Archive for the ‘Gas Mileage’ Category

Not actually a TDI, but it is a Jetta.

Among the many things we check when preparing the reliability stats are unusually high odometer readings. Some people add an extra zero by mistake. Others simply spend an insane amount of time on the road. The latter is especially likely with two cars: VW’s Golf/Jetta/Rabbit TDIs (diesels) and Toyota’s Prius.

Looking at 2010s, with readings averaged over the past four quarters, the Golf TDIs have an average of 38,500 miles, the Prii 37,097 miles. The Honda Accord? 31,230. With 2004s, the averages are 177,964, 128,137, and 102,181 miles, respectively.

This makes rational sense. Diesels and hybrids both get much better fuel economy than regular cars, but they also cost more. The more miles someone drives, the more quickly this extra cost is recouped. Diesel engines also tend to last longer. Hybrids? The jury’s still out, but a few Prii are now well over the 200k mark.

On a recent trip from Detroit to Chicago in a Kia Soul 2.0, I couldn’t quite get 30 miles to the gallon, despite an EPA highway rating of 34. It turns out I wasn’t alone. Hyundai and Kia have now admitted to a “procedural error” in their testing, and will be compensating owners.

How might this happen? Well, the EPA actually tests few vehicles. Instead, it relies on manufacturers to perform most of the testing themselves. If enough owners complain, the EPA will test the car. Owners of the Hyundai Elantra complained, the EPA tested the Elantra, and their results didn’t match Hyundai’s.

(more…)

We’ve enhanced our fuel economy survey and results. Now you can:

• edit previous entries
• enter the fill-up date on a tank
• indicate heavy cargo or towing (for exclusion from the public stats)
• enter comments
• report on electric vehicles
• toggle the units used in the results (either MPG or g/100m, for example)

Also, you can now view fuel economy results and record your fill-ups on mobile devices! (A lot of people have been asking for this.) Go to m.truedelta.com/mpg on your mobile device to get started.

We’ll have another round of updates later this year or early next. If you have something else you’d like us to add, let us know.

This week I’m driving a Buick Verano. Last week I had a BMW 528i xDrive. The first, based on the Chevrolet Cruze, is the smallest car Buick has offered since the J-Body Skyhawk was discontinued back in 1989. It weighs in at 3,300 pounds (midsize territory) and is powered by a 180-horsepower, 171 pound-feet 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine. The latter, for those who don’t speak recent BMW, is the marque’s midsize sedan with a 240-horsepower, 260 pound-feet 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine (yes, a four in a $60,000 car) and all-wheel-drive. So configured, the neu 5er checks in at 4,000 pounds. Which would you expect to get better gas mileage?

(more…)

The EPA labels that report fuel efficiency on new cars are being redesigned. The press recently reported that many people found the new labels confusing. I didn’t look into the details–that many people find just about any label confusing isn’t much of a shock to me.

If I had taken a closer look, I would have noticed that the new labels will do something I proposed here some time ago, but expected would not be done in the interest of simplicity: posting separate numbers for each fuel type. GM angled for a 230 MPG rating for the new Chevrolet Volt based on the old, single number system. The Volt could get such a number because it runs the first 40 or so miles on electricity alone. So, aside from simplicity, the industry had an interest in maintaining the old system.

Instead, it looks like the EPA will post two numbers for vehicles like the Volt: one in energy equivalent for the first 30 miles run on electricity, and a second for MPG on gas once the battery has been depleted. Car & Driver posted the potential new sticker you see here in its new review of the Volt. This is the right thing to do. Any single number would assume an arbitrary split between electric-only and gasoline-assisted driving. Play the split right, and suddenly you’re getting 200+ MPG. But not really.

One step back: no separate numbers for city and highway, probably because including four numbers was judged to be overwhelming. Personally, I hope that separate city/highway numbers are at least available, if not on the sticker.

The only other thing I asked for, but that does not appear to be happening: an EPA rating for electric-only range. How far can you drive before going from the first number to the second?

Though fuel prices have moderated, as long as the economy remains soft car buyers will be focusing on fuel economy, not horsepower. In response, manufacturers are rushing to offer at least the alternative of a less powerful, more efficient engine.

The Mazda CX-7, a compact SUV, is a case in point. When the CX-7 was introduced three years ago, only one engine was offered: a 244-horsepower turbocharged 2.3-liter four. A good fit for Mazda’s driver-oriented image, but fuel economy has been a weak spot.

For 2010 Mazda has refreshed the CX-7, and the turbo has been joined by a 161-horsepower non-turbo 2.5-liter four. The new engine is good for EPA ratings of 20 city and 28 highway, compared to 17 and 23 for the 2009 turbo. (For 2010 the turbo improves to 18/25.) The new base model weighs 300 pounds less, so acceleration should be similar to that of the non-turbo fours in the Honda CR-V (20/27) and Toyota RAV4 (22/28).

