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: mattandi (Sep 25, 2008 10:13 am) The credit was designed to urge people to buy hybrids to REDUCE POLLUTION. The biggest pollution issues are in the CITY. You do the math. It's not hard. My 9 year old daughter could find the connection.
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Sep 25, 2008 10:26 am) I still have no idea how they come up with those figures. I do thank the poster for the spreadsheets provided. It lets me know that CAFE figures are as screwed up as the EPA ratings. A clear bias toward hybrids. Been that a long time.
|
|
|
Replying to: mattandi (Sep 25, 2008 7:48 am) Not yet. I am leaning toward the X5 diesel when it arrives. Or I may still go for the ML320 CDI. I was hoping the tax credits would be on a par with hybrids. The idea was both cleaner and using less fuel. Why the EPA decided to use city rather than combined mileage is anyone's guess.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Sep 25, 2008 11:49 am) The old EPA test was around LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG before the first hybrid. Thusly, it is IMPOSSIBLE for the test to inherently possess any hybrid bias. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Sep 25, 2008 11:49 am) Like I have said before - the only "evidence" you have regarding this is your own opinion. I have produced logical evidence to the contrary. Seems like this is a clear-cut case. If this were a court case, the judge would have thrown out the case and fined you for contempt for repeatedly saying the same thing over and over without any concrete information. |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Sep 25, 2008 11:55 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Sep 25, 2008 12:07 pm) Once again, your opinion, with no facts to back it up. At least in regard to the legitimacy of the EPA mileage test. The EPA has indeed broken the law, been sued, paid fines, etc. I have already explained with virtually perfect logic that there is NO WAY the EPA test could have possibly been biased toward hybrids since the test came first. Do you have some contradictory logic, or are you merely issuing your unfounded opinion? Again.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Sep 25, 2008 11:55 am) But the whole tax credit thing is not really EPA's screw-up, it is Congress's in misunderstanding what those little numbers EPA produces really mean. |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Sep 25, 2008 10:26 am) You are trying so hard to find an angle to argue, and what you fail to realize is that, on this point, I am not arguing with you. The net effect of the whole thing is that hybrids are favored. If it pains you too much too simply acknowledge that, I'm ok with that. If you would rather argue the merits of the rationale behind it all, we can get to that later.
|
|
|
Replying to: mattandi (Sep 25, 2008 2:42 pm) The fact is, the hybrids did well on the old test because the battery ran a lot during the city portion of the test. That's all it was. It was just an accidental fortunate alignment of a flawed test and a new technology that was not on the road back when the test method was created. No one was harmed in the collision of these two factors. In fact, the air being cleaner and the amount of gasoline that has gone unsold are the two main results.
|
|
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
