Consumer Reports on EPA vs. real-world
#1
09-07-2005, 07:47 AM
Consumer Reports on EPA vs. real-world
The latest issue of Consumer Reports has an interesting article regarding the discrepancy between EPA numbers and real-world numbers for mileage. They bring up a number of interesting points, which no doubt will be discussed at length.
A couple things that stood out to me:
- Almost every car's EPA rating was way off from the real-world MPG, ranging anywhere from 20% to 50%, the difference being most significant in city driving.
- In city mileage, the worst in terms of stated EPA versus actual real-world MPG was the Jeep Liberty diesel. Second worst was my beloved HCH. :-( The HCH was still one of the highest overall MPGs of all cars, however, trailing only the Insight and Prius :-)
One other thing I noticed: I expected the current diesels to be the best of all in EPA accuracy, given the posts from diesel owners I have read in hybrid forums elsewhere. Those posts tend to indicate that you can do anything that you want -- race around town like a maniac, go 90 MPH on the interstate -- and you still get EPA or better mileage. That didn't seem to be the case, at least based on the CR story.
There is plenty of other good stuff in the story, regarding which I will let other's fill in.
A couple things that stood out to me:
- Almost every car's EPA rating was way off from the real-world MPG, ranging anywhere from 20% to 50%, the difference being most significant in city driving.
- In city mileage, the worst in terms of stated EPA versus actual real-world MPG was the Jeep Liberty diesel. Second worst was my beloved HCH. :-( The HCH was still one of the highest overall MPGs of all cars, however, trailing only the Insight and Prius :-)
One other thing I noticed: I expected the current diesels to be the best of all in EPA accuracy, given the posts from diesel owners I have read in hybrid forums elsewhere. Those posts tend to indicate that you can do anything that you want -- race around town like a maniac, go 90 MPH on the interstate -- and you still get EPA or better mileage. That didn't seem to be the case, at least based on the CR story.
There is plenty of other good stuff in the story, regarding which I will let other's fill in.
#2
09-07-2005, 08:36 AM
Re: Consumer Reports on EPA vs. real-world
Indeed you are correct it's been discussed at great length many times before. The bottom line is that Consumer Reports is not real-world for anyone that actually cares about fuel economy. Think about it this way: Someone who absolutely wants a car at all costs for it's styling, horsepower, towing rating, etc generally does not care about fuel economy. Their "real world" fuel economy is irrelevant because they don't care about it.
For someone that does care about fuel economy, they need to be willing to drive in such a way that isn't wasteful. Afterall, how can you claim to care about fuel economy, but not care about it enough to stop driving 10+ over the speed limit everywhere, drag racing off every stop light, careless use of the gas and brakes, and so on. The results from such people really don't matter because those people don't truly care about their fuel economy.
That's where CR falls on it's face. They are trying to claim that the fuel economy that careless drivers get is representative of what thoughtful drivers will get. It's backwards logic. Because of this, I feel the EPA numers are a great indicator because they represent rather easy, thoughtful driving techniques. The driving methods used by the EPA are the methods that would be used by someone that cares about their fuel economy enough to change their driving style to a more conservation-minded one.
As for CR and diesels, it's almost ironic because when Car and Driver did their Frugalympics, or whatever they called it, the Jetta diesel had the WORST fuel economy of all the cars they tested. Obviously C/D and CR are doing something very different to get completely opposite results from each other.
EDIT: Forgot to include a link to the Frugalympics
For someone that does care about fuel economy, they need to be willing to drive in such a way that isn't wasteful. Afterall, how can you claim to care about fuel economy, but not care about it enough to stop driving 10+ over the speed limit everywhere, drag racing off every stop light, careless use of the gas and brakes, and so on. The results from such people really don't matter because those people don't truly care about their fuel economy.
That's where CR falls on it's face. They are trying to claim that the fuel economy that careless drivers get is representative of what thoughtful drivers will get. It's backwards logic. Because of this, I feel the EPA numers are a great indicator because they represent rather easy, thoughtful driving techniques. The driving methods used by the EPA are the methods that would be used by someone that cares about their fuel economy enough to change their driving style to a more conservation-minded one.
As for CR and diesels, it's almost ironic because when Car and Driver did their Frugalympics, or whatever they called it, the Jetta diesel had the WORST fuel economy of all the cars they tested. Obviously C/D and CR are doing something very different to get completely opposite results from each other.
