Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard
I think that some (a lot of?) people think that the EPA rating is some sort of guaranty? As we all know, adjusting the nut behind the wheel makes all the difference. Inflating tires makes a big difference, as does weather and temperature, and running the defroster kicks in the A/C which kills the mileage, too.
Let's not get our knickers in a twist...
|
I think this is very true at the
INDIVIDUAL level, each driver uses common sense to realize the, indeed, YMMV. Buyers will let their dealers know thier happiness or not if this becomes either a non-issue, or more widespread and the 'common man' balks in great numbers and decibels.
However, I think the bigger picture is, IMHO, is that more people looking at MPG when shopping makes it more of a marketing issue than it has in the past. So greater visibilty. Hence, more knickers, knotting more than they used to be. MPG is a premeir number now in marketing, not small print back of brochure.
I am sure if people had dynos, they would be mad at thier cars not getting stated horsepower all these years. But, MPG is measurable by EVERYONE, so the advertising better be as spot on as possible, or you have a marketing and trust issue on your hands.
And, perhaps, the
'biggest' big picture issue: this number means EVERYTHING for the OEM in meeting thier
CAFE numbers. That makes Ford's fleet look better than it should?
SIDEBAR ANALOGY?
My dad-in-law (retired GM engineer and kit car nut) pointed out the 1 to 4 skip shift in many GM cars being engineered
specifically for the EPA test parameters and acceleration rates. He points out that when going around a corner, assuming you will accelerate in first and then go 1 to 2, but it goes 1 to 4, could cause an unsafe condition and possibly rear ending. It was all about the EPA test cycle, not real world safety and economy he said.
So, IRT the Ford issue, maybe thier software is SO tuned into the 100% petrol, and the exact speeds and accel rates of the test, that they are "
Engineering to the Test", a test cycle which apparently is better than it used to be, but is still very flawed when taking into account how 'real people' drive it, and the 'real' fuel that is used.
I have no skin in this game, I hope the truth gets tweaked and it starts falling closer to advertised. Or Ford comes right out and posts their test methods and results, and forces the EPA to re-verify that Ford' methods and numbers are legit. Which will then let the EPA yell at the average driving for not driving like thier test
That would prove that the EPA methodology still needs work to match real life.