Answering complaints from consumers that cars get fewer miles per gallon than advertised, the government is proposing changes in the way gas mileage is tested.
...
The Environmental Protection Agency intends to fix that. Under testing changes proposed Tuesday, fuel economy stickers will show most 2008 models getting 10 percent to 20 percent less mileage in city driving and 5 percent to 15 percent less in highway use. Gasoline-electric hybrids will be affected even more, with ratings for city driving decreasing an average of 20 percent to 30 percent.
...
The new, lower ratings, however, will not be used to gauge compliance with government regulations requiring automakers to produce fleets averaging at least 27.5 mpg for cars and 21 mpg for light trucks.
EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson said the Corporate Average Fuel Economy program run by the Transportation Department uses separate requirements for determining fuel economy.
Johnson said the lower figures his agency will develop are intended "to empower consumers with the most accurate information possible about a vehicle's fuel economy," including more details about the effects of "power-hungry accessories" used to lower windows, adjust seats or even play DVDs while driving.
"They can be confident those estimates more closely reflect real-world conditions," he said.
...
But Dan Becker, director of the Sierra Club's global warming program, said that because the rules for complying with the CAFE standards aren't changing, "the bottom line here is that this will have zero effect on oil savings or environmental impact."
My question is these changes would be, in addition to the more realistic ratings being posted on the window stickers and EPA Fuel economy Guides; will a separate CAFE rating be also posted for each vehicle/engine combination?
"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 963 times:
They need to eliminate the advantage for "light trucks", and unify the measurements. Having one EPA milage standard for CAFE and another for listings is silly.
Superfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 38503 posts, RR: 80 Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 936 times:
Quoting Cfalk (Reply 1): They need to eliminate the advantage for "light trucks", and unify the measurements. Having one EPA milage standard for CAFE and another for listings is silly.
No it is not "silly".
You can't expect a truck that is intended to haul horses, boats and other light-duty trucks to be able to comply and get the same milage as a little Ford Focus.
What is "silly" is marketing trucks/SUVs to soccer-moms and gangster-rappers as some sort of cool vehicle to have. It's also "silly" to make a car-based unibody vehicle to look like an SUV as well.
Quoting PHLBOS (Thread starter): My question is these changes would be, in addition to the more realistic ratings being posted on the window stickers and EPA Fuel economy Guides; will a separate CAFE rating be also posted for each vehicle/engine combination?
Doubt it. This is Congress we are talking abouit here. You actually expect them to know about how a vehicle works?
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 934 times:
Quoting PHLBOS (Thread starter): The new, lower ratings, however, will not be used to gauge compliance with government regulations requiring automakers to produce fleets averaging at least 27.5 mpg for cars and 21 mpg for light trucks.
Now that is just plain stupid.
Quoting Superfly (Reply 2): No it is not "silly".
You can't expect a truck that is intended to haul horses, boats and other light-duty trucks to be able to comply and get the same milage as a little Ford Focus.
You can't necessarily expect a truck to get the mileage of a Focus, but you can expect manufacturers to make more efficient cars to offset the effect on mileage averages that trucks have. This will clean out the gas guzzling SUVs from the model ranges. They also need to stop classifying things like the PT Cruiser, which is based on the Neon, as light trucks
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Kevinl1011 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2964 posts, RR: 51 Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 931 times:
The current system is designed to remove as many variables as possible in order to have an "apples to apples" comparison. Things like wind resistance, road grade, temperature, road surface and driving habit are impossible to duplicate over and over so that each car is tested in exactly the same conditions. "Real World" conditions are not a controlled environment.
I believe there will be a second mileage rating system similar to crash testing (NTSB v.s. Insurance Institute). EPA will remain as the standard for Gov. CAFE rating and some other institution will emerge with an accepted "Consumer Average Fuel Economy" rating. Heck....they could still call it CAFE!