EDIT: Forgot to include a link to the Frugalympics
#3
09-07-2005, 10:42 AM
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 1,797
Re: Consumer Reports on EPA vs. real-world
They are trying to claim that the fuel economy that careless drivers get is representative of what thoughtful drivers will get.
Well said AZCivic !
#4
09-07-2005, 11:26 AM
Re: Consumer Reports on EPA vs. real-world
Brandon, you get "thoughtful post of the day".
Having just returned home from a 38 mile roundtrip to drop my wife off at school, and getting 75 MPG, which is 25% OVER the city EPA even with some highway driving mixed in, I view the EPA as a *minimum* number; going below it means either the driver and/or the car require maintanence.
Having just returned home from a 38 mile roundtrip to drop my wife off at school, and getting 75 MPG, which is 25% OVER the city EPA even with some highway driving mixed in, I view the EPA as a *minimum* number; going below it means either the driver and/or the car require maintanence.
#5
09-07-2005, 11:35 AM
Re: Consumer Reports on EPA vs. real-world
I understand what you guys are saying. And I myself have become a much more efficient driver over time.
But I still think that there is great value in the type of testing that is done by CR, even if my own favorite car doesn't look as good as I would like. I think their testing reveals that the HCH is possibly more susceptible to getting poor mileage than other cars, even other hybrids, if you do not drive it at least to some degree with fuel economy in mind.
In addition, it tells the vast majority of folks what to reasonably expect. After all, the goal here is to get the general population to adopt and embrace hybrid technology that will yield better fuel economy, cut emissions, etc. That probably won't happen if too many of those people, who are disinclined to change their driving habits, end up getting peeved at hybrids because they don't deliver on their mileage promises.
So while I don't disagree with your arguments about the way they test, I do still value their results. And it seems like perhaps the 2006 HCH will better tolerate the more demanding driving styles that seem to be pervasive today, at least according to that recent test drive article which got 47.1 MPG in mixed and presumably harsh driving.
But I still think that there is great value in the type of testing that is done by CR, even if my own favorite car doesn't look as good as I would like. I think their testing reveals that the HCH is possibly more susceptible to getting poor mileage than other cars, even other hybrids, if you do not drive it at least to some degree with fuel economy in mind.
In addition, it tells the vast majority of folks what to reasonably expect. After all, the goal here is to get the general population to adopt and embrace hybrid technology that will yield better fuel economy, cut emissions, etc. That probably won't happen if too many of those people, who are disinclined to change their driving habits, end up getting peeved at hybrids because they don't deliver on their mileage promises.
So while I don't disagree with your arguments about the way they test, I do still value their results. And it seems like perhaps the 2006 HCH will better tolerate the more demanding driving styles that seem to be pervasive today, at least according to that recent test drive article which got 47.1 MPG in mixed and presumably harsh driving.
#6
09-07-2005, 12:07 PM
Re: Consumer Reports on EPA vs. real-world
Originally Posted by AZCivic
Indeed you are correct it's been discussed at great length many times before. The bottom line is that Consumer Reports is not real-world for anyone that actually cares about fuel economy. Think about it this way: Someone who absolutely wants a car at all costs for it's styling, horsepower, towing rating, etc generally does not care about fuel economy. Their "real world" fuel economy is irrelevant because they don't care about it.
For someone that does care about fuel economy, they need to be willing to drive in such a way that isn't wasteful. Afterall, how can you claim to care about fuel economy, but not care about it enough to stop driving 10+ over the speed limit everywhere, drag racing off every stop light, careless use of the gas and brakes, and so on. The results from such people really don't matter because those people don't truly care about their fuel economy.
For someone that does care about fuel economy, they need to be willing to drive in such a way that isn't wasteful. Afterall, how can you claim to care about fuel economy, but not care about it enough to stop driving 10+ over the speed limit everywhere, drag racing off every stop light, careless use of the gas and brakes, and so on. The results from such people really don't matter because those people don't truly care about their fuel economy.
#7
09-07-2005, 12:08 PM
Re: Consumer Reports on EPA vs. real-world
Hi All:
___Excellent thread indeed!
___Both you and Brandon have seen the light and deserve recognition with "thoughtful post(s) of the day".
___Coyote, I see a very important relevance in both the EPA and CR FE numbers. Not so much as a real world FE achievement for the average driver (CR probably has the leg up on that one) but what is possible far beyond CR’s own results. In fact, it was CR’s I4 equipped Accord w/ Auto receiving 38 on the highway vs. the EPA’s 34 that nudged me towards the I4 Accord in the first place … I still think she was a good choice given how clean a PZEV she is but I sure do miss my hybrids much higher FE day in and day out at today’s fuel prices
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
___Waynegerdes@earthlink.net
___Excellent thread indeed!
Originally Posted by EricGo
I view the EPA as a *minimum* number; going below it means either the driver and/or the car require maintanence.
