My Rabbit can't do better than 23 MPG combined (it does have a CEL though)
That is damn impressive!!!!
Road Test: 2013 Toyota Avalon Hybrid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGuB5o_cNLk#ws)
Not exactly dog slow either though it won't thrill you. I'm impressed
Toyota needs to make a hybrid Corolla
A Corolla Hybrid.....would be a Prius.
People like to knock Toyota, but they deliver in real world fuel economy. My Yaris is averaging 35-36 mixed.
My parents hybrid fusion regularly gets the same mileage i'm told... despite what lawsuits may want people to believe
Quote from: r0tor on June 17, 2013, 05:50:57 PM
My parents hybrid fusion regularly gets the same mileage i'm told... despite what lawsuits may want people to believe
The lawsuit would be based on the fact that the Avalon is rated for 40 and the Fusion is rated for 47.
Quote from: 2o6 on June 17, 2013, 05:41:09 PM
A Corolla Hybrid.....would be a Prius.
Not with 200HP :rastaman:
That would actually be a Corolla worth buying
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 17, 2013, 06:52:16 PM
Not with 200HP :rastaman:
That would actually be a Corolla worth buying
Buy a Camry Hybrid, then.
Your Rabbit does 23 MPG? Wow is the 2.5 a lump
A hybrid gets good gas mileage? Stop the presses!
Quote from: CALL_911 on June 17, 2013, 07:34:58 PM
Your Rabbit does 23 MPG? Wow is the 2.5 a lump
I think it needs a tune. I'd rather this than the carbon buildup issues of the turbo engines though
I forgot they still made the Avalon.
Quote from: ifcar on June 17, 2013, 06:33:14 PM
The lawsuit would be based on the fact that the Avalon is rated for 40 and the Fusion is rated for 47.
They have have measured tanks in the 60s and tanks in the 30s... Hybrid mileage is completely incomparable and unrepeatable in real world driving.
Quote from: r0tor on June 18, 2013, 08:16:57 AM
They have have measured tanks in the 60s and tanks in the 30s... Hybrid mileage is completely incomparable and unrepeatable in real world driving.
Regular cars are the same way :huh:
EPA mileage is just a guide
But if the real world median is way under the EPA rating there's a problem. 40 combined is still good, Ford fucked up with that lie.
I beat my EPA rating all the time.
I just learned my car does 25 combined according to the EPA. I usually get between 25.5 and 27 combined.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 18, 2013, 08:45:11 AM
Regular cars are the same way :huh:
EPA mileage is just a guide
But if the real world median is way under the EPA rating there's a problem. 40 combined is still good, Ford fucked up with that lie.
You can't exactly lie on an EPA test. The results are what they are - whether or not they match your driving style and scenario (huge variability in a hybrid) is a different story.
What if Ford's GPS told the ECU "hey, I'm near an EPA address! SET EPA MODE TO TRUE"?
:lol:!
Quote from: r0tor on June 18, 2013, 11:32:19 AM
You can't exactly lie on an EPA test. The results are what they are - whether or not they match your driving style and scenario (huge variability in a hybrid) is a different story.
Is is a lie though if Ford games their hybrid system to take maximum advantage of the scripted EPA test at the expense of real-world driving scenarios?
You mean just like most automakers choosing a top gear ratio for the test?
Quote from: r0tor on June 18, 2013, 11:32:19 AM
You can't exactly lie on an EPA test.
Yea you can. The EPA isn't conducting tests on every car, just a sample of models. They don't have the funding to do comprehensive testing. Most ratings are conducted by the manufacturers themselves in accordance w/the EPA's procedures and handed in in good faith. It's very easy to "game", at least on its way to the EPA. They could (and probably did) run the tests on cars w/no interiors or illegally modified engines or something. Or they just lied.
Its not like manufacturers are sending every car to the EPA to get tested. Though that is probably the most rational way to do it (and make the manufacturers pay).
Hyundai and Kia lied.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 18, 2013, 04:02:42 PM
Yea you can. The EPA isn't conducting tests on every car, just a sample of models. They don't have the funding to do comprehensive testing. Most ratings are conducted by the manufacturers themselves in accordance w/the EPA's procedures and handed in in good faith. It's very easy to "game", at least on its way to the EPA. They could (and probably did) run the tests on cars w/no interiors or illegally modified engines or something. Or they just lied.
Its not like manufacturers are sending every car to the EPA to get tested. Though that is probably the most rational way to do it (and make the manufacturers pay).
Tests are performed on a rolling dyno, stripping the interior (or aerodynamic aids) will do nothing to improve them.