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19701 posts, RR: 56 Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 926 times:
Quoting N1120A (Reply 3): They also need to stop classifying things like the PT Cruiser, which is based on the Neon, as light trucks
How the hell did they get away with that one?! The PT Cruiser has absolutely nothing SUV-ish about it at all.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
Superfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 38503 posts, RR: 80 Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 909 times:
Quoting N1120A (Reply 3): You can't necessarily expect a truck to get the mileage of a Focus, but you can expect manufacturers to make more efficient cars to offset the effect on mileage averages that trucks have.
...or just simply eliminate the gasoline option on all truck/SUVs and continue offering the existing diesel option that real trucks & SUV already come with.
The Ford F-350/Excursion, GMC 3500/Suburban, and Dodge Ram comes with diesel option.
The wimmpy BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Infinity SUVs with just have to go bye bye.
The PT Crusier being classified as a truck is news to me. If that's true, shame on Daimler/Chrysler.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 896 times:
There is no diesel option on the Suburban and hasn't been for years
Quoting Superfly (Reply 6): The PT Crusier being classified as a truck is news to me. If that's true, shame on Daimler/Chrysler.
Quoting Mir (Reply 5): How the hell did they get away with that one?! The PT Cruiser has absolutely nothing SUV-ish about it at all.
Yes, they lobbied the EPA for a long time for it and got it classified.
Quoting Superfly (Reply 6): The wimmpy BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, Infinity SUVs with just have to go bye bye.
The BMW X5 has been proven on the Rubicon, just like every Jeep since the 1940s (BTW, those amazing machines would have to go under your rules), the Mercedes G-Wagen is as tough (or tougher than) as a Hummer, the Lexus LX470 is based on the historical Land Cruiser and the Infiniti SUV's are based on the well proven Pathfinder. BTW, the last 3 are body on frame construction
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 892 times:
Quoting Superfly (Reply 2): You can't expect a truck that is intended to haul horses, boats and other light-duty trucks to be able to comply and get the same milage as a little Ford Focus.
Make them smaller.
Quoting Superfly (Reply 2): What is "silly" is marketing trucks/SUVs to soccer-moms and gangster-rappers as some sort of cool vehicle to have.
Agree totally. I sold my wife's SUV and she's still pissed at me and is begging to let her buy a new one. Not a chance. We simply don't need one. Our kids are grown, and we don't have a horse, boat, etc. Even if we did, we could do with a much more efficient SUV than our old Tahoe.
Quoting Superfly (Reply 6): ...or just simply eliminate the gasoline option on all truck/SUVs and continue offering the existing diesel option that real trucks & SUV already come with.
Excellent idea, and it would take exactly one week to implement.
PHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7253 posts, RR: 25 Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 874 times:
Quoting Kevinl1011 (Reply 4): The current system is designed to remove as many variables as possible in order to have an "apples to apples" comparison. Things like wind resistance, road grade, temperature, road surface and driving habit are impossible to duplicate over and over so that each car is tested in exactly the same conditions. "Real World" conditions are not a controlled environment.
I believe there will be a second mileage rating system similar to crash testing (NTSB v.s. Insurance Institute). EPA will remain as the standard for Gov. CAFE rating and some other institution will emerge with an accepted "Consumer Average Fuel Economy" rating. Heck....they could still call it CAFE!
A couple additional points worth noting:
1. The EPA ratings are what most consumers look for regarding an individual vehicle's fuel economy. The CAFE (Coporate Average Fuel Economy) rating is primarily aimed at vehicle manufacturers as a means to measure the average fuel economy of their entire fleet and compare it with the fixed govenment CAFE standard. The more vehicles they sell that exceed the CAFE standard; the more monetary credits the manufacturers receive; fines and penalties are issued for when their overall fleet average falls short of the goal (resulting from more gas-thirsty vehicles outselling the more fuel thrifty ones).
2. What many don't realize here is that the current CAFE ratings per every vehicle engine is actually based the combined average city/highway EPA ratings (through the current rating system). Example: a vehicle that has an EPA sticker of 20 city/30 highway has a CAFE rating of 25 mpg. The new EPA measuring system will essentially be divorcing itself from the Government CAFE system.
