Hybrid Cars to Get New Mileage Ratings

Skidge writes "Wired is running a piece showing the drastically reduced mileage ratings for hybrids after the upcoming changes in gas mileage calculations by the EPA. While the cars themselves aren't changing, plugging these new numbers in to the equation makes a hybrid much less cost effective: "The two top-selling hybrid vehicles, the Prius and Honda's Civic Hybrid, will lose 12 and 11 miles per gallon respectively from their city driving estimates." The new values come from more realistic testing; the old, over-inflated ratings were higher in part because the cars idled a lot, allowing the hybrids to completely turn off their engines. The new ratings should be more in line with what hybrid drivers are actually seeing."

Sampling?

[powerpants]

It's important to have accurate mileage ratings on cars, and it's hard to understand how the EPA could be so bad at it. Why do they try to estimate instead of just sampling?

Here's a simple approach: When a car comes in for an oil change, read the mileage rating stored inthe on-board computer and upload it to an EPA database. Problem solved.

Re:Sampling?

[kannibal_klown]

Catch-22. They like to have a "real" number before the car starts selling, but via your method they'd need to sell enough to get an accurate sample.

Re:

[michrech]

Catch-22. They like to have a "real" number before the car starts selling, but via your method they'd need to sell enough to get an accurate sample.

Many cars are driven around in "normal situations" by test drivers. Many car magazine photographers do their best to try to get snaps of these cars.. They could use the data from these cars to do their estimates. For cars that aren't test driven, they could start.

My car (an '07 Caliber) was rated at "28 to 32 MPG". I consistently get 26 or less. :(

Re:Sampling?

[Fozzyuw]

My car (an '07 Caliber) was rated at "28 to 32 MPG". I consistently get 26 or less. :(

Manual or Stick? Driving habits effect the ratings. Do you drive 65mph on a 65mph freeway or do you drive 75mph-80mph? Do you accelerate fast? Do you find yourself braking often? Think about it the next time you approach a stop-sign. Does your foot move from the accelerator directly to the brake when you want to stop? Or are you 'coasting' and letting your momentum slow you down before you start to brake? Do you speed quickly the the next red light just to stop, or do you slowly coast to it, even if all the other cars are 'rushing' to the red? Do you drive with your windows down or the air-conditioner on a lot (it creates more drag or needs more energy to use)?

I bought a 2006 Pontiac Vibe (new) and just recently a 2007 Toyota Corolla (both awesome cars, though, I do wish the Vibe had a little more 'pep'). The Vibe was rated at 28-36 MPG if I remember right. I'm currently getting ~35MPG (mostly) highway (though it was closer to 31 MPG in the winter). The Corolla (while only having it for about a month now) is getting about 38 MPG (mostly) highway.

Both of these are manual "stick" transitions. The fiancee drives the Corolla, I drive the Vibe. While I don't usually drive aggressively, I don't pussy-foot the cars when accelerating to highway speeds (winding out the RPMs pretty high). However, I do kick in the cruise control at speed limit speeds, occasionally 5-over. What I do try to do, and what I'm getting better at recognizing, is that I try not to 'waist' energy by having the car do more than it needs to do, particularly in braking. Lets put it this way, the more you use your brakes, the more energy you're waisting. (which is the theory behind Hybrids, to turn the brake heat/energy back into car energy). Better braking habits will not only help save some gas but also extend the life of your breaks.

If your car is significantly getting much lower MPG than the rated amount, I would 1st) get it checked out by the dealership. 2nd) look at your own driving habits. If you're getting 26 MPG and you do pretty much all city driving, then I would say you're right on schedule (You can usually take off 1-2 MPG from the rating for 'real' estimates). If you want to raise your MPG, take a longer route in the city that makes you stop much less frequently. Stop/Go is the hardest on an engine and your millage efficiency.

Cheers,
Fozzy

A/C versus open windows

[name_already_taken]

Do you drive with your windows down or the air-conditioner on a lot (it creates more drag or needs more energy to use)?

I've read that modern car air conditioning uses less energy than the additional aerodynamic drag created by driving with the windows open - although if the car is moving at low speed or sitting still then the economical choice is the windows, although they don't work as well to cool the interior of a car stopped or moving at low speed, unless it there is a good wind.

Air conditioning systems

Re:

[SoCalChris]

I would argue that windows have become far less efficient at cooling car interiors than in the past.

Have you ever driven an older car that has wing windows? Or how about one that has vents that you can open, that let fresh air blow right on your lap/torso area.

My first car was a 57 Ford sedan that had both of those, and growing up in a desert area of Southern California, it did a good enough job of keeping me cool that I never wished for a car with air conditioning.

Modern cars are very noisy with t

Yup

[Gorimek]

Also, due to global warming, the outside air just doesn't cool as well these days.

Re:Sampling?

[Smidge204]

This is a rather important point many people don't understand. Driving the speed limit and driving defensively save gas.

Some anecdotal evidence of mine... I drive a '93 Dodge van with over 220K miles on it. It has an onboard computer that tells me both instantaneous and average MPG, so I decided to experiment.

Driving "normally" I got 11.3 MPG average over two weeks. Then I started using cruise control, whenever possible, set at the speed limit. Coasting whenever possible (I'm never in a hurry to get up to a red light anyway), not accelerating as hard and trying to avoid accelerating up hills. My next two-week average was 14.7 MPG.

Since my average commute is a little over 5 miles, I'm nearly 2 gallons of gas per week less than before... or about $7/week at current prices. That's worth it IMHO.
=Smidge=

Re:

[drinkypoo]

This is a rather important point many people don't understand. Driving the speed limit and driving defensively save gas.

What you apparently don't understand is that this varies from vehicle to vehicle.

I have owned two vehicles now which get their best mileage around 80 mph. 1989 Nissan 240SX, which is one of the most aerodynamic vehicles on the planet (0.26cD) and a 1981 Mercedes 300SD Turbo Diesel.

Aerodynamics, gearing, and torque curve combine to define the most efficient point. For some vehicles, espe

Re:

[drinkypoo]

If the AC, radio, onboard navigation, lighting etc are using more energy than the than actual movement of the car, your mileage will be lower.

