3rd gen Prius aeromod thread

[Vman455]

So, the EPA has updated their testing methodology and lowered their rating on 2010-2016 vehicles, including the Prius. Looks like the official numbers for 2013 are now 49 highway/46 city/48 combined.

[sdtundra]

Originally Posted by Vman455

So, the EPA has updated their testing methodology and lowered their rating on 2010-2016 vehicles, including the Prius. Looks like the official numbers for 2013 are now 49 highway/46 city/48 combined.

Awesome, makes it look like we're doing even better. Last tank was 53 mpg including rain and wind at highway speeds

[MetroMPG]

I didn't realize they were retroactively applying the changes to previous years.

Referring to this?

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ing-33956.html

[Vman455]

Yep, exactly that. Someone posted a link to the EPA letter to OEMs; apparently manufacturers had the choice to apply the new coefficient factors to 2016 model year vehicles and not wait until 2017. It appears Toyota chose to do this with the new Prius, but older Prius models have been revised downward, and some lower-mileage vehicles actually saw a bump in EPA rating (like the Tundra, which went from 14mpg combined to 15mpg).

Oh, well--my "% above EPA" just jumped!

[AntiochOG]

Originally Posted by Vman455

Update:

I also replaced the LED turn signals, which were cheapy Superbright SMD towers that washed out in direct sunlight, with VLEDs Tritons:

I just looked up those Triton LEDs. They look very impressive, and expensive. What do you think of them?

[Vman455]

They're fantastic; the SMD towers I had in before were washing out in full sun, and I worried about visibility of the turn signals especially on the front, where the turn and (fairly bright) DRL are in the same housing (and unlike Chryslers and Audis, the DRL doesn't turn off when the turn signal is activated). These are now bright enough that I can see the light they cast from the driver's seat if there's a car in front of me, even at midday, and the reverse lights, which were basically nonexistent before, are like floodlights now. The price is steep, but I figure I'll never have to replace these. They consume more power than the SMD towers, 7 watts each, but that's still a 2/3 reduction from the stock 20W incandescents they replaced.

[RoadCyclist]

How significant in the grand scheme of efficiency is the wattage saved? Forvive my ignorance; I am still new to this.

[oldtamiyaphile]

Originally Posted by RoadCyclist

How significant in the grand scheme of efficiency is the wattage saved? Forvive my ignorance; I am still new to this.

I've switched to LED stop lights in the name of safety. In terms of fuel consumption it's going to be virtually zero, especially since us hypermilers don't brake much and I tend to sit at traffic lights with the engine off, the car in first and my foot off the brake.

Turn signals are a similar story, they're only on for a tiny portion of the time you drive.

The only lights you might see a payback on is lights that are on with the head lights (markers, tails, license plate etc), but even then only if you drive a lot at night/ bad weather. These ones are also the cheapest/ easiest to replace.

[Vman455]

As oldtamiyphile says, probably not much--not measurable at the pump, at least. The turn signals are hardly ever on, of course; same for reverse lights. There are two 5W bulbs in each headlight housing for the parking lights, now replaced with Philips LED bulbs drawing slightly less than 1W each, so ~16W reduction; two license plate bulbs the same, 5W down to 1W, for 24W total saved; two headlights, stock 55W each, now 11W, saving 88W. So, 112W total savings driving at night (the tails/brakes and DRLs are already LED).

All the interior lights are Philips LED now as well, so when I'm car camping I don't have to worry about running the little 12V battery down.

[william1]

Hello from 2 hours south!
Keep up the good work your car looks awesome with the areo.