Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views MPG Ratings Will Drop Under EPA Proposal
375 messages, Last post on Oct 02, 2008 at 9:08 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
See this Edmunds.com article! EPA Overhauls Fuel Economy Estimates for 2008 - As the 2008 model-year cars hit the lot, shoppers will notice a big difference — the EPA has changed its fuel economy testing methods to produce mileage estimates that reflect "real world" driving habits. - (more)
|
Replying to: larsb (Sep 15, 2008 8:31 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: mattandi (Sep 15, 2008 9:08 am) (Bad for lawyers who have clients who want to sue carmakers, but being bad for lawyers usually means good for everyone else.)  Having a test which uses real-world driving conditions like air conditioning and 80 mph driving is also a good thing. They can still make tweaks to make the test even more accurate, which they might do. They might even eventually have more than one test, based on what new car technologies develop.
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Sep 15, 2008 9:20 am) That would be good. Not likely with that bunch of losers at the EPA. Hopefully that is one of the agencies Obama is planning to CHANGE 
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Sep 15, 2008 9:20 am) Like I said before, it just struck me as an odd point to make. The real reason that the new test is better is because of how it makes people feel. Not that it is more accurate or that it more closely reflects real world conditions or that it more closely models how folks actually drive their cars or even that it provides more information to the consumer, but that the real reason it is better is that now more people can brag that they beat the estimate. Just jumped out at me. That's all. I'll go back to watching the fireworks between you and Gary now.
|
|
|
Replying to: mattandi (Sep 15, 2008 12:05 pm) I never considered it that, not in the same way that Food Stamps is a program or the Pell Grants are a program. From the perspective of "do the tests matter AFTER the car is purchased?" then the ONLY value to the consumer is that it makes them feel good to beat the numbers. It certainly made them feel bad to never achieve the numbers in the past with the old tests. That lead to lemon law attempts, lawsuit attempts, buyers protesting outside dealerships, etc. Useless wasteful things. Other than that, can you name another value it has to the buyer AFTER purchase? It made the EPA look bad to have a test which was so hard to duplicate on the road. So they fixed that. Now they may need to adjust it again. |
|
|
Replying to: mattandi (Sep 15, 2008 12:05 pm) Maybe not so good. My gripe is not so much the inaccuracy of the test. It is that tax credits are based on those tests. It does not bother larsb because he got in under the old tests that favored the hybrids. The Prius tax credit of $3150 was based on it getting 60 MPG City, as rated by the EPA. The new VW TDI is based on a very low 29 MPG City estimate. That means it is affecting the pocket book of those that want a 50 state clean diesel. All of the diesels fare poorly with the new tests. VW has complained to the EPA and now GM is complaining as it will have a tremendous affect on their new Volt if it is only rated at 48 MPG. Hopefully the next President will shake up that lazy bunch of bureaucrats in the EPA. You have to take into consideration that Larsb would argue the moon is made of cheddar cheese if he could find someone to argue with.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Sep 15, 2008 12:25 pm) Gary says, "It is that tax credits are based on those tests." You are mad about ONE CAR out of 615 cars getting a low result. Get OVER it already. Gary says, "It does not bother larsb because he got in under the old tests that favored the hybrids." I did not profit much at all from the old tests. And the car with which I earned the tax credit changed from a whopping 39 to a whopping 34 with the new test. So you are wrong about that too. Gary says, "You have to take into consideration that Larsb would argue the moon is made of cheddar cheese if he could find someone to argue with. " Pot, meet Kettle.
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Sep 15, 2008 12:44 pm) NO, now there are FIVE diesel vehicles all being under rated by the EPA. All have gotten their Tax Credit posted on the IRS site. Much lower than they should be compared to the darling hybrids. All 3 of the Mercedes diesel SUVs will save a LOT more money per year than the Prius. Your anti diesel glasses are SO DARK you cannot see the truth.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Sep 15, 2008 12:53 pm) Allow me to refresh your memory: When EPA was doing the revised testing, they had 615 cars to test with the new method and only ONE of them was a diesel. They did not have enough data to worry about tweaking such a small data set. And of the five currently "tested and tax-credited" vehicles, I have not heard you complain that any of them were "robbed" by a faulty diesel test bias other than the Jetta. Did the MB diesels somehow avoid the bias?
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Sep 15, 2008 1:00 pm) No, they are just as far off as the VW Jetta diesel. They are rating the blutec R class at 18 MPG city. Probably off at least 25 percent from what owners are getting. At the very least they are off by 18% that the EPA admits to. At the very least they need to fire the top people at the EPA and clean house. They have yet to post the tax credit for the E320 CDI blutec. It is no wonder our Congress has an 8% approval rating with the way they run these agencies.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views MPG Ratings Will Drop Under EPA Proposal
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