The AC is by far the biggest power-using accessory in the vehicle, with the possible exception of power steering which uses a very high-pressure hydraulic system (Except in some new cars which use electric power assist.) At higher RPMs the AC system can use as much as five horsepower - about 3.8kW or 316W. In other words there's no point in even mentioning anything b

Re:

[Rei]

The big problem with public transport, in my opinion, is delays. Here in Iowa City (which has one of the best bus systems in the area) most busses show up every half hour during the daytime (some busy routes are 15-20 minutes at peak times only), and every hour in the evening. So, in short, we're to compare getting in a car and driving across town in 5-10 minutes or waiting half an hour or so for the bus, then riding it across town which, due to its stops, will take ~20 minutes.

The same goes for people wh

Re:

[aug24]

Simple: because that would skew the sample towards mileage of people who either pay to have their oil changed or have it changed more regularly.

Estimation is intended to produce a balanced result. Heavy on the 'intended', of course ;-)

J.

Re:

[div_2n]

While technically a valid approach, this opens the door for red flags from privacy advocates. I'm not as paranoid as the most ardent advocates, but I can see where the slope starts getting slippery.

Remember that the more avenues you open up for the government to have information about you, the more you open up the possibility of them doing things with it that you will not be happy about. History has shown that once you put more power and information in the government's hands, the likelihood of removing it i

Re:

[CrazyTalk]

Well that will tell them the mileage, but it wont tell them how many gallons of gas were used to achieve that mileage - unless you have to input your VIN every time you buy gas to track that as well.

Re:

[guruevi]

My car (Buick) and a lot of other cars that I've seen keep a mileage rating in the dashboard. Currently an avg. of 27,4 mpg. But still, it would be skewed since I drive a lot and I drive fast (80mph+) making it to use more gas than the average person that buys said car.

Re:

[klubar]

The computer-based MPG aren't that accurate because they don't account for evaporative loss. E

It uses the full tank as a baseline, not empty.

[Kadin2048]

Although not perfectly accurate, computing your mileage using the reading from the gas pump and the odometer doesn't rely on running the gas tank "bone dry." All that it relies on, is that you fill the gas tank back up to the same level as you did the previous fillup. Since gas nozzles are basically standardized and tend to click off at the same point, this isn't a terrible assumption. It's probably accurate at least to a few tenths of a gallon, in my experience of doing it in a small car.

Basically you fill the tank until the pump shuts it off, and reset the odo. This is your start point. You drive for a while, generally until you need gas again, and then you refill the gas tank until it again shuts off automatically, and note the amount of fuel added. You look at the odometer, and simply take the mileage there, and divide by the reading on the pump.

As long as you never fill your tank halfway, and you don't top off or otherwise force the gas pump to keep going after it shuts off automatically, and you reset the odo every time you fill up, you can get pretty good mileage estimates this way.

It's a different method than what I assume the car's computer is using (I'd think it's using some sort of reading from the engine's sensors) but it's not an inherently terrible methodology. If you use the same gas pump/nozzle to fill up each time, I'd imagine it could probably be quite accurate. At no time does it require you to run your car out of gas.

Re:

[toleraen]

Since gas nozzles are basically standardized and tend to click off at the same point, this isn't a terrible assumption.

That's not necessarily a good way to do it either. Half the time the pump clicks off after ~8-10 gallons pumped, which I then have to top off the remaining 4-6 gallons. Sometimes is makes it closer to the 13 gallon mark before clicking off. I pretty much use the same gas station every time I fill up too.

It'd probably be more accurate to 'top off' as much as possible. Your tank can o

Re:It uses the full tank as a baseline, not empty.

[drinkypoo]

Since gas nozzles are basically standardized and tend to click off at the same point, this isn't a terrible assumption. It's probably accurate at least to a few tenths of a gallon, in my experience of doing it in a small car.

Yes, but a few tenths of a gallon is a big difference in a small car, where you probably have a small tank.

In order to get any kind of accuracy this way, you must do multiple tests on the same pump, because they are very much NOT standardized from pump to pump let alone station to station, and average the results.

The pressure cutoff is adjusted directly on the nozzle. Most of the time there's an easily-visible screw and you can adjust it with a standard screwdriver. I've done it myself when the nozzle was clicking off too readily.

And moving averages

[wsanders]

Or just run a moving average - add the mileage and gallons consumed up for the last 5 fill-ups and you will iron out any variations.

Useless data: 1999 Honda CR-V, varies from 21 to 25 MPG or so, the moving average is consistently 23.5, except when I go on a long trip that burns more than one tank.

Re:

[rrkap]

It's important to have accurate mileage ratings on cars, and it's hard to understand how the EPA could be so bad at it. Why do they try to estimate instead of just sampling?

Here's a simple approach: When a car comes in for an oil change, read the mileage rating stored inthe on-board computer and upload it to an EPA database. Problem solved.

I think the main reason for a test is so it can be applied to new or modified designs; it's hard to sample the fuel economy of a car that isn't in use yet. Addi

Re:Sampling?

[robpoe]

The EPA doesn't actually test the cars under real situations.

The car manufacturers test their OWN cars, but not in real-world. They put them on a Dynamometer, drive it in varying conditions, and collect the carbon it produced. From that, they calculate how much fuel the car burned and then derive the MPG from that.

Of COURSE a hybrid would SHOW a huge MPG rating by that government standard. A total electric would show ~ (infinity) as it produces NO carbon itself.

Oh, and for anyone who thinks I'm just blowing smoke out of my ass (pun intended)

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml [fueleconomy.gov]

Re:Sampling?

[schon]

Of COURSE a hybrid would SHOW a huge MPG rating by that government standard. A total electric would show ~ (infinity) as it produces NO carbon itself. Sorry, are you implying that the test is flawed for hybrids because they have an electric component?

If so, here's your cluebat: Unless the electric component is bringing in power from outside the system, the test is completely valid, because all the power comes from the gasoline in the tank. Turning the engine into a generator which powers and electric drive-train doesn't change this simple fact.

Re:

[toddestan]

If so, here's your cluebat: Unless the electric component is bringing in power from outside the system, the test is completely valid, because all the power comes from the gasoline in the tank. Turning the engine into a generator which powers and electric drive-train doesn't change this simple fact.

