EPA and MPG

formatting link

The EPA and MPG: The Wrong Debate

Changes to fuel-economy calculations will likely further incite hybrid critics, yet the real issue is Americans' unrelenting thirst for gasoline

On Jan. 12, the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it plans to change how it calculates fuel economy for new cars and trucks to more accurately reflect the real-world mileage experience of American drivers. The EPA increasingly has come under criticism for outdated procedures that overestimate mileage by as much as 50% in some cases. Consumers are likely to see lower, more accurate numbers on window stickers of 2008 models arriving in dealer showrooms in the fall of

2007.

At the center of the controversy are the EPA ratings for the most fuel-efficient vehicles on the road: hybrid gas-electric vehicles. As gas prices soared to dizzying heights in 2005, consumers abandoned full-size sports utility vehicles and opted for smaller, more efficient vehicles, such as hybrids. The Honda (HMC ) Insight, Toyota (TM ) Prius, and Honda Civic Hybrid -- all hybrids -- are listed as the three most fuel-efficient cars based on EPA ratings.

But these top rankings have made hybrid cars a target of critics, who claim the EPA's ratings are inflated for these vehicles. However, hybrid owners, despite some complaints about lower-than-expected mileage, are among the most satisfied drivers on American roads.

RATINGS DOWNSHIFT. The EPA's new changes will likely provide more ammunition for critics to rehash the arguments over real and perceived shortcomings in hybrid fuel economy. But that's the wrong debate. The real issue in need of a public airing is the federal government's inability to curb the nation's voracious thirst for gasoline, either by enforcing established fuel-efficiency standards or by encouraging the auto industry to adopt effective new technologies.

The EPA's proposed ratings downshift does nothing to require that auto makers increase the fuel efficiency of their cars and trucks. The EPA conducts extensive evaluations to produce fuel-economy and emissions ratings, but the agency merely spot-checks the testing and calculation conducted by auto makers to determine compliance with mandated fuel-economy levels under Corporate Average Fuel Economy rules. Under CAFE rules, the required average fuel economy is 27.5 miles per gallon for passenger cars and 21.6 mpg for light-duty trucks and SUVs under

8,500 pounds.

The average fuel economy for today's new cars and trucks is lower than it was 20 years ago. Despite the rapid growth of hybrid sales, they accounted for only 1.2 % of new cars bought in 2005.

"AN ABSURD SITUATION." The EPA made changes to fuel-economy numbers in

1985, when it reduced the miles-per-gallon test numbers by 10% and 22% for city and highway mileage, respectively. The lower numbers have been used since that time, but auto makers won a lawsuit to prevent the EPA from changing the numbers for the purposes of CAFE. "It's an absurd situation," says Therese Langer, transportation program director for the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, an independent nonprofit organization that monitors energy policy. "The numbers generated to demonstrate manufacturers' CAFE compliance have little basis in reality."

The EPA's changes are designed to reflect that Americans drive faster and use more accessories, such as air-conditioning, than they did when the tests were introduced in 1975. Hybrid cars are reportedly more sensitive to high speeds and the use of accessories. As a result, the new EPA formula may affect more dramatically the mileage ratings for hybrids than for conventional cars. Nonetheless, hybrids are expected to keep their rankings as the most-efficient vehicles available to consumers.

Relative fuel-economy rankings of individual makes and models will be rearranged, but reduced numbers for the entire American fleet will reveal how little progress auto makers have made in terms of fuel economy. Nearly all the advances in automotive technology in the past

30 years have been directed toward producing bigger, faster engines.

TOP-SECRET PROGRAM. For decades, auto makers have claimed that they lack feasible and affordable technology to improve fuel economy. But as far back as 1974, the EPA evaluated a hybrid-car prototype that doubled the fuel economy of a conventional version of the same vehicle. The agency certified that the hybrid met the strict guidelines for the EPA's clean-air auto program -- and rejected it out of hand.

The story about the vehicle and its inventor, Victor Wouk, is unknown among even the most diehard fans of today's burgeoning hybrid-car movement. "The government program I was on to develop hybrids was more secret than Los Alamos and the atom bomb," Wouk said in an oral history interview with the CalTech Archives, one year before his passing on May

19, 2005.

Throughout the '60s, Wouk, an electrical engineer and veteran of the Manhattan Project, worked on reducing auto emissions. After exploring the potential of battery-electric vehicles, he concluded that the best solution was to combine the low emissions benefits of an electric car with the power of a gasoline engine to produce a hybrid vehicle. Wouk received little or no response to his ideas for a hybrid gas-electric car.

"GOING NOWHERE." Wouk contacted several people he knew at the EPA, who encouraged him to propose his hybrid-car ideas as part of the Federal Clean Car Incentive Program, which promised government support for emission-reducing auto technology. Initially, Erik Stork, head of the EPA's Mobile Source Air Pollution Control Program from 1970 to 1978, refused to test the vehicle. When he relented, the hybrid passed the required EPA tests. A month later, Stork sent a report citing 75 reasons why the hybrid wouldn't go into the next phase of support.

Now retired from the EPA, Stork, 78, recalled in an interview for HybridCars.com, "Hybrids are just not a very practical technology for automotive. That's why it's going nowhere. It certainly wasn't going anywhere then. Even today, it's marginal."