Kevinl1011,
You're right about the changes will mean two measuring standards for fuel economy (as w/crash tests) but; unlike the crash tests, it appears that the governement will be conducting both fuel economy tests.
"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
Ummm, it can haul THREE Bmw X5s to the repair shop.
Quoting N1120A (Reply 7): There is no diesel option on the Suburban and hasn't been for years
Incorrect.
Besides, I am talking about the 2500 and 3500 models.
Not the silly 1500s on display at shopping malls and rap videos.
The Mercedes I was refering to was the dumb M-class.
The body on frame Luxury brand you speak of will never be seen used to it's full potential. Same goes for the Cadillac Escalade and Lincoln Navigator.
Take a course in Physics and get back to me.
Perhaps Pushback vehicles could be sold to the general public and yes they are smaller than the Ford F-350 line but I am sure the gas milage would be far worse than the existing F-350 with Powerstroke diesel even if the Pushback vehicles had a four speed transmission.
Quoting Cfalk (Reply 8): I sold my wife's SUV and she's still pissed at me and is begging to let her buy a new one.
Spoil her with a beautiful, powerful and very efficient Ford Thunderbird.
You can pick one up very cheap now.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 849 times:
Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 9): Unless special ordered I guess - because we sure as hell have them up here . . . all over Prudhoe Bay area . . .
There has not been a diesel available on the Suburban since 1999, before the switch to the newer LS1 based Vortec engines. That engine was the old GM 6.5L Turbo Diesel that gave GM the reputation for building the absolute worst diesels in the world, ones that are as inefficient as large gasoline engines.
Quoting Superfly (Reply 11): Besides, I am talking about the 2500 and 3500 models.
There are no 1 ton (3500) Suburbans, only 1/2 and 3/4. Beyond that, the 2500s are not available with the Duramax Diesel, only the Vortec 6000 and Vortec 8100
Quoting Superfly (Reply 11): The Mercedes I was refering to was the dumb M-class.
The "dumb" M-class is built with a low range in its AWD system and has been tested to handle serious off road duty
Quoting Superfly (Reply 11): The body on frame Luxury brand you speak of will never be seen used to it's full potential. Same goes for the Cadillac Escalade and Lincoln Navigator.
Hey, I didn't necessarily say what they would use them for, just that they were capable. Range Rover's are a luxury brand and are some of the most capable vehicles in the world, same with the G-wagen
Ummm, it can haul THREE Bmw X5s to the repair shop.
They can't handle for sh*t, pick up like slugs and their low stance combined with step bars make them next to useless off road.
Quoting Superfly (Reply 11): Spoil her with a beautiful, powerful and very efficient Ford Thunderbird.
If you are talking about the newest one, beautiful is correct buy powerful and efficient they are not. The 0-60 time is 7 seconds, which will get it whipped by any respectable car and several brutish SUVs and in real world driving those things are lucky to get 18 mpg
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Superfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 38503 posts, RR: 80 Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 847 times:
Quoting N1120A (Reply 12): There are no 1 ton (3500) Suburbans, only 1/2 and 3/4. Beyond that, the 2500s are not available with the Duramax Diesel, only the Vortec 6000 and Vortec 8100
Sure about that?
Doesn't matter if you are right because Ford makes a better product anyway.
Quoting N1120A (Reply 12): The "dumb" M-class is built with a low range in its AWD system and has been tested to handle serious off road duty
BULL!
Howcome I see so many flipped over in ditches on I-80 between Reno and Sacramento in the winter time? I find it ironic that they are almost always plucked from ditches by a FORD F-SERIES towtruck with a Powerstroke diesel.
Quoting N1120A (Reply 12): The 0-60 time is 7 seconds, which will get it whipped by any respectable car and several brutish SUVs and in real world driving those things
Thanks to those God damn CAFE rules!
Ford should have dropped in the 5.4 V8!