Actually, it's not that simple. If the hybrid goes into the test with a mostly charged battery pack, and at the end of the test the battery pack is depleted, then the hybrid "cheated" by using stored up energy th

Re:

[shmlco]

Ethanol? Diesel?

Or just convert. How many electrons are in a gallon, anyway.... ;)

Re:You must be new here.

[GreyPoopon]

The US automakers have been fighting to keep the current standards for decades so that they can tout the "Great Milage" that their cars have. Now that something has come along that looks even better that the standard (read fossil fuel only) autos look worse, they probably have done some back door lobbying to change over to this new formula.

I'm not sure this is completely true. For normal gas automobiles, I have encountered fuel economy very close to the EPA estimates, so I don't think there was any reason for the US automakers to "fight" the current standards; they seemed to be adequate. Now, the US manufacturers were "late" to market with Hybrid vehicles, and I can think that for the last several years, they would have been fighting hard to CHANGE the standard rather than keep them the same. Perhaps that's what you meant (IE, fighting the last few years and finally getting success) But as we all know from actual performance of Hybrid vehicles, there has been significant reason to change the ratings process. I can tell you from my experience buying cars (and looking at both Toyotas and Hondas) that, at least from the perspective of the dealerships I visited, they have been hoping and praying for change. They were very well aware that Hybrid cars were not achieving the stated EPA ratings. And they were also aware that even though the short term effect was a boost in sales, the long term effect was a dissatisfied customer. Any good dealership is highly interested in repeat customers, and they know they have to balance that with selling the car for the highest price they can. They don't want something like false fuel economy ratings to interfere with the customer relationship. I know that in the case of two dealerships that I visited, when I expressed some interest in a Hybrid vehicle, one of the first things that the sales people told me was that although the fuel economy was significantly better, in most cases it would not be nearly as good as the EPA rating indicated. In fact, one of the sales people told me that he would like to remove the EPA ratings from the car sticker, but that they weren't allowed to do so.

So actually, I think that ever since Hybrid vehicles hit the market, it has been in EVERYBODY'S best interest to adjust the rating standards, but the EPA has been slow to respond with improvements. But don't go blaming the EPA either. Keep in mind that they had to come up with one standard that applies to both conventional and Hybrid vehicles. The basics of that might be simple, but the effort to come up with something that all the manufacturers will agree with was probably a lot more involved.

Re:

[jridley]

E85 cars are mainly a gimmick. The auto manufacturers love it because they get to make a practically free change (some extra computer firmware and maybe a specific gravity detector for the fuel) and they get to count it as a vastly higher mileage car; I think they get to rate it as though it was only burning the 15% of gas that it does (IE 20 MPG / 0.15 = 133 mpg), even though the vast majority of E85 cars that are sold will never see a drop of E85, and even though burning ethanol releases even more greenh

Re:

[homer_ca]

The EPA test is actually pretty accurate if you drive exactly like the test cycle, but the test conditions are nothing like real world driving. The city cycle averages about 21mph with very mild acceleration. The cold start occurs at 75 deg F (cold starts in colder weather burn much more gas). The A/C and heater are not used. The highway test has a similar leisurely pace. It averages 48mph with mild acceleration. Anyone merging and driving in freeway traffic that slowly would be a serious road hazard.

See he [caranddriver.com]

In other news...

[shakestheclown]

In other news, the miles per gallon rating of the bicycle was also drastically reduced today by the US government.

But on the brighter side of things, the Hummer is now rated at 75mpg on the highway.

Re:In other news...

[UbuntuDupe]

In other news, the miles per gallon rating of the bicycle was also drastically reduced today by the US government.

Yeah, I heard on the Discovery Channel that a bicycle gets infinite mpg, but now the EPA says it's only *countably* infinite mpg.

Re:

[davburns]

I can do 30-40 miles on my first 1.5 liters of water + .5 liters of gatoraid. That works out to 57-76 mpg. (calm, cool day, moderate hills)

(But then, that's probably only comparable to cars using up coolant and motor oil; the energy for the trip generally does not come in liquid form, and I don't know the volumentric measurements of bannanas and begals..)

Re:

[Jarjarthejedi]

Beagles have way more than 310 calories, it's more like 2400 easy, you can have beagle meat for lunch and then the leftovers for dinner and breakfast the next day, and that's not counting the fat beagles, then you've got 3000 no problem.

Uh...not that I have any real world experience...>.> .

(Actually looking at the facts I would think that a humans MpG (of food) on your average bike would be a little less than 50, in line with these cars. Of course one is a biodegradable substance with many other uses

Re:In other news...

[brian0918]

"But on the brighter side of things, the Hummer is now rated at 75mpg on the highway."

Is that miles or meters per gallon?

Re:In other news...

[twistedsymphony]

they got it mixed up... they rate the Hummer in gallons per mile.

How to drive a hybrid

[Anarchysoft]

I thought the key to getting good mileage with a hybrid was understanding how to drive it properly and, when that was done, folks were getting close to the listed mileage.

Re:How to drive a hybrid

[BendingSpoons]

I thought the key to getting good mileage with a hybrid was understanding how to drive it properly and, when that was done, folks were getting close to the listed mileage.

Not really. I drive an '06 Civic Hybrid, which is listed at 49mpg city/50mpg highway. I am a very fuel-efficient driver and I get - at the most - 42 mpg when I drive around Philadelphia. And that's when I'm pissing off every driver behind me by accelerating slowly/coasting/etc. And under optimal weather conditions.

The highway estimate is a little more accurate. Cruising at 65-68 mph under optimal conditions (no AC, etc.) I usually get around 47 mph.

It's also kind of funny how much the weather affects my MPG. Cold weather drops me down at least 5 MPG. I'm not sure if that's particular to hybrids, or if that's every car.

Re:

[rolfwind]

Season/temperature affects different things.

In the summer, many cities and surrounding counties mandate a 85%/15% gas/ethanol mixture in order to reduce pollution. This has the effect of making the gas more expensive, but Consumer Reports also found that in regular cars - it kills the MPG by up to 30% because of ethanol's lower energy potential making it actually worse than pure gas.