Quote from: r0tor on June 18, 2013, 12:47:52 PM
You mean just like most automakers choosing a top gear ratio for the test?
Skip-shift features on manual transmissions (a-la Corvette, Camaro, and GT500), automatic transmission programming specifically written for the EPA test, gearing chosen to perform well in the test as opposed to real driving... Fuel mileage targets, based on the test, are design requirements. The automakers will design accordingly to meet those targets in the test.
:hammerhead:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 18, 2013, 04:02:42 PM
Yea you can. The EPA isn't conducting tests on every car, just a sample of models. They don't have the funding to do comprehensive testing. Most ratings are conducted by the manufacturers themselves in accordance w/the EPA's procedures and handed in in good faith. It's very easy to "game", at least on its way to the EPA. They could (and probably did) run the tests on cars w/no interiors or illegally modified engines or something. Or they just lied.
Its not like manufacturers are sending every car to the EPA to get tested. Though that is probably the most rational way to do it (and make the manufacturers pay).
Do you realize the penalties involved if a manufacturer cheats the EPA test? The absolute PR nightmare?
Quote from: r0tor on June 18, 2013, 06:07:17 PM
:hammerhead:
Do you realize the penalties involved if a manufacturer cheats the EPA test? The absolute PR nightmare?
Ask Hyundai.
Quote from: r0tor on June 18, 2013, 06:07:17 PM
:hammerhead:
Do you realize the penalties involved if a manufacturer cheats the EPA test? The absolute PR nightmare?
Hyundai + Ford did just that, and got away with it for quite some time :huh:
Just cause its a bad idea, doesn't mean manufacturers won't try it. Point is though cheating EPA tests is easy and manufacturers have done it.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 18, 2013, 06:29:24 PM
Hyundai + Ford did just that, and got away with it for quite some time :huh:
Just cause its a bad idea, doesn't mean manufacturers won't try it. Point is though cheating EPA tests is easy and manufacturers have done it.
And your proof that Ford did is what? Now that my parents are no longer remote starting the car to warm it up, they are regularly meeting or exceeding epa estimates.
Quote from: 93JC on June 17, 2013, 11:17:53 PM
I forgot they still made the Avalon.
The new model is selling pretty well. They actually made it look good for once.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on June 18, 2013, 08:22:47 PM
The new model is selling pretty well.
Wouldn't know, they don't sell 'em here! :lol:
This discussion sounded a little familiar so I did a search through my old posts. It turns out I had this very same discussion ("They still make the Avalon? wat.") about a year ago. :lol:
And it turns out Hyundai still makes the Azera! Who knew?! :lol:
Quote from: r0tor on June 18, 2013, 12:47:52 PM
You mean just like most automakers choosing a top gear ratio for the test?
Gotcha ;). Minimum RPM doesn't automatically equate to maximum MPG. If the test procedure is known ahead of time, what with electronic throttle, ECU and electronic transmission, a whole lot can be done to maximize MPG for said procedure - shift points, TC lockup, A/F mixture, timing, throttle position (esp. as it concerns pumping losses), etc. Turbo cars are even more so - now add boost control (and no coincident that turbo cars are falling well short in real-world driving - esp. Ecoboost V6 and Hyundai 2.0T).
Is this lying or cheating? Meh...
As to the Avalon, it sells well for the class and this new generation is getting great if not rave reviews.
Quote from: r0tor on June 18, 2013, 06:07:17 PM
:hammerhead:
Do you realize the penalties involved if a manufacturer cheats the EPA test? The absolute PR nightmare?
They ain't explicitly cheating or lying - they're gaming, as all government regulation exists for, by tailoring performance to the known test procedure.
Quote from: GoCougs on June 18, 2013, 11:53:47 PM
Gotcha ;). Minimum RPM doesn't automatically equate to maximum MPG.
I dont remember typing this... Every engine has a spot on its operating curve to achieve the best brake specific fuel consumption. American automakers tend to tie this to speeds for the EPA test by choosing a specific top gear.
Quote from: r0tor on June 18, 2013, 06:49:48 PM
And your proof that Ford did is what? Now that my parents are no longer remote starting the car to warm it up, they are regularly meeting or exceeding epa estimates.
Do they have a Fusion/C-Maxx hybrid?
