Whiny fuel economy/EPA story on NBC

Same old story - nobody wants to take responsibility for their own actions. And the media is quick to ell us It's Not Your Fault - it's "THEM".

It also depends what state mandates the gasoline formulation, IMHO. My Highlander, here in Northern California runs low 20's on highway. In Idaho, Washington or Oregon I run about 10% better. I probably drive a bit hard to get best mileage but In summer I am over 17 in town and about 21 on highway with V-6 AWD. about 23 up north Ron

That is pretty good mileage for Highlander. My wife has a 05 Highlander Limited FWD and it never gets more than 21 mpg. It usually gets around 18 of mix driving in Southern Orange Couty, CA. The 20 mpg was achieved during our trip to Phoenix between Xmas and New Year 3 months ago. The information display in that car never tells you the truth about the gas mileage consumption. It always shows that we are getting around 22 mpg and in fact we only get 19 from it. The speed limit is 75 mph on I-10 and people usually drive minimum 85 mph on I-10 between LA and Phoenix. Even though there is nothing but desert between LA and Phoenix, the road is not flat, either.

I also niticed that Toyota cars get pretty bad gas mileage during cold rainy day. My 99 Sienna usually gets 19 in mixed driving, but it only gets 16 or less in cold rainy days.

Yeah, kinda childish. We want to hear from people who don't even care about us, blaming others for problems. But then, these shows are very popular, I guess there are many people who want to be treated like children. Now this is just a guess...

imho,

tom @

I noticed maybe a 10% drop in economy from summer to winter, if even that. Of course, mine are all '80's cars...

Does this apply as much to hybrid-engine cars? I heard that the percentage of difference between "real world" mileage and EPA numbers was much greater with hybrids. For example, a Hybrid rated at 38 city, 50 highway might see real-world numbers consistently in the 36 range, while a traditional gas-engine vehicle that also sees real-world numbers consistently in the 36 range would be more likely to be rated at, say, 33 city and 42 highway.

If this is the actual case, does it mean that the mileage of hybrid-engine cars drops off more sharply under non-ideal conditions than that of conventional-engined vehicles?

From what I've read about hybrid drive vehicles and heard from friends in the automotive industry, fuel economy in hybrid vehicles tend to be better in an urban stop-and-go environment than on the highway. This is because the internal combustion (IC) engine is less likely to be running at lower vehicle speeds and the regenerative braking system returns some power back to the batteries versus on the highway, where the higher speeds mean the IC engine is running and there is less regenerative braking.

Having heard from people who say that they get as good as or better fuel economy than the EPA estimates and people who say that their mileage is much worse, I suspect that driving style and environmental conditions has a greater effect on fuel economy on a hybrid than in a conventional drivetrain.

I like people who put 22's on their tahoe and complain about gas mileage.

Like all the posters are saying: Driving style effects fuel consumption. My father consistently gets 10-20% better than EPA regardless of the vehicle he's driving HOWEVER. He uses a block heater 60% of the year so he's never starting a cold car, His brakes are usually original when he trades a vehicle in near 100K & he will often shut the engine off and coast when on hills & approaching traffic lights or traffic jams. (This might play a part) His tires also last close to 60 K as well.

Some Hybrids (I won't mention Toyota Prius here) seem from what everyone says, do consistently worse than rated. Others (I won't say Honda Accord) do pretty close to their rating.

My 1995 Olds 98 Regency Elite will hit High 30's driven sensibly in the summer. Parked outside in & driven in the city during the winter I'll hit high teens.

Vehicles are societies tools of consistent consumption. If we lived in a non-capitalist, non-consumption based society fuel economy wouldn't matter b/c we'd all be walking through the snow or waiting and taking subways/trains everywhere. However our society is based on consumption. Oil is high to justify drilling in Alaska and processing the Trillion Barrels of in Alberta before people move on to another fuel source, so lets quit worrying about EPA ratings.

As my brother said after a serious car accident. "Fuel is a hell of a lot cheaper than hospitals, buy a safe car".

EPA is just a rough guideline. I wouldn't base my purchasing decision on what a group of overpaid under worked government officials say to the public , After all what are they driving? ;-)

If you want to get decent milage the US needs to start getting low-sulphur diesel and SOON, so that the newer generatiosn of Diesel engines can be brought over.

a VW lupo diesel will do 60mpg, an audi A8, with a 4l twin-turbo diesel can manage 40mpg on the highway (and thats a big heavy car!)

