MPG Test: BMW M3 vs. Toyota Prius

I was going to call this post "Friday Eye Candy" but unfortunately there's a Prius in the video as well.

In any case... take one beautiful sport sedan, the 'bahn storming BMW M3 with it's 4.0L V8 pumping out 414 glorious horsepower and then pit it against every fuel misers darling, the supposedly economical Toyota Prius in a no-holds-barred Miles Per Gallon shootout!

The results:


Ignore the part in the intro where Clarkson mentions that the construction of the Prius is more enviromentally damaging than that of a Land Rover. While there is a certain amount of truth in what he says, it's not quite that simple. (If you want to know the whole story, you can read all about it HERE at thecarconnection.com.)

I'm sure that the Prius drivers of the UK were already several sentences into their hate-mail before the credits rolled, but the fact remains, as he said at the end, that how you drive can be more important than what you drive.

Save Fuel By Driving Less!

That's the brilliant advice offered by Toyota on their corporate blog. Seriously, they've got some pretty intense, hard-hitting journalism there. I never would have thought that not driving my car uses less fuel.

In all fairness though, they do make one or two valid points... things that not everyone may think of. In that same blog posting they link to an earlier article about "hypermiling", which is the practice of adjusting your driving habits & style to improve fuel economy. It's a good article that is definitely worth taking a few minutes to read. Lately I've been making a concerted effort to apply certain hypermiling strategies as often as I can. It's not always feasible, but the techniques do make a difference.

The two biggest changes I've coerced myself into making is avoiding heavy use of the gas pedal, and eliminating idling as much as I can. Accelerating modestly isn't nearly as fun, but driving like your grandmother is in the passenger seat saves a ton of gas! (I'll admit, this is still the hardest change to adopt... I just love really driving.) As for avoiding idling, I don't turn my car off for every stop-light, but the lights that I know are particularly long... lights I wait at nearly every day of the week... for those I definitely cut the ignition. The traffic light to leave my office can be well over 3 minutes. Drive-thrus are another trap to be avoided like the plague. That is much too much time spent with the engine running while not making any forward progress. Nine times out of ten, when I go inside there's barely any line-up there... yet I can't say the same about the drive-thru window.

The other tips mentioned in the article linked above all help too.

I've personally seen a difference of as much as over 18% between the mileage of a tank of gas driven how I usually drive, and a tank of gas hypermiled as much as possible. Even a "moderate" amount of hypermiling saves me over 12% per tank. Over a year that's nearly 10 tanks of gas for me.

Ten tanks of gas at well over $70 per fill-up (@ $1.499/L - current price) is over $700 that I would much rather see in my pocket than the oil company's.

BMW's Efficient Dynamics

BMW's "Efficient Dynamics" is a collection of technologies developed and/or implemented to improve the efficiency of their vehicles without sacrificing what makes a BMW a "BMW". They recently showcased these technologies in North America when they brought the Efficient Dynamics demo car, a 118d, to New York.

The program uses features such as Auto Start Stop (turning the car off when at a stop in neutral to save fuel and reduce emissions), Brake Energy Regeneration (using the brakes to charge the battery to power accessories instead of allowing it to parasitically feed on the engine, again reducing fuel consumption), and Electric Power Steering (which means the power steering only functions when the wheel is actively being turned, differing from a hydraulic system which feeds off the engine at all times).

Other features of the program include a Gear Shift Indicator, so you can shift at the best time for optimal efficiency, active air vents to reduce aerodynamic drag when the engine doesn't need cooling, and RRR (reduced rolling resistance) tyres.

BMW is even working on a hybrid... and if anyone could change my mind about driving a hybrid, it's BMW. In the mean time, you can read more about their Efficient Dynamics at their international website, HERE, and then wait for them to eventually bring it all to the North American market... one day.

In the mean time, hopefully technologies and ideas like these will be adopted by many other manufacturers in their own line-ups. These are all smart ideas, some very simple even, each of which alone makes a small improvement in fuel efficiency, but together can make a significant difference in mileage and emissions at the end of the day!

All without sacrificing the drive.

Supercar Miles per Gallon

Single digits, anyone?

(Warning: Not to be taken seriously. Please!)

Edmunds.com: Hybrids Aren't the Best Value Over Time

Edmunds.com published THIS article earlier this week, thus confirming what I've been telling people for quite some time... much longer than I've been writing this blog.

Hybrids are over-priced underachievers. There's no two ways about it. They cost far too much and deliver far too little. Or, if we're talking L/100km, then not little enough!

At the current average price across the US, the best value hybrid (Honda Civic) doesn't even make the top 10 is "lowest cost to own". While it's true that hybrids become a better economical choice as gas prices rise, even at a price of $6/gallon the Civic hybrid still doesn't make the top 5. Everybody's darling, the Prius doesn't even make the top 30 at current prices, and only ranks 18th if gas were to cost $6/gallon.

