Russell McMahon wrote: >> Also to the equation you should probably add things like cargo room, >> passenger capacity, etc. >> > > I'm in agreement with the principle - but note that you need several > 'real world' comparison standards to suit differing requirements > At least one such should siply be "per mile driven" to cover the > single passenger to and from work usage which is all too prevalent > worldwide. > It doesn't matter how many passengers you COULD carry if you carry > none. And cargo room is irrelecvant if not used. > Heh, sure, until it's time to take your family on vacation. ;') > >> The Prius' real world HWY MPG is within a few MPG of the E320CDI, >> but at >> greatly reduced cargo/passenger room. >> > > Somewhere I read a real world account by a Prius owner of achieved > mpgs and the conditions under which they were achieved and I was very > impressed. No doubt, therefore, I'd also be impressed with the > E320CDI. > > The misrepresentation of the real world economy of the Prius is nearly legendary. In fact the only thing that saved them from a class action law suit was that they quoted the EPA fuel economy ratings. The problem was so bad that the EPA has now revised those tests. The Prius is rated at 60/51 mpg, but to quote http://www.automotive.com/2005/43/toyota/prius/reviews/driving-impressions/index.html "...Most Prius owners report much lower fuel economy, while others argue this point. Published reports have pegged actual fuel economy at 44 to 48 mpg or 20-percent less than the government's EPA rating." On the other hand, most owners report higher real world MPG for their diesels than the EPA numbers. As for the E320 CDI, I really encourage you to test drive one. Even if you'll never even consider buying one, it's an interesting experience to see where diesel has come since the 300D days. I think everyone should test drive one. > Russell. > > > > > -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist