http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060111/...e/fuel_economy

It's about time! A system set up 20 years ago was bound to change sooner or later.

 

I wonder how we'll be affected

 

Probobly wont affect us much...I think the bigger engines will see the effect more

 

I hope we're effected. I can drive on the highway, and as long as I stay between 60-70 mph without being lead footed in my accelleration, I can get about 32mpg.

Mix in some agressive driving (which, sometimes is the only way you can drive if you want to get some power out of it's little lump), some cruising at 80-90mph with the flow of traffic, and the MPG number can drop to 26mpg.

Same if I drive it briskly around town - 26-27mpg.

I think they should compromise a little - mix in some agressive driving. Also - STOP measuring MPG by how much emissions a vehicle puts out. Why not measure it like everyone else, divide the # of gallons used by miles traveled!

 

amen to that last statement, you know why they dont do that??? CAUSE IT MAKES SENSE! and people loving doing things that dont!

 

The xA Automatic has 31/38 mpg on the sticker. I get anywhere from 29 - 34 mpg driving around South Florida. The mileage would be better if it wern't for the Earth Destroyers and soccer moms on power trips that I encounter on the highway.

I also usually travel with passengers. The mileage tests account for just one person (the driver) inside the vehicle. It is said that the average vehicle loses 1 mpg for every 100 pounds of weight added to the car. I think the tests should take a step further and account for at least one passenger or some cargo weight.

 

its not 1 mpg its 10% from what ive heard, and its not 20 years ago it is 30

 

p2filz...this is straight from the article...

The EPA hasn't revised its fuel economy ratings in 20 years. The agency also plans to redesign the stickers so they are more consumer-friendly.

"It's obvious that the driving world has changed a lot since 1985," said Johnson, who noted that 20 years ago he drove a full-size Pontiac Catalina coupe. "My car really would not match up to today's vehicles."

^^^Thats straight from the article. I didn't write it. 1985-2005= 20 years.

As far as it 'affecting' us as some of you have put it...this will do NOTHING for us. It is just stating that they are going to measure it differently. Just like the horsepower ratings from a year ago to now. It's the same HP, just measured different. My '04 Matrix XRS had 173HP but the '03 had 180HP. It was the same motor, just a more accurate way to measure it.

Same goes for this. MY mileage isn't going to improve...but when I go to buy an identicle car with the new EPA numbers, the new car will state a drop in mileage compared to the same car sold a year earlier. Comprende?

It will not affect us at all...until we go to buy a new car that is...then you will see what I mean.

 

I disagree when you say "this will do NOTHING for us"... It WILL do something for us. The whole intent of the article is to let us know that the EPA is changing their measurement methods to be more accurate. This will translate in to the consumer having a better idea of the actual mileage a car can be expected to obtain. Hey it's your and my tax dollars paying for this stuff. Let's hope there is some benefit to the common good in here somewhere.

 

No, what I meant was it will do nothing for me with the current vehicle I am driving RIGHT NOW...meaning I am not going to miraculously get better mileage. I will, however, have a better idea of what kind of mileage I will get next time I go to a dealership.
Sorry Rickisan, for the mis-interpretation.

 

Why are you bringing this up? Where in this thread has that been an issue? Nobody has said this so far.

 

I re-read your post and noticed I had previously overlooked the last line "until we go to buy a new car"... all clear now. My oversight.

It was heartening to see the quote from Dan Becker, director of the Sierra Club's global warming program... "the bottom line here is that this will have zero effect on oil savings or environmental impact." Also, a poster in another thread obliquely addressed the wastefulness of the "Huge SUV Crowd" so along those lines... I want a bumper sticker saying "By driving this car I'm saving oil resources and the environment for my children and yours"

 

sure the article says 20 years but the actual time in which they decided their measurments for mpg was back in '73, 33 years ago... much when fuel injecion was getting big in the market.. its just been following that up until '85 when carbs were gone out of style

 

There will be an immediate effect experienced by some if the Gas Guzzler Tax laws or the CAFE standards (if they still exist) aren't altered to compensate for the new fuel economy standards. There's probably other things tied to the EPA Mileage Estimates, too.

 

Yeah, just in time for them to lower speed limits back down to what they were 20 years ago...

 

When the system was first created, it was not designed for vehicles that put out zero emissions for part of the driving cycle. Manufacturers have learned to "game the system" to produce high EPA ratings even when real-world mileage is much lower.

The problem with changing systems is figuring out how to compare vehicles tested under the two systems. This is not a trivial conversion, particularly for the "gamed" vehicles like the Prius.

Something very similar occurred during the "horsepower wars" of the '60s. Engines were measured at the crankshaft, with no accessories (water pump, alternator, etc). The HP figures were greatly inflated that way. A standard was agreed on and HP ratings immediately dropped by 25% or more, but the engines made exactly the same power.

George

 

The 60s, leaded gas and cheap prices are history. The EPA is just a lot of red tape. The Prius EPA numbers say 60mpg but Consumer Reports says 44mpg, so that's a lot of hot air. I agree with the former, drive off a full tank of gas with 500 lbs of load (driver, passenger and a couple of heavy suitcases) and divide the mileage by the number of gallons. Then we will see the Scion competition squirming and biting their nails.

 

LOL ^^^ I read an article on 4 guys in PA that got over 100 MPG in a prius. It took over 48 hours to run it dry and get this....When the fuel light came on, they continued todrive 9 HOURS (over 200 miles) before it finally ran out! they got over 1200 miles out of a tank of fuel!

 

Were they going downhill the whole way?

 

Actually they said they use a 'coast uphill/gas downhill' ?!?! method. I have no clue. I'll see if I can cut and paste the link here. BTW, they never got over 45 and never under 35 or something...LOL