Back in September 2008 I suggested how gas mileage should be calculated for range-extended electric vehicles like the upcoming Chevrolet Volt: one set of numbers for electric use, and a second set for after the batteries have discharged. General Motors, of course, saw things differently. It wanted the highest possible numbers, both for CAFE and for advertising purposes. And it appears that GM has gotten its way, as the EPA city rating for the Volt will be 230 MPG.

How is this possible? Through a test that makes almost no use of the gasoline engine. Problem is, this figure doesn’t remotely represent the full cost of operating the vehicle.

In a way, though, such a high number will be less misleading. General Motors has so overshot the mark in lobbying for the highest possible number that even the most clueless person will know it’s BS. If they’d finagled a number in the 80 to 100 range then perhaps the average person might have been misled into thinking it was real. But not now.

I needed to drive my family 800 miles (and back) to visit my in-laws. None of my cars are large enough, so I rented a minivan from Alamo. They had by far the best rate.

Alamo gave me the choice of any car in their minivan lane. Aside from a Dodge Grand Caravan and a Toyota Sienna, they also had a Toyota Sequoia, Saturn Outlook, and Ford Flex. I went with the Ford, since a previous test drive had found the seats to be extremely comfortable. It also had more space behind the third row for our luggage than did the Sequoia and Outlook (the minvans do best here). Luggage for five people fit. A bag for the sixth went on the floor between the second and third rows.

The Flex proved exceptionally well suited for traveling 800 miles in a single day. The seats are comfortable and the ride is smooth and quiet.

The biggest surprise of all, though: this massive vehicle got about 25 MPG running a fairly steady 75-80 with three adults and three kids aboard and the A/C on. (Manual calculations were a few tenths short of this figure, the trip computer read a couple tenths higher than this figure.) Running about 65 MPH on a later stretch, the trip computer read over 27–average, not instanteous–until I hit some hills.

I’m amazed that such a large, heavy vehicle can do so well. My compact Mazda struggles to reach 30 at similar speeds. Then again, the Flex’s 3.5-liter V6 is spinning about 2,000 RPM at 75, while the Mazda’s 2.0-liter four is spinning about 3,500. Extra gear ratios help.

President Obama has proposed an increase in Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) to 35.5 MPG by 2016. CAFE is not mandatory, but manufacturers that fail to achieve the average must pay fairly hefty fines, and they don’t like paying fines.

At first glance, 35.5 MPG seems a very ambitious target. After all, most cars these days have real-world gas mileage in the 20s, and SUVs struggle to get into the high teens. Part of the improvement will have to follow from lower sales of trucks. A shift to smaller cars with smaller engines and additional technology will also contribute. The government will no doubt also provide credits for alt fuel vehicles.

But one thing people often don’t realize is that CAFE figures are based on a 55/45 mix of the EPA’s internal city/highway MPG figures, which since 1985 haven’t been the same as the ones on window stickers. That year, in an attempt to bring the public figures in line with real-world experiences, the EPA adjusted the published city figures downward by 10 percent and the highway figures downward by 22 percent. More recently, in 2008, the formulas for the window sticker numbers were changed to incorporate more real-world variables like A/C use. But the internal, gross figures have continued to be used for CAFE.

What these adjustments mean: an average of 35.5 MPG in the EPA’s internal figures translates to an average around 27 MPG in terms of a 55/45 mix of the city/highway figures on window stickers. The 42MPG figure for cars? (The 35.5 is the overall target for cars and trucks together.) It equates to about 32 MPG in real-world mixed driving.

Still a large increase from current real-world averages. But the implication isn’t that we’ll all soon be driving small cars. Auto makers might even still offer a car like the new V8-powered Camaro, with real-world suburban fuel economy in the high-teens, as long as they sell a a couple compacts that manage results in the high 30s to offset each one.

Doable? Absolutely.

Thanks to tax incentives, diesels now account for a large percentage of car sales in many European countries. These engines tend to be more powerful, smoother, and quieter than the diesels of even five years ago.

The most extreme example: the 5.9-liter V12 monster Audi offers in the Q7. It produces 500 horsepower at only 3,750 rpm, and 737 pounds-feet of torque at just 1,750 rpm. The next rung down, Audi, BMW, and Mercedes all offer V8 diesels, but these also sell in low volumes.

The meat of the diesel market begins with small fours and tops out with sixes around 3.0 liters. We’re now getting some of the latter in the U.S. Only VW currently offers a four-cylinder diesel in the States.

Even with gas engines, far more choices are offered to buyers in the UK. The 3-Series line across the pond starts a pair of 141-horsepower 2.0-liter fours, one gas, the other diesel.

While most of TrueDelta’s members are in the US and Canada, some are in the UK and elsewhere. In response to requests, we’ve now added UK powertrains for recent model years of most Audis, BMWs, Mercedes, Saabs, and Volvos. Also select Jaguars and VWs.

Have a powertrain that’s still not in there? Let us know, and we’ll do what we can to add it.

So hopefully we’ll start seeing some Gas Mileage Survey responses for these engines, and get a clearer idea of what we’ve been missing out on.