Which auto makers if any has the closest emissions to their lab results? Honda? Subaru?
Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
101–110 of 336 posts
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
The source of the data is actually www.spritmonitor.de, which is a self-reporting mileage tracking site (like www.fuelly.com). With ~501k vehicles tracked and 8.885B kilometers tracked, the site represents ~17k kilometers per car of user-reported mileage information. Is this the best, or a reliable source, of information to start the reckoning/witch hunt to come? I'm not sure.
I thought the same. In my anecdotal experience, drivers tend to get much lower than the manufacturer mileage because they optimize for things other than fuel economy (e.g., speed). My dad taught me lots of tips on conserving fuel and thankfully I've exceeded the sticker numbers on every car I've owned.
Care to share some of those tips?
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
The source of the data is actually www.spritmonitor.de, which is a self-reporting mileage tracking site (like www.fuelly.com). With ~501k vehicles tracked and 8.885B kilometers tracked, the site represents ~17k kilometers per car of user-reported mileage information. Is this the best, or a reliable source, of information to start the reckoning/witch hunt to come? I'm not sure.
I thought the same. In my anecdotal experience, drivers tend to get much lower than the manufacturer mileage because they optimize for things other than fuel economy (e.g., speed). My dad taught me lots of tips on conserving fuel and thankfully I've exceeded the sticker numbers on every car I've owned.
Just stay off the brakes as much as possible. No big secret really.
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#104The thing is that the cheats (throwing out unnecessary weight, taping door gaps etc, using super hard notrogen inflated tyres, etc.) would add a constant amount to the fuel consumption, say .2 liter per 10km. If you keep pushing your engine consumption downwards to the ridiculous levels we see now ( Just goes to show that the cars should be designed without large door gaps or outside mirrors (cameras instead) and so…
The lack of good data is really frustrating. The EPA adjusted the formula for mileage a few years ago which made things slightly better but I never come close to hitting the results in my car.
Observed economy is related to personal circumstances, and in my case living at 700 elevation and traveling down close to 0 on a daily basis hurts my scores (along with tire lifetimes, etc). Another thing that bothers me is that performance cars are rated by the same standards, when the people who buy them undoubtedly drive differently than the people buying Toyota Yarises.
Anecdotal reporting online is a joke. You will find endless car forums with people boasting about how they consistently get 25mpg in their V8 sedan. Gimme a break.
What I'd love to see is some service/app that was able to gather real world data from owners of the same type of car in the same area as me along with general stats about their driving style. This would have to be automated to be accurate.
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
In car braking systems the pedal movement from depressed to pressed corresponds to a very small ( With the brake cylinder fully compressed (as they did for the test), it requires several full pumps of the pedal to bring the pad into contact with the disk. This increases braking distance, which is generally considered a bad thing.
The travel from a single pedal press is small, but its probably a solvable problem. It just needs a different design.
It's an interesting one certainly, it sort of comes down to mechanics at the end of the day. In the event of a catastrophic, complete electrical/engine failure, the driver needs to be able to apply enough braking force to stop the car in a sensible distance using their leg muscles. This places an limit on the travel distance of the pads for a full press of the pedal.
Indeed, most cars use a servo that uses vacuum 'pressure' harvested from the engine to assist with braking and reduce the amount of effort the driver needs to expend. However, you can still brake with a non-functioning servo, all be it with a much reduced braking performance.
It's a similar reason why even very modern cars (bar a few, the Infiniti Q50 being one) still use direct mechanical linkages (heavily assisted in many cases) for steering, despite the steering rack, column and rods taking up room and complicating engine bay arrangements. If it all goes really wrong, you need to be able to steer and stop the car.
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#106It's called "real world driving". Look, this is no different from Tesla claiming a 280 miles range that nobody can achieve. Not saying it is right. What I am saying is: We need better tests.
Hard to resist all that power under foot in Tesla's!
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#107Ok let's be real here, if we put the "pollution" taxes onto fuel and not on the design of the car, this problem, in effect, goes away.
There is still the issue that high efficiency, usually means running the engine at high temperatures which generates far more NOx gases.
We should be taxing the amount of fuel used.
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#108this is bullshit. a planed smear campaign against german car manufactures. can we see some charts for american cars please!
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#109could we expect a major recall? 10+ million cars would be disastrous.
Re: Study: Some car models consuming around 50% more fuel than official results
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
"3. Deducting 4% from measured results Bizarrely the NEDC procedure allows carmakers to actually declare (use) a value 4% lower than the one measured. The provision is designed to minimize the testing burden but is being abused by carmakers to declare lower test results systematically." I wonder if there is a person that didn't expect this to happen.
Does it matter however when it is systematic? This is going to sound backwards, but consider this: People buy cars based in part on MpG, however MpG is within itself an abstract thing (i.e. you don't actually get X miles per gallon, never did, never will too many other factors to include). So if everyone removes 4% from an abstract number, the entire market has shifted down, but the relative difference between two mo…
It does because emission regulations are not there for comparison purposes alone. We need to reduce emissions to a certain level, and the environment won't be fooled. This is similar to the way unemployment is now calculated based on active job seekers rather than people who are, well, unemployed.