That, however, does not explain your lower MPG in the winter. This is actually pretty easy - the colder your engine is on st

Re:

[qval]

Funny how your replied to a topic "How to drive a hybrid" with this:

"I get - at the most - 42 mpg when I drive around Philadelphia. And that's when I'm pissing off every driver behind me by accelerating slowly"

Use some common sense!

You're supposed to accelerate briskly with a hybrid, so that you get the drive train to offer you extra torque from the electric motor. This allows you to get up to speed quickly and efficiently. Then you simply maintain speed.

I'm not telling you to slam your pedal to the carpet.

Re:

[Red Flayer]

Temperature also affects tire pressure. Until you've driven quite a bit on a cold day, your tires are probably underinflated, thus decreasing your fuel efficiency.

Not just for hybrids

[PaisteUser]

It's important to note that these new ratings also change the mileage estimates for pure gasoline engines as well.

Re:

[aichpvee]

So a Hummer is getting -10mpg now?

Why so much Hummer Hatred?

[HappySqurriel]

What is with all the Hummer Hatred?

There are three factors which determine how ecconomical (and environmental) your transportation is:

1) What you drive
2) How much you drive
3) How you drive

Personally, I don't drive a Hummer nor do I drive a prius (I don't want to own either car because they do not suit my needs or wants) but I'm positive I have better "Fuel Ecconomy" than either car. My feet get me far greater mileage than any car and I use them far more than my car; I end up using transit a lot too.

I used t

Re:Why so much Hummer Hatred?

[aichpvee]

It's probably because they're three lanes wide, weigh six tons, and get about five-miles-per-gallon highway. Doesn't hurt that they're ugly and most people who drive them drive like dicks.

Re:Why so much Hummer Hatred?

[Paradise Pete]

What is with all the Hummer Hatred?

It's too damn big. You youngsters probably don't remember this, but there was a time when you could actually see what's going on ahead of you in traffic.

Re:

[mobby_6kl]

It's just that the hippies are insecure about their penis size.

Girl [looks down] - "Hey, is it.. is it supposed to be so small?"
Hippie - "Huh...? Did I tell you about my neighbour who drives a Hummer?
H - "It probably only uses 10 gallons per mile! Har har. He's obviously compensating for something. Yeah..."

Re:

[bataras]

I think there are 2 factors which determine how economical (and environmental) your transportation is:

1) What you drive
2) How you drive

"How much you drive" is not relevant to how economical and environmental you are while you're driving.

"How much you drive" is related to how environmental you are overall.

Re:

[pyrbrand]

The point is, regardless of your driving habits (how much you drive), if you get a vehicle with higher fuel efficiency, you will be reducing your impact by the same % as you increase fuel efficiency. This is true whether you drive 1 mile a month or 1,000. If you drive a Hummer (10-15 mgp effective), you are automatically increasing your impact several times over what it would be if you drove a Prius (45 mpg effective).

If everyone in America did not change their driving habits and switched to Prii, the a

Re:Why so much Hummer Hatred?

[robogun]

AC remarked: They are shit 'cars' for a sick society. If you 'drive' a Hummer, you are - almost by definition - a total asshole with no aesthetic taste, no interest in cars, no basic grasp of physics and no financial sense. You are, for all intets and purposes, an American idiot.

I doubt it has anything to do with Americans being the way they are. Hummer driving, like driving V12 Benzes and BWMs 200kph on the autobahn, is conspicuous consumption. This is a species-wide phenomenon which proves they have the resources to burn & some like Freud would say, proves their fitness for reproduction in attracting the female of the species.

Re:

[tshak]

Hummer driving, like driving V12 Benzes and BWMs 200kph on the autobahn, is conspicuous consumption.

At least the latter do so in style.

Re:

[Mattintosh]

Except most UAV (Urban Assault Vehicle, a.k.a. SUV) drivers don't drive a real Hummer (a military HUMMV, or the commercially available "H1" Hummer). They drive a whored (not pimped) version of a GMC Denali (Chevy Suburban) called "H2". Or even a shrink-ray-victim version of the H2 called "H3", also available in a "fake truck" version (see also: El Camino or Ford-Explorer-with-an-open-truck-bed).

If you want to join a dick-waving contest, at the very least, bring a dick to wave. H2's don't count. In fact, I m

No... the invalid ratings are due to poor testing

[jkerman]

Far as i know they still test EPA mileage ratings by using an exhaust sniffer and rollers.... indoors.... it fails to account for AIR RESISTANCE!

far as im concerned they should require someone to /actually drive/ the damn car through an /actual city/ and average the results to get the fuel rating.

Re:No... the invalid ratings are due to poor testi

[Turn-X Alphonse]

And exactly how is this fair?

To test everything evenly you need a constant situation that will not change without you manually changing it, a "real city" is the complete opposite of this. So if Tuesday you get stuck behind a bus and on Wednesday you've got the rad to yourself, the results are clearly quite different.

Re:

[mrchaotica]

Or at least do the test in a wind tunnel with a moving floor...

Re:No... the invalid ratings are due to poor testi

[Junior J. Junior III]

far as im concerned they should require someone to /actually drive/ the damn car through an /actual city/ and average the results to get the fuel rating.

How can you do this in a way that will result in reproducible results? If I want to contest the findings, I'd need to be able to verify them independently by performing a controlled experiment. Real driving does not offer any controls to the experiment -- you'll get too many variables and won't have a clear picture of what you're actually observing.

Re:

[ArsonSmith]

That's why the call it an average. You take readings for a month of driving from lots of different people and combine the statistics together. Then you have an average MPG. Otherwise you just have a benchmarked MPG that may or may not reflect reality.