2013 fusion hybrid
Quote from: r0tor on June 19, 2013, 02:58:28 PM
2013 fusion hybrid
I never said it was impossible... but they're clearly the exception to the rule
http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/fusion/2013/hybrid%20l4 (http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/fusion/2013/hybrid%20l4)
140 people are averaging 41 MPG in their Fusion Hybrids... some getting as much as 49... some getting as little as 33... but on average getting nowhere near 47
Most other cars match their EPA ratings on average... Ford lied
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 19, 2013, 03:47:06 PM
I never said it was impossible... but they're clearly the exception to the rule
http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/fusion/2013/hybrid%20l4 (http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/fusion/2013/hybrid%20l4)
140 people are averaging 41 MPG in their Fusion Hybrids... some getting as much as 49... some getting as little as 33... but on average getting nowhere near 47
Most other cars match their EPA ratings on average... Ford lied
Not to mention that CR couldn't meet the EPA ratings.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 19, 2013, 03:47:06 PM
I never said it was impossible... but they're clearly the exception to the rule
http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/fusion/2013/hybrid%20l4 (http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/fusion/2013/hybrid%20l4)
140 people are averaging 41 MPG in their Fusion Hybrids... some getting as much as 49... some getting as little as 33... but on average getting nowhere near 47
Most other cars match their EPA ratings on average... Ford lied
Yippee... fuelly! Another waste of internet resources to try and make people think they are important in the world. Why bother with testing standards when you have social media!!!
BTW, I beat the fuelly averages in my RX8 and Jeep by 2-3mpg routinely and I dont even drive that nicely
Quote from: r0tor on June 19, 2013, 04:46:10 PM
Yippee... fuelly! Another waste of internet resources to try and make people think they are important in the world. Why bother with testing standards when you have social media!!!
BTW, I beat the fuelly averages in my RX8 and Jeep by 2-3mpg routinely and I dont even drive that nicely
.....Ford has created MPG numbers that have been nearly impossible to achieve. Hyundai had believable numbers, and they were caught cheating.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 19, 2013, 03:47:06 PM
I never said it was impossible... but they're clearly the exception to the rule
http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/fusion/2013/hybrid%20l4 (http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/fusion/2013/hybrid%20l4)
140 people are averaging 41 MPG in their Fusion Hybrids... some getting as much as 49... some getting as little as 33... but on average getting nowhere near 47
Most other cars match their EPA ratings on average... Ford lied
Quote from: 2o6 on June 19, 2013, 04:55:50 PM
.....Ford has created MPG numbers that have been nearly impossible to achieve. Hyundai had believable numbers, and they were caught cheating.
Have either of you actually read the EPA test procedure for how they go about measuring fuel economy?
And my parents fuel mileage sucked up until a few months ago because they were using the remote start to warm the car up in the morning. They also never had a hybrid before and werent use to driving it to get the best mileage.
Until you have results from a standardized test, all the internet hype in the world is just pissing in the wind.
Quote from: r0tor on June 19, 2013, 04:46:10 PM
Yippee... fuelly! Another waste of internet resources to try and make people think they are important in the world.
Kind of like posting on a message board?
Quote from: r0tor on June 19, 2013, 04:46:10 PMWhy bother with testing standards when you have social media!!!
Because real world drivers are more representative of real world results?
Quote from: r0tor on June 19, 2013, 04:46:10 PMBTW, I beat the fuelly averages in my RX8 and Jeep by 2-3mpg routinely and I dont even drive that nicely
Your purple heart is in the mail. Most people don't though, as evidenced by Fuelly. And you yourself are an example that EPA estimates aren't necessarily true for everybody.
Quote from: MX793 on June 19, 2013, 04:58:25 PM
Have either of you actually read the EPA test procedure for how they go about measuring fuel economy?
EPA doesn't even conduct most of the EPA tests... if they did, Hyundai & Ford wouldn't have been able to lie, and the lawsuit for Hyundai's universally missed mileage would have been filed against the EPA, not Hyundai :huh:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 19, 2013, 05:20:47 PM
EPA doesn't even conduct most of the EPA tests... if they did, Hyundai & Ford wouldn't have been able to lie, and the lawsuit for Hyundai's universally missed mileage would have been filed against the EPA, not Hyundai :huh:
Have you read the procedure or not?
Or let me put it another way. Do all of those consumers reporting lower mileages drive in the exact same manner as the vehicle is "driven" (vehicles aren't actually driven, they are on a dyno for the test) during the test? Do they accelerate at the same rate? Does their commute have the same level of "stop and go" as the test's city cycle? Do they travel at the same speeds on the highway? Do they run their AC more or less? Do they use the same grade of fuel (EPA testing is done with pure gasoline, not E10 which is practically all you can buy these days)? And so on and so forth...
