Reminds of the cycling world. Boundaries are pushed with doping and in order to stay competitive, after a while everyone is doping until the whole thing collapses.
The same thing goes for bodybuilding, anyone has another example?
Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
61–70 of 336 posts
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#62Didn't I read somewhere or maybe it was John Oliver on Last Week Tonight that corporations in the USA report their own MPG to the government on an "honor system" because congress won't fund proper testing by the government.
So much for government protecting the people from corporations and their sole quest for profit.
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason air pollution is so much worse in European cities than American ones is largely due to diesel passenger vehicles.
See for example Paris's recent (yesterday?) "no car day" in the center. The city's usual blanket of smog is gone. France of course having the highest %age of diesel cars in its passenger fleet of any country.
Some air pollution data here:
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/health-sapping.htm...
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#64That's a lot of bad news in a row for fuel based vehicles.
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#65I think we all should agree that this is the same for every car manufacturer (except electric). Sure, european manufacturers are the target now, but i expect same results from all other manufacturers (including asian and american). Lab results never represent real street results. How could they? People drive differently and the outcome is based on many aspects that you can't reproduce in lab conditions.
> except electric
Why? You have just been shown corporate cheat on tests. Why you would ever assume this has something to do with fuel type? I expect Tesla cheat as much as MB or BMW in their "range" test. And if you believe otherwise you are just someone who doesn't learn from his experience.
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are obfuscating the issue here. The issue isn't that we can't "represent real street results", the issue is that manufacturers took deliberate steps to alter car behaviour with the intention of obtaining better test results than would be present outside the tests.
And that's a surprise to whom? It's the same with smartphone and notebook batteries. Tell me, when was the last time, you actually got 9 hours of battery live (in case of a MBP)? Don't get me wrong, i see it the same way as you are, but this is an issue that you can find everywhere not just in car manufacturing. For example, a lot of power supply companies try all kinds of tricks to game the efficiency test systems.
In fairness, Apple typically understates battery life in marketing materials. Most new-model reviews show that clearly.
And, if you got a bad battery that doesn't live up, they'll replace it at no charge.
Battery life declines with age, however.
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the third paragraph of your article: >Mercedes cars have the biggest average gap between test and real-world performance, with real-world fuel consumption exceeding test results by nearly half.
Yes, your facts are valid too, but that's a different comparison than the one I am citing. Read my comment word-for-word and you will see the difference.
GM claimed less improvement(aka cheated less), so your comment is wrong.
Edit: Apparently I am wrong.
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or maybe we abolish nonsensical, contrary requirements? Whoever actaully believed the fuel consumption figures is a fool. You cant have a 1,5t of a car and expect it to use only 5l/100km. That's a good rate for a goddamn motorbike (450ccm,one piston, dont exceed 90 km/h and you might reach 4,5l/100km) Its one fifth of the mass...
Well sorry for being a fool then. It's impossible to investigate everything about every part of our lives, and personally I feel a bit cheated by these revelations. I think most people are aware there could be cheating, but not on the scale being claimed. I don't think it's unreasonable to have placed a bit of trust in the number.
that's no excuse, its basically ignorance. not personal critique, but still lots of people follow blindly things they don't understand.
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#69I think we all should agree that this is the same for every car manufacturer (except electric). Sure, european manufacturers are the target now, but i expect same results from all other manufacturers (including asian and american). Lab results never represent real street results. How could they? People drive differently and the outcome is based on many aspects that you can't reproduce in lab conditions.
> except electric Why? You have just been shown corporate cheat on tests. Why you would ever assume this has something to do with fuel type? I expect Tesla cheat as much as MB or BMW in their "range" test. And if you believe otherwise you are just someone who doesn't learn from his experience.
Tesla have, on a couple of occasions, experienced the opposite: a journalist does a range test and falsifies the result downwards by unrealistic driving conditions. On one occasion they used the car's telemetry to disprove the review.
Top Gear got complaints for doing the same thing to (I think) a Leaf.
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#70"On average, two-thirds of the claimed gains in CO2 emissions and fuel consumption since 2008 have been delivered through manipulating tests" How deep does this rabbit hole go :( Here in Ireland the motortax for cars newer than 2008 is based on CO2 emissions, if motorists find their tax rising due to cheating by car manufacturers thats an unexpected and direct cost to their wallets.
Or maybe we abolish nonsensical, contrary requirements? Whoever actaully believed the fuel consumption figures is a fool. You cant have a 1,5t of a car and expect it to use only 5l/100km. That's a good rate for a goddamn motorbike (450ccm,one piston, dont exceed 90 km/h and you might reach 4,5l/100km) Its one fifth of the mass...
Comparing to known fuel effiencies of existing vehicles competely misses the point, which is to stimulate new technology development. For example, aluminum and plastic car body pieces, which reduce weight.
If you want to talk about "believable," start from basic physics and calculate the best possible fuel efficiency that a car could be expected to deliver. Even taking into account available materials, fuels, and engines, the answer is way better than what regulations currently require.
A lot of the expected gains will come from taking known "custom" solutions and scaling them up to mass market--like greater use of aluminum, and ultimately, composites.