I'm very surprised that all this hasn't been brought up sooner.

Racing Green!

Recently the American Le Mans Series announced it's rule set for their up-coming Green Challenge "series within a series". The aim of the Green Challenge is to promote & reward the use of alternative fuels in motorsports.

The ALMS has long been at the forefront of alternative fuel technology and all the cars in the series run fuels other than regular "gas", including clean (sulfur free) diesel, E10, and cellulosic E85.

The 2009 Green Challenge, which will officially kick off at the 2008 Petit LeMans this fall, will rank cars based on three criteria:

- amount of energy they use

- greenhouse gases (GHG) they emit

- amount of petroleum they displace

Basically, whichever teams goes the furthest, the fastest, and with the least environmental impact wins!

In the words of Scott Atherton, President & CEO of the ALMS:

"We have always claimed to be the most relevant racing series on the planet. Now, we hope to play a role in saving that planet by working with manufacturers on innovative alternative fuel solutions and new technologies. We believe this could be truly paradigm shifting by effectively putting the auto back into auto racing and taking the sport from a form that for some has been primarily entertainment-focused to one that is also relevant and issue-focused. We are working with the car companies on new technology that matters."

You can read the full story on the American Le Mans website.

A Sub 7-Second German Sports Coupé That Gets Over 40mpg...?

Does that even sound reasonable?

It does to Audi, and they can even do it with conventional fuel.

The latest powerplant offered by Audi for their A5 sports coupé is the all-new 2.0L TFSI. The turbocharged engine puts out a respectable 208hp (@ 4300 - 6000 rpm) while producing 258 lb-ft of torque (@ 1500 - 4200 rpm). Those numbers are enough to propel the A5 from 0-60mph in just 6.9 seconds, while the TFSI technology allows the coupé to get a combined cycle fuel mileage of 42.8 miles per Imperial gallon (6.6L/100km - 35.66 miles per US gallon).

And it does all that while looking drop dead gorgeous!

Unfortunately, there's no word on when it will be available in North America. In the mean time we'll only be able to get the 2.0L TFSI in the A4 sedan later this year.

For more information on what TFSI is and how it works you can look here, on the Audi UK website.

Car Buyers More Interested in Gadgets Than Fuel Efficiency

According to the results of a J.D. Power & Associates study released yesterday, hybrid technology vehicles rank pretty high among consumers interest. In fact, 72% of people asked said they were "definitely/probably" interested in hybrid technology. However, once they were told that this technology would add about $5000 to the price of their vehicle, the number if still interested buyers dropped to 58%.

What ranked higher than the fuel efficiency of a hybrid though? Blind-spot detection technology at 76%, and back-up assist at 74%.

Oh great, that's just what the world needs... technology to help incompetent drivers pay even less attention to what they're doing behind the wheel.

Here's what I think of that:


Unless they're installing KITT in my dash, I don't not want my car thinking for me.

But I digress.

I have to wonder where they got the $5000 "average" from though. When I first read the report it seemed awfully cheap compared to the hybrid premiums I've seen, but I figured those were the price differences in American dollars for the American sold cars. So, I did a quick check across a few of the cheaper hybrids in Canadian dollars and came up with the following:

-Honda Civic Sedan:
Conventional: $19,490.00 (w/AC+automatic)
Hybrid: $26,350.00
Difference: $6860.00

-Toyota Camry:
Conventional: $23,400.00 (w/AC+automatic)
Hybrid: $30,660.00
Difference: $7260.00

-Toyota Prius vs Toyota Corolla: (since the Prius doesn't have a conventionally propelled equivalent I'm comparing it against the Corolla, which is Toyota's closest offering)
Corolla LE: $19,900.00 (w/AC+automatic)
Prius: $29,500.00
Difference: $9600.00

Toyota Highlander:
Conventional: $36,900.00
Hybrid: $41,075.00
Difference: $4175.00

Chevrolet Malibu:
Conventional: $22,995.00
Hybrid: $26,995.00
Difference: $4000.00

Chevrolet Tahoe LT:
Conventional: $47,155.00
Hybrid: $66,125.00
Difference: $18,970.00

That's an average premium of nearly $8500.00. While the MSRP for cars in Canada is always higher than in the US, their estimated $5000.00 for the added cost of a hybrid still seems a little low.

One interesting detail I noted while compiling those numbers was that while a Civic Hybrid costs nearly $7000 more than a similarly equipped conventional Civic, the fuel savings are in the range of 30%. If a Civic owner drives 25000 kms per year (~15000 miles) that's nearly $1000 in savings each year at current fuel prices. The Chevy Malibu, on the other hand, only costs $4000 more for the hybrid, but the fuel efficiency is less than 8% better. That's only about $250 per year saved. Honda's hybrid premium pays for itself in 7 years, while Chevrolet's takes about 16 years. (I really hope those buyers are choosing a hybrid to "make a statement", and not to save money...)

