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: gagrice (Sep 25, 2008 5:09 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Sep 25, 2008 5:04 pm) I already explained that in full. The purpose of the hybrid tax credit was to get cleaner cars on the road. The majority of air pollution problems are in big cities, in densely populated areas, and is also the place where air pollution is most dangerous to the health of the citizens. So cars which do WELL and pollute LESS on the CITY portion of the test would be more beneficial toward cleaning the air. Thus, the hybrids, which were designed to perform well in city environs, were pimped to the public with the high City mileage in a part of the effort to CLEAN THE AIR. If you cannot latch on to that perfect logic, then you have personal issues.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Sep 25, 2008 3:45 pm) Brand Model Style City Hwy Unrounded city unrounded hwy SATURN ASTRA 2D HATCHBACK 24 32 27 30.9 45.1 VOLKSWAGEN JETTA TDI 29 40 33 38.5034 56.6944 TOYOTA PRIUS 48 45 46 66.6 64.8 This following paragraph will PUT AN END to the argument that the "Jetta TDI GOT SCREWED" by the EPA test. Because if you look at the numbers, the Jetta TDI was given a rating which was 75.3% of it's actual city test result, while the Prius was only given a rating which was 72% of it's actual test result. On the hwy test, the Jetta TDI was given 70.5% of it's actual test result, while the Prius was given only 69.4% of it's actual test result. So the TDI actually was given a BETTER NUMBER than the Prius based on the formula. So now, Gary, FINALLY you can GET OVER the problem/issue you have experienced regarding your completely FALSE belief that the Jetta TDI got screwed by the EPA. The numbers PROVE YOU WRONG, Amigo. Time to be a man and admit it. Dangit, I LOVE the smell of being RIGHT in the morning. 
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Sep 26, 2008 6:12 am) Automobile Tax Credits Buying and driving a fuel-efficient vehicle and purchasing and installing energy-efficient appliances and products provide many benefits such as better gas mileage – meaning lower gasoline costs, fewer emissions, lower energy bills, increased indoor comfort, and reduced air pollution. Individuals and businesses who buy or lease a new hybrid gas-electric car or truck are eligible for, and can receive, an income tax credit of $250-$3,400 – depending on the fuel economy and the weight of the vehicle. Hybrid vehicles that use less gasoline than the average vehicle of similar weight and that meet an emissions standard qualify for the credit. “Lean-burn” diesel vehicles could also qualify, but currently available diesel vehicles do not meet the emissions standard. There is a similar credit for alternative-fuel vehicles and for fuel-cell vehicles. http://www.energy.gov/taxbreaks.htm |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Sep 26, 2008 6:33 am) The numbers PROVE NOTHING. Only that some over paid Civil Servant has a computer with Excel. There is no good evidence that we can trust the people that are doing the tests. Think Fannie Mae and the FED. ALL CROOKS getting paid and doing little to protect US. When I see a real world test that matches the average driver's mileage I will believe the system works. Till then it is BROKE, and we are stuck paying the bill. Lies on a window sticker are worse than no mileage information at all. Most of my vehicles over that last 20 years did not have EPA ratings and I was fine with it. Your little calculations should prove to you how flawed their system is. Can you come up with a reason that the percentages are all different? There are no tests involved according to my letter. They call them "adjustment factors". I tell them to factor this you bunch of useless bums 
|
|
|
Gary says, "The credits were ALL based on fuel saved. " Exactly. More Fuel Saved = Cleaner Air More Fuel Saved = The Cars Who Do Best In Populated Areas Help More Than Cars That Do Well In Rural Areas More Fuel Saved = Give Bigger Credits To The Cars Who Save The Most Fuel And Therefore Help Clean The Air I never said the tax credit was designed for the hybrids. It wasn't. It was indeed designed for clean, high mileage cars. You can stick with your illogical position all you want to, but that does not make it any more logical. Gary says, "I would guess some zealous EPA person saw the higher City mileage on the Prius and convinced the rule makers to base it on City mileage rather than combined." That's completely laughable. Give me a few seconds to laugh....................Hard to figure out how much more ridiculous some of your stuff can get but this one really is near the top. My position = based on logic and is completely sound and logical. Your Position = based on some far-out assumption that ONE PERSON could have decided at random "Hey, let's use CITY" and had no logical reason to do so. Every post you put here makes me look smarter and smarter. Keep this up and soon I will become the Einstein of Edmunds.
|
|
|
|
|
Just in case anyone wants a break from the emotional venting and mudslinging here... My understanding is the spreadsheet gives the CAFE figures which are used for determining if a manufacturer meets that standard. These differ from the published numbers in the fuel economy guide and window stickers in that they do not use fudge factors to adjust them and I believe they also do not use the new test components (higher speeds/acceleration, cold weather, A/C use). http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/420f04053.htm#cafe http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/CARS/rules/CAFE/overview.htm
|
|
|
Replying to: jeffyscott (Sep 26, 2008 7:30 am) |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Sep 26, 2008 6:12 am) The purpose of the hybrid tax credit was to get cleaner cars on the road. Read the legislation. This is an energy act, not a clean air act. The energy act does include the provision that qualifying vehicles must meet emissions standards, but there is no provision that they show any improvement in emissions. Most of the factors used to determine eligibility and actual credit are tied to fuel consumption, not emissions. The act is riddled with statements regarding improved fuel efficiency, energy independence, energy security, lower fuel consumption, exceeding baseline MPG, and on and on. There is no mention at all about improved air quality. Cars must meet established emission standards, but there is no requirement that they exceed them. The purpose is to improve fuel efficiency, reduce fuel consumption, and ultimately move towards energy independence and energy security. Cleaning up the air is a bonus, not the motivating factor, and the language in the act certainly does not establish that as the purpose of the act. Yes, you can make the argument that reducing fuel consumption and such does indeed result in cleaner air. You can argue that cleaning up the air and reducing pollution are worthy pursuits, and that focusing efforts on more populated areas with the greater problems makes sense. You can even make the argument that this act has indeed resulted in cleaner air since diesels had to improve to meet the emissions standards to become eligible for the tax credits. Those arguments have a lot of merit. That's just not the purpose of this act or this tax credit system. If it was, the language in the act would reflect that. |
|
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