Re:

[UbuntuDupe]

I'm not so sure. By driving through an "actual city", you open up the test to biases about what that particular voyage had to deal with (more/less traffic, stops, having to go different speeds), etc. The reason for the test method is not so much that it simulates real driving, but to have an apples-to-apples comparison between the various cars. Even if it doesn't match the gas mileage you actually get, it's still useful for knowing how it compares. So don't think "I will get 25 mpg with this car"; instea

not just hybrids

[Chris Chiasson]

As I understood it (a few years ago), the tests were not changed for a long time for several reasons, among them were easy comparisons to old data. Also, AFAIK, the test MPG numbers were already automatically scaled back by 20% (for all cars) before being placed on window stickers. By the way, I think all cars were benefiting from the tests (because the tests didn't reflect real world driving and tended to overestimate the MPG) - it is just that hybrid cars were really able to abuse the tests.

not about payback time

[Stoertebeker]

It's sad how every article about hybrids always focuses on how many years it takes to save enough gas to pay fro the added cost of the car. That's not what it is about! Especially not if you use the gas prices in a country where said price is held artificially low!
It's about how much more we could do by using technology in a sensible way rather than spending it on finding ways to allow every Joe to accelerate a 7 ton monster truck 0-60 in under 4 seconds!

Re:

[dpilot]

Maybe it's not about payback time, but...

Even with the degraded mileage figures for both Prius and Camry, (non-hybrid) they suggest that it will take 1.2 years to break even, using some sort of "average" driving and mileage statistics. But at the front of the article, they specify this at $2.70/gal gasoline. Prices right now are well above that, and it seems to me that $2.70/gal is closer to a low figure for the past year than any sort of average.

I keep gasoline records for my vehicles, I guess it's a famil

Re:not about payback time

[PHAEDRU5]

I'm afraid it actually *is* about how many years it takes to save enough gas to pay fro the added cost of the car.

When the green movement can give me technology that at least maintains my current lifestyle, while showing savings on the bottom line within a year or two, I'll go for it. Until then, well, it can keep selling to the true believers.

Re:not about payback time

[Hatta]

No one can guarantee you can maintain your current lifestyle indefinitely. Growth curves [tamu.edu] are sigmoidal. We are in the exponential phase right now, but that doesn't last forever. Resources are finite, and growth must eventually approach an asymptote. You can stick your fingers in your ears and deny it, but that doesn't change anything.

Re:not about payback time

[PHAEDRU5]

Indeed. However, back in 1900, or thereabouts, there was a report that, by the end of the century, everyone in the world would have to be a telephone operator...

I really can't accept your picture of scarcity and want. I have enough faith in human ingenuity to believe that not only will my lifestyle continue, it will get better and better.

Re:

[PHAEDRU5]

Oh, and BTW, is it at all possible that gas prices in other countries are *artificially* *high*?

I mean, how much tax is there on a gallon of gas in, say, the UK? I lived in the UK for a couple of years in the 80's, have loads of relatives there, and visit regularly. I know for a fact that government policy is to keep gas prices as high as possible (just right below where the peasants start to rebel) in order to encourage people to use public transport.

In other news

[Fear the Clam]

The smug cloud that's been threatening San Francisco appears to be dispersing.

Hybrid are about performance not just MP

[f0dder]

Help me out.. my understanding of a hybrid system was to bring performance to what are normally gutless high mpg 5spd low HP gas engines. If we only focused on high MPG then your 3cyl Geo Metro should of sufficed. But they sold poorly because they're gutless and for many reasons the market are not receptive to driving stick. A lot of folks keep bringing up the VW TDI diesels. But I looked at the performance numbers (ie 0-70 from consumer reports and the prius has better numbers). Are we to only focus on

Re:

[RingDev]

A very solid point! A gutless IC engine can be pushed really far for efficiency. You can lean out the mixture and drop the power output (you'll get more NOx I believe though). A hybrid does a few things for ya, it will recoup power from braking, it will allow a better fuel:air mixture (less NOx emissions), and it will augment your power on acceleration to make up for the gutlessness of the IC engine. If performance isn't an issue, then yes, a mid 80's civic can probably be pushed to 60mpg it you're willing

Huh?

[shoptroll]

I knew this was coming, and I'm a recent owner of a 2007 Prius. I'm currently averaging about 48 mpg on mainly highway driving, so I guess I'm doing better than most people out there driving these? Anybody who pays attention to the screen should be able to figure out to get the car running efficiently without needing to read up on hypermiling techniques (which will help if you want to go beyond some simple adjustments).

So how are other cars faring with the new calculations? I'd imagine it should be proportional to the current numbers?

GreenHybrid

[mnemonic_]

Looks like these numbers agree pretty well with GreenHybrid's data [greenhybrid.com], which is composed of self-reported mileage numbers from hybrid owners. I'd still probably rely on GreenHybrid more because the EPA testing is just that, testing, not real world use.

Realistically

[bahwi]

Realistically you do idle a lot. Red lights, idiot drivers, and traffic, and you're spending a lot of time idling. Not idling is not realistic. Even on highways you have some idling time, between dallas/houston(abt 4 hrs to 5 hrs) I idle about 30-45 minutes because of traffic and construction, and that's between the cities, where you can have even more traffic depending on what time. Traffic sucks, but it's a part of life. And yes, if you know how to drive a hybrid, you'll get mileage over what the EPA currently says(and drastically that over what it will say soon).

And with the tax credits (I think ending this year or ended) it's been typically cost effective depending on what type of hybrid you get. A civic hybrid from last year would have paid for itself within 8 months with my level of driving, a 3000 premium over regular civics with 2000-2500(I forget where it was last year) back from the gov't means a difference of 500-1000 to make up, which is pretty easy with how gas prices went last summer.

I hate these people who run the numbers and leave out other numbers. Tax Credits on IRS page [irs.gov]

Yeah, they aren't guaranteed, but if you buy early you can get them pretty easily. Or who say "Batteries are expensive" when they have very long warranties that cover it. If you want to pretend to know what you're talking about, then do the proper research. If you want the most cost effective vehicle, gas wise, get a bike. You have to be comfortable with your car, hybrid or not, and if you don't like them don't get them. But don't make up fake reasons.

Re:Realistically

[ScentCone]

I hate these people who run the numbers and leave out other numbers.

And I can't stand it when people talk as if getting tax credits reduces costs. It transfers costs to someone else. Ironically, even the guy who takes his bicycle or public transportation to work is going to have to shoulder some of the federal income tax burden that you - as a driver of your own personal vehicle - are able to shrug off because of the flavor of engine you bought. Unless you can demonstrate how your purchase of that vehicle is going to reduce the federal government's cost of doing business by the amount of your tax credit, you're just asking everyone else in the country to write you a rebate check out of their own income.

