Posted on 09/22/2005 4:57:12 AM PDT by grundle
http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/daybreak/consumernews/stories/wfaa050920_wz_crmpg.769b7aa2.html
Consumer Reports: Overstating gas mileage
07:22 AM CDT on Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Consumer Reports
When shopping for a new car, the gas mileage is a top priority these days. Automakers' mileage predictions are based on lab tests like the ones conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Cars are strapped onto a machine called a dynamometer. It turns the front wheels while a computer directs the driver to speed up and slow down.
Consumer Reports just analyzed the fuel economy data of every vehicle it has tested in the last five years. CR's Kim Kleman says this analysis reveals the mileage for 90 percent of the vehicles is overstated.
"The EPA tests don't correspond to the way most of us drive," Kleman said. "Their tests represent driving on a 75-degree day on a road with no curves or no hills, which is ideal for maximizing fuel economy."
The EPA tests haven't changed in 30 years, so they don't take into account today's driving conditions. There's a lot more congestion, idling in traffic, and widespread use of air conditioning.
Consumer Reports runs its own fuel economy tests. The engineers say these tests—done outdoors—give a much more accurate assessment of the actual mileage you'll get from a car.
Consumer Reports' tests often turn up results that are substantially different from the EPA's—especially for stop-and-go city driving.
For instance the EPA says you'll get 22 miles per gallon with a Jeep Liberty diesel, but Consumer Reports found you'll get just half that—11 miles per gallon.
With a Chrysler 300 C, the EPA says you'll get 17 miles per gallon, but Consumer Reports' tests get only 10.
As for a Honda Odyssey minivan, the EPA gets 20 miles per gallon; Consumer Reports gets just 12.
The differences Consumer Reports turned up with hybrids in city driving are even greater. The EPA says the Honda Civic hybrid gets 48 miles per gallon; Consumer Reports measured just 26.
"Newer cars tend to overstate the mileage more than older ones," Kleman said, "so the discrepancy between what you're promised and what you're getting seems to be growing."
Consumer Reports says with skyrocketing gas prices, that's a trend that's more troubling than ever.
For comparison purposes only.
The fact that Consumers Report went to the effort and expended all that time and energy to write this article simply proves that even apparently intelligent and competent people can fail utterly to be able to grasp a simple concept.
I would like to see what the differences are for different brands and models.
I have bought only Toyotas for over twenty years and they have always done as well as the EPA-rated mileage per gallon.
To get better mileage, I only drive downhill wherever I go.
Driving a relatively conventional competitor to the 'hyprids', I watch these numbers - EPA v. owners report - fairly closely. I find the hyprids typically overstated.
I damn the EPA and the market for not recognizing the VW TDIs potential. I see 45 mpg to 55 mpg (extremes), typically 48 mpg in town and at 80 mph, 52 mpg over long distances.
This is whast happens when you put the inept and incompetent government in charge of the simplest tasks. They screw it up and everyone suffers for it.
That's already been proven. There is a very interesting professor that number crunches all forms of energy based on reality, not EPA pseudo-science and he has proven that there (at this time) no panacea in hybrids, hydrogen or any other fuel source--other than boosting our own production. Recycling/disposal of battery systems in hybrids is a huge expense, offsetting any savings you might have realized and that's just one hurdle.
Besides, liberal drivers of hybrids and similar vehicles still drive in the passing lane at 45 mph, increasing the road rage rate in the U.S., causing higher court costs and repair bills on their mini-hybrids.
Yeah we have a Civic and it get's like 35mpg, I don't think it's 17.5 per gal. There's no way. I could see it being off by 5 from time to time.
The horror of THE BATTERY is another red herring; A hundred and a half or so sealed "D" cells can hardly be placed in the same category as a tanker truck hauling nitro.
Yes, that is possible. In the industry where I work, our products, and our competitors, measure durability through standardized tests. It is possible, and some of our competitors have doen this, to engineer a product to perform fantastically on these tests. However, those tests have nothing to do with real world performance. Marketing likes them because it's easy to say a product scores a point or two better than the competiution, but it has nothing to do with the real world. And I've seen the opposite where products that do great on standardized tests perform very poorly in the real world.
Have you checked the online forums? I've seen things about using 10-W-30 instead of 5-W-20(?) being a problem and some other possibilities.
Yeah, I got that issue too. I don't 'buy' their claims -- I have an Ody (Odyssey) and they got far lower than I could ever get. And I had it in San Diego for a while, worst I would get is ~15mpg. Heck, I got 25mpg (and change) driving cross country -- loaded down and with the hammer down ;)
Yup. Mine are always on target.
'03 Infiniti QX4: 12 mpg. Have had three of 'em, the all got 12. Suppled to get 17/22 with a V-6.
The 1972 Ford Maverick was a terrible vehicle, but it was better in every respect than a 1949 Ford Sedan. Vehicle technology improves with every generation. Because a 2005 Ford Escape is superior to a 1972 Ford Maverick does not mean a much better car would not be available in a deregulated environment.
The problem with CAFE is it exempted light trucks from the standard. The definition of a light truck mandated that the load floor for the SUV class must be flat from the tailgate to the back of the driver's seat. This requires the load floor to be placed entirely above the rear axle.
Normally, the decision on where to place this floor would be made by the designer, and would be lowered as much as possible to lower center of gravity and improve stability and aerodynamics. But this design decision has been removed from the designer, and been mandated by legislation.
The resulting vehicle is taller and more unstable that it otherwise would need to be. This makes them more inefficient that they would otherwise need to be.
Hey, if you need to go off road or carry 4x8s around, a large SUV might be the very thing. Some were sold even before the CAFE dodge came along, and some would be sold today. But most people who buy SUVs only do so because conventional vehicles with comparable power and room are no longer available, because they are not exempt and have been all but made illegal under CAFE.
If CAFE were eliminated, and the decisions were placed back into the hands of the designers, they would come up with a better solution to this problem.
The problem with CAFE is that it exists.
Much because it became the thing to sit higher than other drivers. The Expedition driver sat higher than the Suburban driver so the Suburban had to be raised in height.
Same here. I bought a 2005 Buick LeSabre last year and so far the combined city and highway mileage is 24.2 mpg. EPA says 23. Sounds like Consumer Reports needs to check the plugs and change the fuel filter on their calculator.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.