I must mention that their calculations in the first sentence are horrifically incorrect. Good info, though.http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...mileage12.html

 

Its about time the EPA realized how poorly their estimates fare in real world conditions! IMO the 12% & 8% estimates are not enough, but it is a good first step.

 

"The new system will use more high-speed driving, part will be done in 20-degree cold, air conditioning will be used for some portion of each driving cycle, and there will be more stop-and-go and rapid-acceleration driving."

Well, except for the stop-and-go, that sounds like all the wrong things to do with a bybrid!

"Mileage estimates for gas-electric hybrids probably will be 20 percent to 30 percent lower than they are now for city driving and 10 percent to 20 percent lower on the highway. That's because they quickly lose their all-electric advantage when operated in cold weather or when rapidly accelerated, Wehrum said."

Yep.

 

I agree with all this except engaging the AC... that part is a little silly. I have yet to use the AC in my Prius and I live in freakin' LA. Ah well.

The rest of the changes sound great, they were a long time coming. I do have to wonder how Hybrids could be more negatively impacted than other vehicles... especially if there's more stop and go. I've gotten 60mpg driving an average of 70mph on the highway in the Prius, so I really wouldn't be surprised if its highway mileage held steady under the new tests. Maybe the "hybrids will be hurt most" prediction is just guessing rather than based on any real data.

Adding rapid accelleration is the most important part to me - it will force Hybrid makers to consider that factor when designing for mileage. Pulse and Glide mileage in the Prius can be great but having to Pulse in traffic can cut my mileage numbers by 30%.

So do we think the Hummer's MPG will go down from 11mpg to 8 under these new rules? 7? Any takers for 6?

 

IF the EPA really wanted people to make better decisions about their vehicle choice and their driving “style” or behavior, they would have recommended a fuel economy gauge in every new vehicle sold that helps the user understand the dependenc(y) better.

I would look carefully at who benefits at reducing the perceived benefits of hybrid vehicles for the answer to who is pushing these specific changes.

the tests need to be overhauled, but in a sensible way. The new test clearly is meant to specifically target and disadvantage hybrid vehicles. The heavy accelerations and copious AC are things most drivers don't do. Specifically drivers with MPG meters in their cars.

i suspect that any manufacturer that is behind in the R&D for efficient vehicle development probably had a heavy hand in developing the new standards for the EPA. Cough GM cough ford cough cough Chrysler.

not that i have any evidence, but it would be interesting to ask the EPA who they consulted with for the new tests.

The truth is that hybrids offer substantially greater opportunity to save fuel, IF the user wants to learn how to do so. The information is there and the vehicle capability is there. Most people who buy a hybrid are looking to optimize or minimize their fuel consumption, so they will learn how to drive their vehicle most responsibly to do so, without put themselves or anyone else in harm’s way. A rating scheme that presumes people will drive with a lead-foot (so they cannot take advantage of the all-electric mode of the hybrid) is purposefully trying to cover up this advantage of the hybrid. THE CHANGES THAT ARE BEING MADE ARE NOT IN THE INTEREST OF THE CONSUMER, NOR IN THE INTEREST OF SAVING FUEL, contrary to what most of those commenting on the new system have been led to believe.

 

I don't know where you drive twuelfing but swing by California some time - everyone drives with a lead foot all day. While I agree that an MPG meter in every car might help reduce that, the EPA doesn't set that kind of standard - Congress has to pass a law and tie it in with CAFE standards. It's a good idea and a bill you should lobby for but not the EPA's place.

To be completely honest, although I think GM and Ford have played the lobbyist game of changing the rules not the car for a long time, Katrina proved to them that reality will put them out of business no matter how much rewriting they do. Their desperate attempts to introduce the Saturn Vue and Ford Fusion Hybrids are, I think, part of their begruding acceptance that rewriting the rules won't work anymore.

I really think these rules are good for consumers, and that's coming from a Prius driver who bought it for the environment.

I think it's worthwhile to see what the new EPA numbers are on various vehicles. I don't think Hybrids will be as uniquely harmed as the article assumes, and it's going to knock some popular vehicles below double-digits. That won't help the next time we have a hurricane, souring relations with Venezuela, political unrest in Mexico, etc. The highest number will still be hybrids and they'll still knock every other car out of the market.

 

I didnt say the EPA could mandate it, but rather recommend it. Which would give it more clout in a bid for a bill, or alteration of vehicle standards.

The changes absolutely disadvantage all the technologies in a hybrid. I am very strongly in favor of changing the methods of fuel economy testing, but it needs to work. We dont need to be stuck with a meaning less number for another 20 years. I think each car needs to be tested the way it is driven on a per vehicle basis. Additionally perhaps a climate rating. And lastly some real world data. Start logging people drives the way television monitors neilson boxes. Then after a certain amount of time for a new model you can mandate the real data is printed on the window tag and on all advertising.

lets change this, but lets change it so it works rather than just changing it to say we are changing it.

 

Maybe the first step is to wait and see how the numbers come out. Will they be anti-hybrid, perhaps. I don't think this will change Toyota's approach other than to improve the areas that show up weak.

There is data that suggests software changes in our Prius could tailor the vehicles for each state. If so, folks in less environmentally sensitive states will with software, get a competitive, high mileage car. So the Ultra-clean California cars will get OK mileage and our Alabama Prius will compete on efficiency with the Japanese models.

Bob Wilson

 

Ah, so you mean, Bob, that the CA tweaked ones burn gas more often to keep the catalytic converter warm while AL ones burn gas less often to keep mileage high?

Poo.

 

It turns out that is one of the differences between the Japanese and US Prius:

http://hiwaay.net/~bzwilson/prius/pri_temp.html

Bob Wilson