Sadly, of all the different features and options mentioned in the survey, clean diesel ranked last. Why? I'm not sure. I mean, who wouldn't want 50+mpg from a conventional (read: simple & uncomplicated) drivetrain?

As Mike Marshall, J.D. Power & Associates director of automotive emerging technologies, said:

One explanation for this may derive from a lack of education with the technology. Many consumers cannot differentiate between clean diesel and traditional diesel fuel—which in the past had a negative connotation with unpleasant vehicle emissions. As consumers become more educated in the benefits of clean diesel through increased product offers launching later this year, interest in the technology may increase.

I suppose the European companies that are starting to make this technology available in North America have along road of re-education ahead of them. The masses are still stuck on the old stereotype of diesels being noisy, smelly, and generally a nuisance. It's a stigma that may take a while to be rid of.

You can read the full report HERE.

Why is it called a 'smart' car?

Size & Weight Matter

It sometimes surprises me how rarely people realize this, but fuel economy isn't only about the size of the engine or the number of cylinders.

Big, huge SUVs are heavy. Small, sub-compact cars are light. The bigger and heavier an object is, the more energy (read: fuel) is needed to move it around. Cars and trucks have steadily gotten bigger and heavier over the last 20+ years, and subsequently the engines have become more and more powerful to deal with this. In spite of the fact that technology has advanced, the simple fact is that a more powerful engine needs more fuel to produce that power.

Yet, the North American obsession with SIZE has blinded so many people to this fact until very recently. The trends of the past decade have dug the deep hole we're all in now, and it took $4/gallon gas to smack Americans upside the head before they finally saw the problem. Everyone wanted to buy the biggest SUV they could afford, and now suddenly they're paying the consequences.

And this was all about "want"... nothing more.

Need... what's that?

The idea of responsible car buying was so utterly far from most consumer's minds for years, and now our roads are cluttered with 6000 pounds behemoths greedily gobbling up gas at a rate of 10-15 miles per gallon.

And then the bottom fell out!

The Big 3 can't give their trucks away and it seems like every week another truck plant belonging GM or Ford is shut down and shortly thereafter plans are announced to convert said plant to producing a particular small car platform.

Excessive fuel consumption is just the plight of the large SUV either.

The "crossover" SUV is smaller and lighter than a conventional SUV. Which in itself, is a good thing. However, these crossovers are really nothing more than a conventional car chassis jacked up for a few extra inches of ground-clearance and perhaps an optional all-wheel-drive system to give them a pretense of off-road capability. In short, they are nothing more than extra heavy cars.

Take, for example, the Mitsubishi Outlander crossover SUV. It's powered by a 2.4L 4-cylinder. The same 2.4L engine that also powered the Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback a few years ago. At that time my mother was in the market for a new vehicle and insisted on getting a SUV. Her reasoning was "I can see better higher up. I feel safer in a truck. I need space for the dog." She finally decided to buy an Outlander 2WD.

Why an Outlander instead of a Lancer Sportback? I wondered that myself. For all intents and purposes, they are nearly the same vehicle with naught more than a few inches of ground clearance difference between them. Her Outlander is nothing more than a glorified 4-door hatchback.

As for her reasoning:

"I can see better higher up" - Granted the Outlander is higher. What exactly are you trying to see from that vantage point though? Sails on the horizon? She's driven standard height cars all her life prior to the Outlander and she saw fine up until that point.

"I feel safer in a truck" - the IIHS rates the Outlander "Good" (their highest rating) in frontal impact testing, yet "Poor" (their lowest rating) in side impacts. Owning a "truck" is not making her any safer in this case since the Lancer has the exact same ratings. Underneath the sheetmetal they're quite likely nearly the same vehicle.

"I need space for the dog" - the Lancer Sportback has 24.9 cubic feet of cargo capacity with the seats folded up and 61 cu.ft. with them folded down. The Outlander, the truck she felt she needed so as to get all that extra space, has 24.4 cu.ft. (seats up) or 60 cu.ft. (seats down).

So basically, like too many others, it came down to "wants" and not needs. The simple fact is that she wanted a truck and there would be no convincing her otherwise. She has no extra cargo space, and she's no more safer than if she'd have purchased the equivalent car.

In the final tally, what did her truck provide? Well, yes... a higher vantage point.

And some utterly atrocious handling to go with that higher vantage point.

By the numbers, one last thing... about 10% worse fuel economy. The same engine provides motivation to both the Lancer Sportback and the Outlander... yet the added height, weight, and aerodynamic drag of the larger crossover costs nearly 10% more at the pump.