I know a lady that has one and it gets 31 MPG hiway.
It does however get 18 city if you drive like me.
Kevinl1011 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2964 posts, RR: 51 Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 846 times:
Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 10): it appears that the government will be conducting both fuel economy tests.
I still believe that a University, consumer industry group or knuckleheads like JD Powers and Consumer Reports can publish a "Guide to MPG" that will be accepted as CSI ratings are.
Quoting Superfly (Reply 13): Ford should have dropped in the 5.4 V8!
Or at least made it so that it didn't spit out spark plugs!
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 842 times:
Quoting Superfly (Reply 13): Quoting N1120A (Reply 12):
They can't handle for sh*t,
It's not a sports car.
They handle for sh*t as compares to other SUVs
Quoting Superfly (Reply 13): I find it ironic that they are almost always plucked from ditches by a FORD F-SERIES towtruck with a Powerstroke diesel.
Yes, diesel engines are the absolute best at doing tasks like that and the US manufacturers have maintained an oligopoly on the large light truck segment, and Ford is much better at truck fleeting and specialized use marketing than GM or Chrysler (who actually have the best engine with the 4.9L I-6 Cummins)
Quoting Superfly (Reply 13): Howcome I see so many flipped over in ditches on I-80 between Reno and Sacramento in the winter time?
Two things. 1) That is hyperbole 2) People are idiots, I have seen people flip Jeeps into ditches and those are among the most capable SUVs that exist
Completely. 1 Ton Suburban's don't exist, or haven't been around for at least 20 years and there has been no diesel option since 1999.
Quoting Superfly (Reply 13): Doesn't matter if you are right because Ford makes a better product anyway.
As far as the Super-Size Me obese SUVs go, the Suburban is the more nimble and capable of the two. The best engine offering is most definately the Powerstroke on the Excursion, but the more than 3 tons of weight increases the fuel consumption not insignificantly
Quoting Superfly (Reply 13): Thanks to those God damn CAFE rules!
Then how to you explain the fact that my car gets FAR better fuel mileage than the T-bird, has 2 fewer cylinders and is significantly faster? BTW, it carries 4 people and plenty of luggage
Quoting Superfly (Reply 13): I know a lady that has one and it gets 31 MPG hiway.
It does however get 18 city if you drive like me.
The lady I know who drives one drives combined driving, is reasonable with the peddle and gets 17-18 combined
Quoting Superfly (Reply 13): Ford should have dropped in the 5.4 V8!
A truck lump motor in a car? That is a good way to put out lots of pollution, burn lots of gas and blow up a lot of motors. FoMoCo needs to talk to Ford of Europe about making compact engines that can actually make power.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Superfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 38503 posts, RR: 80 Reply 16, posted (7 years 4 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 838 times:
Quoting N1120A (Reply 15): Ford should have dropped in the 5.4 V8!
A truck lump motor in a car
Umm, the Ford GT uses that 5.4 liter engine block.
Quoting N1120A (Reply 15): The lady I know who drives one drives combined driving, is reasonable with the peddle and gets 17-18 combined
Tell hare to change her spark plugs and get wheel alignment.
Quoting N1120A (Reply 15): Then how to you explain the fact that my car gets FAR better fuel mileage than the T-bird, has 2 fewer cylinders and is significantly faster? BTW, it carries 4 people and plenty of luggage
Convertibles weigh more because of the extra reinforcment needed.
Quoting N1120A (Reply 15): US manufacturers have maintained an oligopoly on the large light truck segment
Are you claiming that ther is a 'conspiracy'?
Howcome Boeing isn't able to wrestle US based airlines in to buying only Boeing?
Perhaps Ford, GM, and Chrysler makes a better product than the overseas competition?
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7253 posts, 
From Thailand, joined May 2000, 38503 posts, 
I could fit one of those in the bed of the BAFDT - to hell with a spare tire, I can haul a spare car! Ha Ha Ha . . . .
Printer friendly format 