Hybrids are far more sensitive to driving style and driving conditions than regular IC powered cars. As such, there will be far more variability in the amount of "YMMV" than with a traditional vehicle.
Does any of this mean that Ford didn't fudge the numbers or cheat the test? No. But I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that Ford lied or cheated based on a bunch of anecdotal fuel mileage numbers posted on the web that aren't accompanied by any data on driving style or conditions. Especially when some people are able to meet or beat the published fuel economy numbers.
I will add that I find it strange that the Energi plug-in hybrid version of the Fusion has a lower EPA rating (by several MPG) than the regular Hybrid model. I would have expected them to be more or less the same, with the plug-in perhaps being slightly worse on account of more weight.
Again the fact that most of the cars on Fuelly (including other hybrids) come within 1-2 MPG of combined mileage on average means the EPA guidelines are applicable in the real world. The real world isn't an EPA test loop... the EPA test loop is supposed to approximate the real world.
Man, I really need to get back to keeping my records on Fuelly. I enjoyed that.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 20, 2013, 07:40:51 AM
Again the fact that most of the cars on Fuelly (including other hybrids) come within 1-2 MPG of combined mileage on average means the EPA guidelines are applicable in the real world. The real world isn't an EPA test loop... the EPA test loop is supposed to approximate the real world.
Actually, there's an equation that adjusts the results from the EPA test to generate the "real world" numbers published on the window stickers. The raw numbers aren't anywhere close to what one could expect to achieve. The fact is that the EPA test doesn't match real world operating conditions. In the real world, temperatures vary, there are hills, there is wind... That doesn't even take into account the human factor. The EPA uses specific acceleration rates and throttle inputs. They use specific shift points for cars with manual gearboxes. Do you know how GM decided at what RPM the skip-shift feature on the Corvette and Camaro turns off? It's set a bit higher than the EPA-mandated shift RPM to allow them to game the test by skipping gears (not allowed by EPA testing unless the vehicle has features to lock out gears).
Nice package.
Quote from: Raza on June 20, 2013, 09:13:09 AM
Man, I really need to get back to keeping my records on Fuelly. I enjoyed that.
Use the phone app. Usually I update my MPG at the gas station every time I fill up.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 18, 2013, 04:02:42 PM
Yea you can. The EPA isn't conducting tests on every car, just a sample of models. They don't have the funding to do comprehensive testing. Most ratings are conducted by the manufacturers themselves in accordance w/the EPA's procedures and handed in in good faith. It's very easy to "game", at least on its way to the EPA. They could (and probably did) run the tests on cars w/no interiors or illegally modified engines or something. Or they just lied.
Its not like manufacturers are sending every car to the EPA to get tested. Though that is probably the most rational way to do it (and make the manufacturers pay).
The EPA doesn't even conduct the tests: the manufacturers do, under strict EPA guidelines; on a rolling dyno set to simulate the car's actual curb weight, and any "cheating" would be severely dealt with. Its not done on "good faith": the data is sent to the EPA for auditing.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on June 22, 2013, 01:32:06 AM
The EPA doesn't even conduct the tests: the manufacturers do, under strict EPA guidelines; on a rolling dyno set to simulate the car's actual curb weight, and any "cheating" would be severely dealt with. Its not done on "good faith": the data is sent to the EPA for auditing.
How can the EPA scan for ringers? I'm not saying the EPA doesn't check or see the details of the results, just that without actually testing the cars themselves there's no way for them to know whether the cars being tested = the cars that will be sold to consumers, no matter how much they analyze the data.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 22, 2013, 07:32:54 AM
How can the EPA scan for ringers? I'm not saying the EPA doesn't check or see the details of the results, just that without actually testing the cars themselves there's no way for them to know whether the cars being tested = the cars that will be sold to consumers, no matter how much they analyze the data.
You do understand how mass production works, right? Lots and lots of cars, made exactly the same way?
Since it's a Toyota, the EPA adds 20 mpg extra for a combined total of 60+ mpg! :winkguy:
Quote from: Soup DeVille on June 22, 2013, 08:06:56 AM
You do understand how mass production works, right? Lots and lots of cars, made exactly the same way?
Not sure what mass production has to do with Hyundai making special ringers for EPA tests :huh:
The point is Ford & Hyundai somehow gamed the EPA tests. I was just speculating how they might have done it. But they did.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 23, 2013, 12:52:53 PM
Not sure what mass production has to do with Hyundai making special ringers for EPA tests :huh:
The point is Ford & Hyundai somehow gamed the EPA tests. I was just speculating how they might have done it. But they did.
