I'm revisiting the Official Fuel Economy Ratings that I entered in the garage for my car.
The reason is I recently made the Top 10 by Percent Over EPA list with my
ECOrolla89, but I don't think I belong there (yet), and I certainly think my 22 MPG combined is way off.
My first question is whether I picked the right version of my car. I have a 1.6L 4A-F (carburetor) 5-spd manual. Fueleconomy.gov lists 3 cars that are similar:
- 1.6L "(FFS)" 5-spd manual - 26city/32highway/28combined MPG
- 1.6L "4A-GE (FFS)" 5-spd manual - 23/28/25 MPG
- 1.6L "4A-FE (FFS)" 5-spd manual - 20/26/22 MPG
Is option 1 supposed to be the 4A-F? It doesn't say. I picked the 4A-FE version because "
The 4A-FE is basically the same as the 4A-F (introduced in the previous generation of Corollas), the most apparent difference being the electronic fuel injection system as noted by the E." (-
Wikipedia)
My second question is what is wrong with EPA on this car? Ecomodder says
- Note: use EPA's "new" (2008) formula.
- Find your EPA rating (link opens new window). [links to fueleconomy.gov]
... but what if I know that the fueleconomy.gov numbers are bogus? I mean, here's a list of my issues with their numbers:
- The 2 owners reported 31 and 38 MPG for the 4A-GE manual Corolla, vs 25 combined EPA rating. You can add me as a 3rd owner prior to hypermiling in 2007 with a 15,000 mile average of 34 MPG. No way, right?
- The 4A-FE is the most fuel efficient engine for this car, but it's rated much lower than the others.
- How can 3 different 1.6L Toyota engines spread the FE for the same car by 27%? (Actually, to play devil's advocate, I wonder if the engine correlates to how tall the tranny is, I think the 5-spd manual in my car feels quite short.)