Re:

[ArsonSmith]

But then the hybrid owner is also lowering the cleanup costs from impact to the environment. Those will be shared by all as well.

Re:

[DragonWriter]

And I can't stand it when people talk as if getting tax credits reduces costs.

It reduces the cost to the purchaser.

It transfers costs to someone else.

Yes, so does burning gasoline, since it imposes substantial costs on people outside of the transaction. If you don't include the externalized costs of the gasoline when analyzing what saves money (and you shouldn't, if you are considering what saves the purchaser money), why would you include the costs of the tax credits to others?

Re:

[AK Marc]

Ironically, even the guy who takes his bicycle or public transportation to work is going to have to shoulder some of the federal income tax burden that you - as a driver of your own personal vehicle - are able to shrug off because of the flavor of engine you bought.

Ironically, the public transportation systems are run at a loss and I am fleeced for other people's ability to take the bus/train. And the bicycle riders use roads paid for from gasoline taxes, but yet don't pay the gasoline taxes, making me p

My 2002 Saturn 2SL still averages 30 and 40 mpg ..

[Jerry]

in town and on the interstate at 75mph, respectively, after 50,000 miles of travel. My best, so far, is 33 mpg in town and 43.5 mpg on the interstate.

It is a 4 door, five speed stick shift with air and cruise control, which I use when ever my speed goes over 30 mph. I run unleaded 87 octane Shell gasoline, found anywhere. I've often wondered about the "hybrids" that boasted of 35 - 40 mpg rates but cost $25K or more when my Saturn cost $17K (five years ago).

Re:My 2002 Saturn 2SL still averages 30 and 40 mpg

[Timesprout]

Yeah, the earlier model Saturns were more economical. I have a Saturn V and it burns about 3 tons of fuel a second.

Does it really matter?

[Monoman]

Who cares? It all depends on your driving style. If you run around do an excessive amount of speeding, accelerating, and delayed braking then you probably aren't going to get close to the EPA MPG ratings in ANY kind of vehicle.

I see it every day during my commute. SUVs speeding along, tailgating, braking, accelerating back up to speeding .... lather, rinse, repeat.

Our new car shows current MPG and MPG for each trip meter. It has done wonders for how we drive every day. It turns into a little game.

Detail is important...

[L0neW0lf]

As others have said, the new tests lower mileage on standard gasoline vehicles too.

More importantly though, there's a lot of details that get glossed over in hybrid/standard comparisons. They skip over the lower emissions of partial-zero emissions vehicles, how cost factors might even out sooner if gasoline prices continue to rise, and how if you're a high-mileage driver (especially a city driver) you may even out sooner in your purchase than others.

On the other hand, I bought a fuel-efficient gasoline c

From Personal Experience

[tarlos25]

As an owner of a 2005 Prius, I think they're full of crap. I regularly get an average (city/highway mix) of about 55 MPG. In the summer, it goes over 60 MPG for the AVERAGE, not just the city. If I only did city driving, it would be even higher. I'm not driving very conservatively, my driving habits are about the same as they were when I started driving. I keep up with the traffic around me, and sometimes go a little faster.

Of course, when they lower the estimates, I'll just be beating their estimates

Anybody Else?

[blankmange]

Anybody else out there with a big, fat, 'told you so'? The automobile testers have been stating this very thing for years - that EPA ratings are out of whack.. and anyone who has ever purchased a car and tried to achieve the EPA ratings can attest to this as well... so all these poor reviews of hybrids are now validated...

Re:

[iggymanz]

I get 3 mpg better than the EPA estimate for my '99 Camry with 2.2L 4 cylinder. what's your problem, leadfoot?

This is absurdly stupid

[gelfling]

Anyone with eyes and a brain can see these numbers are junk. I own a 2004 Camry. With two people in the car, on the highway, on cruise control @79mph I get 33mpg all day everyday. Anyone who tells me I'm really getting several mpg less than that is simply being a paid shill for Detroit.

What lobbyist paid 'science' are they going to discover next? The fumes from my neighbor's custom built F-450 (yes FOUR fifty) SUV is health food? C'mon people at least learn to know when they're humping your leg.

My Ford Escape Mileage

[tiedyejeremy]

while the EPA estimates are 36/31, my reality is about 36/29.5, unless I'm on the highway on a roadtrip with my car-top carrrier and in a hurry...
then my highway mileage will drop off to about 23. That hurts.

There are alternatives to the EPA numbers

[delirium28]

There's a hybrid database that I've been scanning over the past year or so to see exactly which hybrid is "worth" the extra cost (ignoring the environmental impacts of course, since I'm a greedy capitalist pig ;-))

Hybrid Mileage Database [greenhybrid.com]

So far the EPA numbers in TFA seem to line up well for the Prius at least, but I haven't looked at any of the other numbers.

Diesel!

[spud603]

We have a 2003 VW Jetta TDI, and we consistently get 40-45 MPG. If I drive very conscientiously I get over 50 MPG. As I understand it, the main reason that diesels aren't picking up in the US is that the EPA restricts their sale: car companies can only sell up to a certain percentage of their fleet as diesels. Demand for them cannot legally be satisfied, so they are not marketed at all.
Add to this the facts that diesel fuel requires less energy to produce, and can be made (mostly) renewably from just about anything that grows, and diesels blow hybrids out of the water in terms of fuel efficiency.
Maybe this change in rating schemes will take some of the marketability out of hybrids and raise awareness for diesel... though more likely it will just encourage people to say fuck it and buy an RV to drive their kids to soccer practice.

Re:Diesel!

[sunking2]

The reason that diesels haven't kicked in is because they don't pass the emissions standards in any state that follow "California Emissions." Has nothing to do with the EPA at all. The fact that this includes California, NY, and all of New England reduces the number of potential buys so much that it's simply not worth pushing to market in the US.

Hopefully within a few years the auto manufacturers will produce vehicles that do pass and they'll become available. Juat about every automaker has new engines coming to market that do meet the requirements, so things should change soon

Re:

[Catbeller]

New diesel technology has been available for years that clean up the old problems. Europe is replete with diesel cars. Detroit just doesn't like diesel. The executives are gasoline fans, always will be.