___Coyote, I see a very important relevance in both the EPA and CR FE numbers. Not so much as a real world FE achievement for the average driver (CR probably has the leg up on that one) but what is possible far beyond CR’s own results. In fact, it was CR’s I4 equipped Accord w/ Auto receiving 38 on the highway vs. the EPA’s 34 that nudged me towards the I4 Accord in the first place … I still think she was a good choice given how clean a PZEV she is but I sure do miss my hybrids much higher FE day in and day out at today’s fuel prices
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
___Waynegerdes@earthlink.net
Last edited by xcel; 09-07-2005 at 12:56 PM.
#8
09-07-2005, 12:27 PM
Re: Consumer Reports on EPA vs. real-world
It's interesting, this same topic came up today in a thread on The Car Lounge where one of the diesel fans lamented that the Jeep CRD achieved only 11mpg in the CR test. 11 miles per gallon, and it's a turbodiesel! It's EPA rated at 22/27 by the way, so they got half the city figure. I want a video of what they do for their city test, to be perfectly honest. Now I'm just at a loss to explain what they're doing.
#9
09-07-2005, 05:25 PM
Re: Consumer Reports on EPA vs. real-world
Cheers to Consumer Reports for continued hammering on EPA fuel economy testing, demanding a change in outdated test methods.
Jeers for CR not considering the hybrid consumer driving mindset.
CR results, showing a 19mpg hybrid average below EPA, may have a significant effect on discouraging potential hybrid sales. Occurs to me that it may be appropriate to write into Consumer Reports, to put in their editorial remarks segment next time, pointing out the following:
* If a consumer paid premium on a hybrid, then they most likely would drive with fuel efficiency in mind, not like a "real world" driver.
* Since CR most likely used relatively new hybrids for the testing, they should be made aware of the hybrid break-in period that produces higher MPG after 3-5K miles.
* Also, if CR tested in colder or hotter climate than normal, then it would affect hybrid performance more than standard vehicles (therefore not a fair test).
I am sure some of you can come up with others ... Anyone want to start an email campaign to CR with me?
Not that a CR editorial later would make a difference, but you know the press is going to pick up on this and some ill-informed reporters will add it to their list of reasons not to buy a hybrid.
-Dan
Jeers for CR not considering the hybrid consumer driving mindset.
CR results, showing a 19mpg hybrid average below EPA, may have a significant effect on discouraging potential hybrid sales. Occurs to me that it may be appropriate to write into Consumer Reports, to put in their editorial remarks segment next time, pointing out the following:
* If a consumer paid premium on a hybrid, then they most likely would drive with fuel efficiency in mind, not like a "real world" driver.
* Since CR most likely used relatively new hybrids for the testing, they should be made aware of the hybrid break-in period that produces higher MPG after 3-5K miles.
* Also, if CR tested in colder or hotter climate than normal, then it would affect hybrid performance more than standard vehicles (therefore not a fair test).
I am sure some of you can come up with others ... Anyone want to start an email campaign to CR with me?
Not that a CR editorial later would make a difference, but you know the press is going to pick up on this and some ill-informed reporters will add it to their list of reasons not to buy a hybrid.
-Dan
Last edited by Gillman; 09-07-2005 at 05:29 PM.
#10
09-07-2005, 05:45 PM
Re: Consumer Reports on EPA vs. real-world
I heard this on NPR this morning while driving to work (125 miles one-way...today)...My HCH is brand new, it has just 900 miles on it, and I averaged 46.7 MPG on 500 miles. I know my HCH will get better as it breaks-in.
The 500 miles I drove in the last two days were at the the posted speed limit (65 or 70MPH) and I wasn't super easy on the gas...plus in town I am averaging well in to the 60MPGs.
So I don't know how CR got their low numbers...
Later
Brian
The 500 miles I drove in the last two days were at the the posted speed limit (65 or 70MPH) and I wasn't super easy on the gas...plus in town I am averaging well in to the 60MPGs.
So I don't know how CR got their low numbers...
Later
Brian
