Kia Niro Forum banner

21 - 38 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
Engine usage can vary a lot by PHEV drivers. I think I'm on the higher end of PHEV ICE usage at 33% of my mileage (estimate based on my average fuel economy).

While I live in a colder climate, I still expect my ICE usage to go down for winter due to my driving usage changes over the winter months. November has been usually cold here with most days well below freezing and so far my ICE usage is pretty low as I'm doing mostly shorter trips now within battery range.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
555 Posts
Hope that on the next generation of the Kia Niro, (MY20), there will be more information displayed for these kind of stats (ICE time running vs EV)...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Hope that on the next generation of the Kia Niro, (MY20), there will be more information displayed for these kind of stats (ICE time running vs EV)...
On my 2017 HEV I have installed a cheap engine hour counter (~$12 on Amazon) and for the last tank of 9.254 gallons travelled 473 miles, that equals to 51.1 MPG (the vehicle displayed 53 MPG) at average speed of 32 MPH, the ICE was running for 47% of the travel time and on electricity alone for 53%. Mainly short trips (around 15 miles) on county road with speed limit 40-50 MPH and the rest in city driving 25-35 MPH, in the temperature range 30-50F and the window defrost/defog approx. 30% of the time and for the rest "auto" set to 72F.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
423 Posts
Discussion Starter #26
Just hit one year with the hour meter. 18844 miles, 292.6 hours. Using the same numbers as I always had, that gives:

12874.4 miles on the gasoline engine and hybrid mode.
5969.6 miles on battery only.

68.3% and 31.7% over a year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Just hit one year with the hour meter. 18844 miles, 292.6 hours. Using the same numbers as I always had, that gives:

12874.4 miles on the gasoline engine and hybrid mode.
5969.6 miles on battery only.

68.3% and 31.7% over a year.
3793 mile trip (6103 km) almost all on freeways at high speed, average 59 MPH (95 km/h) in 62:37 hrs. and ICE running for 47 hrs. that equals 75% of the travel time, used 82.107 Gal (US) of fuel 46.2 MPG (5.1 l/100km). Winter driving conditions, most of the time below freezing, lowest temp. 9F and highest 50F with strong winds, snow, sleet and some rain. Tires inflated to 36PSI, temperature set to 73F in auto mode, which kept the windshield fog free most of the time.

BEWARE OF THE SCC! I have used the cruise control set to 70 MPH whenever it was possible, and made the mistake to use the "smart cruise control" just because it is a default setting and requires only one push of a button. In SCC mode the vehicle is prone to sudden deceleration in places you do not expect it and could not identify why the vehicle slowed down. I was very lucky and escaped rear end collision at 70 MPH when the vehicle suddenly decided to slow down on open road with only one car behind. My car is 2017 model and I hope that newer models are more refined. I WILL NEVER USE THE SCC AGAIN, it is simply too dangerous to use.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
887 Posts
I've never encountered such issues with the cruise control. I've never seen sudden deceleration on the freeway at all. In fact, I feel it's much better than my previous Outback with Eyesight. Speed up and slow down is pretty gradual at speed. The only place I've seen more aggressive braking is on city streets with curved roadways or cars slowing to turn ahead of me. Those aren't ideal places to use adaptive cruise anyway, and if cruise control is desired in those locations then disable the smart function and use it as a standard cruise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,572 Posts
There is zero doubt in my mind that SCC is considerably more prone to unexpected and unneeded braking events than either manual control or under standard cruise control. Normally, the first thing I do after turning the car on is to go through the couple steps required to change the SCC default to standard. But once in a while, recognizing I'm only going a mile or so in the city, I use SCC and every single time, the car does an unexpected braking event that reinforces I should never use it.

On top of that, standard cruise control will always be more efficient - unless there is zero traffic and then SCC is not needed anyway. Yes, it does take more attention just letting the idiot ahead control your speed so not for everyone. But to me the point of buying a hybrid is to maximize efficiency so using a feature that lowers your mpg just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
653 Posts
I'm with @atc98092, I like the SCC. I've only had it decelerate unnecessarily once or twice when the car in front moved right to exit and slowed. Each time it recovered quickly.

I'm not sure I agree that standard cruise is always more efficient. If I do my part and monitor the traffic I can easily change lanes to pass slower traffic without SCC slowing the car. On the other hand, if I just want to flow with traffic I can let the car handle it. Best of both worlds. YMMV as always,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,572 Posts
Unless the car ahead is driving at a fixed speed (most likely with standard cruise control) you will be varying your speed with his. Great if you can switch lanes to avoid rapid slowdown (just as easy in standard), but if he is just varying his speed a couple miles an hour up and down, you will follow and your mpg will not be as good. Paying attention to traffic conditions ahead allow you modify your set speed so you don't ever (as much) have forced slowdowns and speedups - instead you set your speed to the average speed, not up and down slinky effect of SCC.

