hybrid (regular Camry is 24 mpg now, down from 27, per the article).

40/45 for the Civic Hybrid (correct?) is higher than what I got, and I actually drove that car more gently/efficiently than the Camry Hybrid, but it's not too far off.

EDIT: By the way, the new testing takes into account passing, hills, etc., which the Camry Hybrid does suffer from due to its weight. To get 37 mpg at 80 mph, or 34 mpg at 90 mph, I need to maintain speed and stay light on the throttle. Oh, that reminds me -- cruise control isn't used for these new tests. Of course enabling CC will result in higher mileage.

 

Maybe on the flats - in the hills cruise controll will hurt you as it tries to maintain speed. Far more efficient to taper off slightly on uphills and make it up on the downhill side - truckers have done that for years.

 

Given the same terrain, higher elevation increases fuel economy as your engine is effectively smaller (15% smaller in Denver). Most people don't realize it, but after living there for 10 years and noticing all my cars got better mileage at altitude I finally figured it out. This was not always the case in the days of carburetors, as they didn't always compensate well for the altitude.

Yes, your other winter factors are all a negative, though.

 

Thanks John312 for the great link. I've been driving like a catatonic undertaker to achieve the original sticker mileage.