Diesel and Detroit

[JimBobJoe]

Detroit just doesn't like diesel. The executives are gasoline fans, always will be.

You will find that Detroit had a massive experiment with Diesels in the 1970s [wikipedia.org] and it was a total disaster (badly designed engines.) Because of that, the American consumer was quite scarred and wouldn't touch Diesel for decades.

Chances are those scars are gone now and Diesels can be re-entertained. Low-sulphur diesel is finally here stateside, and GM has plenty of experience with diesels in its European divisions (Opel, Saab,

Not Downrating the Traditional Gas Engines

[Doc Ruby]

EPA MPG stats on regular gasonline engine cars are often inflated. I don't see them making those "more realistic", even though their inaccuracy has been known for years [google.com]. Funny how prompt they are to reduce hybrid ratings.

And how is it more accurate to reduce ratings for hybrids because they shut off while "idling"? Gas engines burn gas while idling but getting nowhere. Which is part of the real efficiency of hybrids, especially in city driving.

Why must the inaccurate ratings that favor gas combustion force more economical (short term fuel prices, and longterm environmental/warfare costs) to look worse?

How does this make the cars less cost effective?

[edunbar93]

plugging these new numbers in to the equation makes a hybrid much less cost effective

No, plugging these new numbers in makes the cars *appear* much less cost effective. The fact of the matter is that plenty of hybrid owners were actually reaching their posted fuel efficiency ratings, unlike gas-only cars which do not. And whether the car is stopped in traffic or not, a non-hybrid car is still consuming fuel while a hybrid is not. In fact, hybrids do much better in heavy traffic because under a certain speed (35 Km/h for the Prius for instance) it's just running on batteries.

I think the EPA just changed the way these cars are rated because other carmakers complained that the numbers were "unfair".

Re:How does this make the cars less cost effective

[Technician]

In fact, hybrids do much better in heavy traffic because under a certain speed (35 Km/h for the Prius for instance) it's just running on batteries.

In the escape Katrina traffic which was at a standstill much of the time, many people ran out of gas within 60 miles of New Orleans because they were traveling at less than 2 MPH. At 2 MPH a Prius can run for days (literaly) on a tank of gas. (keep the AC off)

I know this is possible as I have put an inverter in mine and use it for emergency power. In an ice st

Is it really worse?

[madsheep]

I know I am bit late here as there's already like 200 replies but here we go anyway. First, if the system has been flawed this whole time, it will also reduce the estimate mileage for a non-hybrid vehicle. So if a Hybrid rated at 60 mpg loses 10 mpg.. that's at 16.6% drop. If a car rated at 20 mpg loses 3 mpg tha's a 15% drop. You're looking at about the same cost-efficiency at this point.

In any event, why do people always complaina bout the EPA rating. You've known how it's been done for a while. You basically have a comparison of cars at their same "unrealistic" measurement. So you know your car Y is X-times better/worse than car Z in this test. Who relies on a single set of tests for their data anyway. EPA updating it to be more realistic is great, as it will probably more accurately report the mileage. But it still won't be perfect, so what? Guess how long it takes to test your gas mileage yourself? I don't know.. a week on average? How long does it takes you to fill up all the way, reset the meter, and wait for the gas light to be on for a while? Not rocket science and there's plenty of websites of car owners that report what they're actually getting.

Old news, and TFA still wrong

[onemorechip]

The new mileage ratings were posted some weeks or months ago, so this article is late to the party. But it still gets it wrong on a few counts. Mostly not factually wrong, just wrong on interpretation. For instance:

Hybrid vehicle performance was previously overestimated partly because the tests included vehicles' idling for long periods, causing many hybrids to shut down their engines to conserve fuel. The old testing methodology registered "a higher fuel economy for hybrid vehicles than is achieved under typical driving conditions," according to EPA documents.

Linking these two statements into one paragraph suggests that shutting down the engine while stopped causes the hybrid to perform better in the test than in the real world. That's not true; the same benefit is derived by the hybrid in real-world driving (most of the stops in the old EPA test were briefer than a typical traffic light stop -- not "long periods", a factual error in the article). In reality, a full hybrid such as the Prius also stops the engine while coasting (if the speed is low enough to allow this), but the EPA didn't seem to think it needed to do anything to remove this advantage from the tests.

The earlier test methodology ran the cars through a certain speed profile (one profile for "city", the other for "highway"). The results were known to be optimistic because (1) A/C was not on during the test; (2) most people drive faster than the profiles; (3) in many people's "city" driving there are more frequent stops than in the test, although this varies with location; (4) probably a host of other reasons. To compensate for these factors, the EPA applied fudge factors to the result, derating the MPG to better match real-world conditions. The same derating was applied regardless of the type of vehicle, so some cars get more optimistic ratings than others.

The fix to this inequality was to change the test so that the derating factors could be eliminated. The profiles were changed, and things like cold engine starts and the use of A/C were taken into account.

But, if you change the amount of time the car is stopped during the test, this would have no effect on the outcome for a Prius or similar hybrid (I'm not sure if the Civic hybrid shuts off the engine while stopped; I seem to remember reading that it doesn't). It doesn't use any gas while stopped, so the denominator is not increased, but it doesn't go anywhere during the same period, so the numerator is not increased. For a non-hybrid, there is a definite increase in measured MPG if there is less time when the engine is idling, so the ratings gap between hybrids and non-hybrids is reduced.

Consider a hypothetical example. Car A is a hybrid and gets 65 MPG under the old city test; with the derating factor applied, it gets 60 MPG (roughly the numbers for a Prius). Car B is a non-hybrid that gets 32.5 MPG on the cith test, derated to 30 MPG. Under the new test, the conditions are tougher (higher speeds, A/C is on part of the time, etc.), so both cars see a drop in measured MPG. Say Car A now gets 48 MPG and Car B gets 27 MPG (Car B sees a lesser drop because, although the test is tougher in other ways, it doesn't have to idle as much, a benefit that is meaningless to Car A). No derating is applied, so these are the published numbers. Car A's EPA rating drops by 20% from the previous method, and Car B's drops by 10%.