So describe for me any situations where your mpg will be better with SCC versus standard please, not just ways you have to minimize the impacts. SCC is a luxury that you pay for with reduced economy.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
887 Posts
I also believe the Adaptive Cruise works quite well on the freeway. The Kia maintains speed far more smoothly than my former Outback, has very little variance (doesn't speed up downhill or slow down up hill). Could the standard system be slightly more efficient? Possible, but requires far more effort on my part to monitor the exact spacing behind the leading car. I'd rather let the car maintain my distance so I can be more aware of what's happening all around me. There's so many fools out there... ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,572 Posts
You know, there really isn't a good technical reason why SCC has more braking events than standard CC or manual control. I can only assume that Hyundai/Kia believes (probably correctly) that drivers using it are less attentive and therefore earlier intervention is thus helping to counteract the loss of safety SCC actually causes. The reason everyone like SCC is it reduces attention needed, and thus allows you to arrive less tired at your destination. Absolutely true.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,572 Posts
By the way, one could make the same statement about Tesla's autopilot: you have more time to be aware of what is happening around you. Not a great argument for added "safety" features in my opinion.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
887 Posts
By the way, one could make the same statement about Tesla's autopilot: you have more time to be aware of what is happening around you. Not a great argument for added "safety" features in my opinion.
True, but a pretty bad comparison. For whatever reason, far too many Tesla drivers seem to think that something named "autopilot" means they no longer need to pay attention. They can't be bothered by actually remaining alert. Another example of technology that could offer great benefits, but people won't use them as designed.

And you're right, while I pay attention to my surroundings while the car handles speed and spacing, far too many do not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
653 Posts
Unless the car ahead is driving at a fixed speed (most likely with standard cruise control) you will be varying your speed with his. Great if you can switch lanes to avoid rapid slowdown (just as easy in standard), but if he is just varying his speed a couple miles an hour up and down, you will follow and your mpg will not be as good. Paying attention to traffic conditions ahead allow you modify your set speed so you don't ever (as much) have forced slowdowns and speedups - instead you set your speed to the average speed, not up and down slinky effect of SCC.

So describe for me any situations where your mpg will be better with SCC versus standard please, not just ways you have to minimize the impacts. SCC is a luxury that you pay for with reduced economy.
I'm mystified as to why you think manually adjusting the CC set point is more efficient than letting the car do it for you. In both cases you are speeding up and slowing down. If the car in front of you is constantly varying speed you either have to match it, pass him or set your speed slow enough to not close on him. I don't see why doing that yourself would be more efficient that letting SCC handle it. What am I missing here?

This is the part of your statement that is particularly confusing to me:
instead you set your speed to the average speed, not up and down slinky effect of SCC.
Why can't I do exactly the same thing with SCC?

Also, if you set the regular CC to the average you are still going to have to slow down when the traffic slows below the mean, just like SCC does automagically. Then you'll have to speed back up to the average value again, just like SCC does automagically.

Like I said, I'm puzzled by your description of how you use the regular CC and how you think it's more efficient than using SCC intelligently. Sure if I use SCC blindly and without regard to the traffic conditions your way will be more efficient. However, if I use SCC in exactly the same manner as you describe I don't see the difference. Other than I don't have to keep adjusting the CC set point in small increments to handle normal minor variations in traffic speed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,572 Posts
When you look ahead of the car just in front, you can see the normal slinky effect of traffic speeding up and slowing down. That could be 10 mph swings or so at the peak moments. SCC will just mimic that so your peak and low speeds are just the same. An intelligent and aware driver can average those swings by keeping a long trailing distance and averaging those speeds. This results in a near constant speed and even adjustments are far less than that the peaks and troughs of medium to heavy traffic.

Yes, you could do that in SCC, but no one does and by your own account, you don't either. Hypermiling requires active management and most people are just not engaged in active driving nor do they want to be. Not saying anyone has to do what I do, just pointing out the SCC can never be as efficient as standard CC, especially when following a car exhibiting even middle of the road driving practices, i.e., non active driving. Heck, just the obvious extra slowdowns by the Niro's extra sensitive auto braking behavior while in SCC is anti-efficiency by itself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
I have SCC in both my 2015 Outback and 2019 Niro. I think both are reasonably good safety nannies and am thankful to have them. Interestingly, unlike act, it seems like my Outback does a better job in SCC than my Niro. The Niro brakes & accelerates more aggressively than OB. I'm more comfortable using SCC in OB. That said, both systems tend to be more reactive than I am. I can perceive the need to take my foot off the gas sooner and coast. Also, I accelerate up to previous speed more gradually.
 
21 - 38 of 38 Posts
Top