Wouk was forced to shelve his Buick Skylark hybrid prototype. Today, nearly 400,000 hybrids are running on American roads. The cumulative health cost of auto-pollution-related illnesses since 1980 -- when Wouk's hybrid design realistically could have been put into production

-- can be measured in the billions of dollars.

When the EPA changes take effect in 2007, the wide gap in mileage numbers between hybrids and conventional cars may be narrowed. But the real impact should be felt when the public realizes that every single vehicle on the road -- from behemoth SUVs to modest compacts -- is burning an imported, pollution-producing, nonrenewable resource much faster than previously thought.

Reply to
badgolferman
Loading thread data ...

Well, it's about time, Dammit!!!

I'm sick of looking at the mileage sticker on a new Toyota and being mislead. They really need to fix this!

I don't know how many times I have bought a Toyota, referring to the EPA MPG sticker, and then found out I was actually getting 10-15% MORE MPG than the sticker said!

Reply to
Hachiroku

I have the same problem! I got almost 27 mpg on my LS 400 over 250 highway miles instead of the neighborhood of 23 that the EPA says we are supposed to get.

Reply to
Ray O

Hondas tend to be like that too. My '93 Accord usually gets 32-34mpg on the highway, with an automatic tranny. EPA estimated 28mpg. And I usually drive about 10 miles over the speed limit, which is probably faster than the EPA guys did.

Reply to
High Tech Misfit

I believe the epa figures are (or were anyhow) derived from running vehicles thru various cycles on a dyno. These don't really take into consideration any environmental factors.

Reply to
ron

Sure you did. Which way was the wind blowing? One freeway cruise does not a scientific study make.

Reply to
dizzy

250 miles is a "freeway cruise"? All in the same direction the wind is blowing? With the wind actually blowing sufficiently fast to be a factor at 65 mph?

My admittedly unscientific observation over the past 30 years or so has been that imports typically equal or exceed the EPA rating, whereas domestic brands do worse than the EPA rating. That may be a deliberate bias in the test process, I don't know.

But it is time for the EPA to finally adjust the tests to reflect actual driving conditions.

Merritt

Reply to
Merritt Mullen

When will this advertising hype end?...

Reply to
Gord Beaman

Diz, that wooshing sound you hear above your head ain't the wind son...

Reply to
Gord Beaman

Reply to
Gord Beaman

This is puzzling to me. Out of the 8 or so new cars I've owned in the last

10 years ALL exceeded EPA estimates. They were all sticks, included 4s & 6s. I definitely didn't "bog" shift any of them and I rarely travel the speed limit. This includes winter warm-ups with I'm up north. The only one that temporarily dipped below EPA city had a defective stuck-open thermostat which, when fixed, corrected the problem. Weird. Of course I agree this is the wrong debate but artificially inflating hybrid economy does nothing for the issue either.
Reply to
FanJet

I agree that one freeway cruise does not a scientific study make, however, I consistently get that 25 to 27 MPG on my frequent highway trips, cruising right around 75 MPH in my 2000 LS 400. I used to drive about 1,000 miles a week, getting a new car every 12,000 miles, and the Land Cruiser was my only demo that did not beat EPA highway mileage.

The trick is steady RPM, not steady speed ;-)

Reply to
Ray O

Not hype, just experience. I have not driven a Prius so I don't know how I would do, and I couldn't beat highway EPA in a Land Cruiser demo I had for a couple of weeks one winter - I forget what model year, but it was terrible. Hachiroku would recognize the route, but I'd leave Mansfield, MA with a full tank, stop somewhere around Springfield and top off, continue to Westfield, Pittsfield, North Adams, or Greenfield, and then top off in Springfield again, and then top off when I got home. Stopping every 150 miles or so for gas was getting to be a major time consumer so after a couple of weeks, I gave it to one of the new reps and went back to my standard winter demos, a 4X4 Van (later All-Trac Previa) or All-Trac Camry.

Reply to
Ray O

Both my Avalon and Chrysler 300M averaged 20 mpg. The Avalon had better epa numbers.

Reply to
Art

The problem is that if an SUV is rated at 15 mpg and gets 20 % less, 12 mpg doesn't seem that far off. But if a hybrid is rated at 60 mpg and misses by

20%, 48 mgp sounds like a rippoff.

Reply to
Art

Our 97 Avalon gets between 32 and 35 MPG on highway trips but only around

20-21 MPG around town.
Reply to
Ray O

Yes, I think "250 highway miles" can be called a "freeway cruise". Why on Earth would you object to me calling it that?

Obviously a possibility.

Do you realize that a 5MPH tail-wind while traveling 65MPH means you encounter only 85% the wind resistance that you would in still air?

Reply to
dizzy

I agree that it is a possibility that there was a tail wind, however, I consistently get this mileage on round trips - 125 miles to my son's college, 125 miles return trip, and on other long trips.

I took a wilderness canoe trip several years ago, where we had 15 MPH head winds on the way out and something like 25 MPH head winds on the way back. We took the same trip another year and were able to travel triple the distance without the head winds. I'm definitely going to order the no winds or tail winds on my next canoe trip!

Reply to
Ray O

I've heard that 90 % of vehicles don't get the EPA hwy mileage advertised. I think most of it has to do with speed and terain. My 96 Tercel has a 39 mpg hwy EPA rating, but can get anywhere from 37 to 45 mpg, depending on if I use the AC, or drive on slower 2 lane hwys.

Reply to
bakdor51

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.