They take random samples off the line, that's why.
The tests are always gamed, by programming the ECM and transmission to maximize the efficiency along the EPA trace, which is never an exact fit for real world driving; and there are serious flaws with the standards for hybrid cars in the tests themselves.
But, that's completely different from making one off ringers.
Lets not forget about GMs skip shift, which is bullshit.
Quote from: 280Z Turbo on June 23, 2013, 05:46:14 PM
Lets not forget about GMs skip shift, which is bullshit.
Also why their seven speeds automatics shift so weirdly.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on June 23, 2013, 12:57:07 PM
They take random samples off the line, that's why.
The tests are always gamed, by programming the ECM and transmission to maximize the efficiency along the EPA trace, which is never an exact fit for real world driving; and there are serious flaws with the standards for hybrid cars in the tests themselves.
But, that's completely different from making one off ringers.
Turbo cars also add an extra measure of gamability what with boost (Ecoboost V6 and Hyundai 2.0T get way under EPA in real-world driving).
Quote from: Soup DeVille on June 23, 2013, 12:57:07 PM
They take random samples off the line, that's why.
The tests are always gamed, by programming the ECM and transmission to maximize the efficiency along the EPA trace, which is never an exact fit for real world driving; and there are serious flaws with the standards for hybrid cars in the tests themselves.
But, that's completely different from making one off ringers.
I agree that there are issues, but at the end of the day on average most cars are hitting their EPA estimates and Ford + Hyundai weren't. How come there is only a disparity for those two brands?
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 23, 2013, 09:11:59 PM
I agree that there are issues, but at the end of the day on average most cars are hitting their EPA estimates and Ford + Hyundai weren't. How come there is only a disparity for those two brands?
A trillion engineering decisions came together to give them vehicles that were better able to game the system?
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on June 23, 2013, 09:11:59 PM
I agree that there are issues, but at the end of the day on average most cars are hitting their EPA estimates and Ford + Hyundai weren't. How come there is only a disparity for those two brands?
Most cars get below their ratings, some more than others. Ford's ecoboost engines consistently do worse though.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on June 23, 2013, 06:27:03 PM
Also why their seven speeds automatics shift so weirdly.
The 6AT in any GM application runs to 6th as fast as possible and stays there.
Maybe engineering isn't listening enough to what their clientele wants and how they drive. Most GM vehicles achieve their EPA ratings, if not better, and they are usually fat fucks. The Cruze 1.4T isn't the greatest motor out there on paper (at least in comparison to the more high-tech Ford Ecoboost units), but in the real world it delivers.
Quote from: 2o6 on June 23, 2013, 10:06:23 PM
The 6AT in any GM application runs to 6th as fast as possible and stays there.
Theres' more going on than that though sometimes they hesitate, sometimes they don't. There's something inconsistent in the entire shifting sequence that bugs me.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on June 23, 2013, 10:08:55 PM
Theres' more going on than that though sometimes they hesitate, sometimes they don't. There's something inconsistent in the entire shifting sequence that bugs me.
The Cruze is the worst. It holds neutral and shifts between gears pretty slowly. Or like you said, sometimes it's ultra quick. Not as bad in the Sonic, and the 6AT in the Malibu and LAMBDA crossovers does OK.
Parents Fusion just did 470 highway miles with a smidge over 10 gallons of gas visiting me in the outer banks. Came out to 46.2 mpg highway. Most of the driving was 70-75 mph.
Quote from: r0tor on June 26, 2013, 07:18:27 PM
Parents Fusion just did 470 highway miles with a smidge over 10 gallons of gas visiting me in the outer banks. Came out to 46.2 mpg highway. Most of the driving was 70-75 mph.
Lol let it go dude.
Yea, I care enough to lie. Do I need to go down to the beach and write "go fuck yourself" in the sand?
Quote from: r0tor on June 26, 2013, 07:22:48 PM
Yea, I care enough to lie. Do I need to go down to the beach and write "go fuck yourself" in the sand?
Did I say you were lying? People beat EPA estimates all the time, that doesn't mean Ford didn't goof the testing
Quote from: GoCougs on June 23, 2013, 08:26:27 PM
Turbo cars also add an extra measure of gamability what with boost (Ecoboost V6 and Hyundai 2.0T get way under EPA in real-world driving).
My dad's Sonata's average MPG is 28 or so. Not bad for his commute. Highway regularly turns 33-34, and I've done as high as 37.1 on a entire tank. Not bad.