Another factor is that running the A/C takes up a bigger percentage of the fuel consumption in a car with higher fuel economy. That's not hybrid-specific; any non-hybrid that is in the 35-MPG and higher territory is going to see a big difference between A/C and non-A/C operation.

Online consumer MPG submited database

[RingDev]

For 'real world' numbers: http://www.greenhybrid.com/compare/mileage/ [greenhybrid.com]

-Rick

Strange but true

[SheldonLinker]

Unlike most cars, the Prius gives enough feedback to actually help. By learning how the car works, I'm actually getting 2 MPG better than the posted ratings for city driving.

On the flip side of this, I just got back from a trip, Irvine to Phoenix and back, and the actual MPG was 3 MPG less than the posted ratings. However, that was with the air conditioner set at 72F and High.

Re:Strange but true

[AKAImBatman]

Alright, time for a reality check here. The Prius is doing such a damn good job on mileage not because it's a hybrid, but because it's an exceptionally well-designed car. Your own experiences with highway driving demonstrate that. Hybrid vehicles should actually get worse highway mileage because of their design. But the Prius doesn't. Why?

The answer lies in more than just its batteries. There are plenty of auto manufacturers jumping on the bandwagon by battery-backing their existing engine designs. That won't do much. Toyota took a different approach. For one, the engine of the Prius was replaced with a more efficient Atkinson Cycle [wikipedia.org] engine. This engine would normally not be viable in a car, as its peak output is quite poor. However, the Prius uses stored battery power to provide maximum torque when accelerating. This makes up for the engine's poor peak power output. Furthermore, the torque delivered by electrical power is more fuel efficient than driving an Otto-cycle engine to sudden, peak power-output conditions.

But the engineers didn't stop there. They used the research behind Continuously Variable Transmissions (CVT) [wikipedia.org] to develop a transmission that can evenly split the power between the electrical and gasoline powered components of the car. This transmission can smoothly transfer power between different sources and outputs, avoiding the limitations and excess power consumption of the traditional geared transmission. This transmission (which Toyota calls a "Power Split Transmission") is only workable in a small car like the Prius, due to the torque limitations of most CVT designs.

Finally, Toyota further hedged the car's bets with computer control and tuning over the entire power system, a low air-resistance body design, lightweight aluminum construction, and vacuum flask coolant storage for fast warm-up times.

What you're looking at is the modern equivalent of a Chevy Sprint [wikipedia.org]. Those three bangers got great mileage at the expense of power and comfort. (My mother had one and managed to get 58 MPG on the highway!) The Prius uses modern technology to provide similar returns, but without the drawbacks that made the Sprint so unpopular in the first place.

Re:

[AKAImBatman]

We CAN make small, [underpowered, cramped, and unreliable] fuel-efficient cars

I hope that answers your question?

I'm not against the idea of bringing back a sub-compact vehicle, but I'm afraid that the general American market isn't. The average consumer associates such vehicles with insufficient acceleration to use for interstate merging, uncomfortable seating that's not so great for long car trips, and cheap construction that will eventually cause maintenance problems. There are also the emotional issues th

Re:

[cens0r]

They didn't discontinue the echo, they just renamed it. Get a Scion or a Yaris and you end up with the same car.

Accurate for my single data point, anyway

[raygundan]

My wife's Prius is averaging right around 47mpg in mixed city/highway driving after about two years. She doesn't do anything special while driving-- just treats it like any other car. Since the new rating is 48/45/46, it sounds like they're right on the money.

It's about damn time the EPA revised their ridiculously inaccurate tests. The data has been off for years, for all cars.

Re: Hybrids

[TooMuchToDo]

#1 The best milage comes from the most conservative driving.

True. Buy you also see significant gains in mileage vs. gas-only vehicles when not driving conservatively all the time.

#2 The batteries are more toxic than those in a normal car- and with each hybrid carrying between 5 and 7 of those batteries, they are not better for the environment.

False. The batteries in a Prius are no more toxic than any other battery. Also, they can be **completely** recycled at end of life.

#3 The total energy used to manufacter a hybrid vehicle is higher than what it is for a regular vehilce of same size.

Perhaps slightly. But luckily that energy is most likely electricty which is being generated at a plant with strict emissions control in Japan. That extra energy used offsets the petroleum energy that would be used by a gas-only vehicle, as well as the pollution said gas-only vehicle would cause (you have to take into account that the Prius is a SULEV vehicle).

#4 The depreciation rate is held up by popular opinion. This is true in all vehicles, but the steep cliff at year 6 is going to make most people unhappy, and the battery replacement at year 8 will be a very large cost to shoulder and may drive many people out of this market all togeather.

Can you prove this steep drop off in value at year 6? If not, than why state it? Let's assume for a moment that this year 6 valuation drop-off occurs. How much is that going to matter to someone who has held the car for 6 years? Probably little at that point.

#5 There is currently no plan for the recycling of these batteries.

Now you're simply sputtering off nonsense. Don't spout bullshit unless you know someone isn't going to catch you:

http://www.toyota.com/about/environment/technology /2004/hybrid.html [toyota.com]

Is there a recycling plan in place for nickel-metal hydride batteries?

Toyota has a comprehensive battery recycling program in place and has been recycling nickel-metal hydride batteries since the RAV4 Electric Vehicle was introduced in 1998. Every part of the battery, from the precious metals to the plastic, plates, steel case and the wiring, is recycled. To ensure that batteries come back to Toyota, each battery has a phone number on it to call for recycling information and dealers are paid a $200 "bounty" for each battery.

Re: Hybrids

[metamatic]

Freeway speeds such as 70mph will IN FACT put you into the SUV mpg territory. And that is a single person no load condition. Load 4 passengers and all their gear for a 4 day weekend- and you are in fact at SUV MPG.

Utter horsehit. I drove a Prius from MA to TX, it was almost all freeway driving at 55-70 mph. Not only that, there were two of us in the car, and the back was entirely filled with cargo, seats folded flat. (We were moving.)

We averaged 47mpg.

Take your Detroit astroturf FUD elsewhere.