I also agree that driving style has a lot to do with it - I did a run from atlanta to sailsbury, NC on sunday - there and back averaged

30mpg, on a vehicle with an EPA highway rating of 26, and the return journey had 2700lb of lexan in it. That was from an 87 dodge 3l, with the check engine light on, imagine what i'll get when i get the engine working graet (i got it about 4 weeks ago)

Basically comes down to 3 things

1) driving style - most americans, it seems, have little knowledge of smooth driving, or wide spacial awareness. they don't anticipate or aggregate. The significantly lower standard of driving required to pass the test in the US compaired with the UK, also means that drivers look for bigger vehicles for safety.

2) Mechanicals - American engines are not the best out-putters of power. Tend to be big engines, that are then tuned for low-end torque and made quiet. The abundance of automatic boxes also makes it less efficient. Side impact bars, safety cages etc. are also often missing in the smaller cars, meaning that peolpe look to the big heavy vehcles for safety.

3) legislative. Car tags, at least here in georgia, are priced on vehicle value, in the UK, they're emissiosn dependant. Smaller engined cars cost less. the lower safety requirements, and the incrased reliance on active, secondary devices, such as airbags, and away from better stronger chassis, or better handling (admittedly, the last is hard to legislate) . Silly stuff too, such as Arnie proposing the Pruis be allowed to use carpool lanes, even when only 1 person in it 9the prius's 1.5l engine, is the same size as that in my civic, and my civic is a HELL of a lot lighter with no batteries or motors to feed/carry - so can i run my civic in the california carpool lanes on my own too, eh? nope, didn't think so.

Partially agree. Would you want to be broad sided by an American Car/SUV/Truck in a Lupo? Hell even being in a Polo would be fatal.

I love the A8, Mid sized Bimmers & the new GTi Diesels. Wonderful fun cars to drive, cheap on fuel etc. I agree on the Diesel. We should have Low Sulphur available for those of us that want it esp since we grow so much Rapeseed/Canola over here.

Agreed. Though poorly designed roads/motorways have as big an impact on smooth driving. One "law abiding" idiot switching lanes in front of faster moving traffic & you've got a 3 hour tie up (assuming that they don't cause a wreck)

Big slow revving engines last longer & can use as little or even less than a smaller engine working harder (compare the V8 Lincoln's to a Turbo Saab to see what I mean). Auto Boxes can be more efficient than they have been (for eg, the new twin clutch trannies in the Ferrari's and Porsche) Fast, efficient and potentially much more reliable.

It's hard to swerve out of the way of someone running a stop sign or a red light. I like the UK idea of standard bumper heights on trucks and under-runners (or whatever they're called) on the sides of larger trucks (Lorry's/Juggernaughts).

Also most North American vehicles are designed for our climate. Europe and Asia is much more temperate and thus the vehicles don't need quite the same HVAC system we do over here.

Legislatively I think mandating increases in fuel economy would be a good starting point. Imagine a Corvette with a Hybrid V8. 500 HP gas plus 100HP electric with massive torque on demand then 2 cylinders running in stop and go. Or a 4X4 SUV with Electric rear drive train for acceleration and generation. There's no reason we can't hit mid to high 40's on gasoline with the size and shape of vehicles we have now. Add to it an electric battery pack chargeable from home & you're off to the races.

Not touching the California thing. I have no clue what the objectives are down there.

Please explain to me why there is this notion that economy = deprivation

is a 6000 square foot Solar home more wasteful than a 1200 square foot traditional home? I believe homes are where we should be focusing the economy on, (greater gains fewer $). end of my rant

Hachiroku, TOPPOSTING!!!!

SNIP

Spending on electricity what he saves on gas? Tell him to use a good quality synthetic oil instead. He won't need a block heater anymore.

SNIP

Don't put all gov. emplyees in the same basket. I work for a Crown Corp. here in Canada and I am NOT under worked. My salary is adequate, at best.

JP

I agree, I almost always do at least as well as the EPA estimates,and often do better. The exception is winter driving. there is a 5-6MPG average difference between me and the wife in the same cars...she drives a lot more aggressively than I do. She goes through brakes faster too!!!