Ford to lower mpg ratings on 6 vehicles, compensate 200,000 owners
 

Doh... and 7 mpg drop on the MKZ hybrid!!! woah. :eek:

Ford to lower mpg ratings on 6 vehicles, compensate 200,000 owners | The Detroit News

-mort

A long time ago a UPS driver parked in front of a no parking zone in the city when I use to attended VCU. I asked the driver if he knew it was a ticket-able offense. His answer was golding, he said the ticket was just the price of doing business, if he even got one at all. :eek:

Between http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...est-29102.html and ford not even being able to keep track of its own numbers, are manufacturers drag numbers worth anything?

Damn, no Mustang :/

I don't understand why each vehicle doesn't have to go to the EPA and do an actual performance test.

$$$. EPA doesn't have the budget or manpower to do everything itself. All it can do is random audits of the results.

And even the manufacturers don't do everything themselves. The C-Max issue arose earlier because they were allowed to apply EPA figures for the drivetrain between platforms (if I recall right).

What?! The EPA could easily charge the companies to do it. New model? Decent changes? YOU MUST RETEST.

Before I knew the slightest hair about FE (old EPA estimates?) I thought this was the way it was done.

So, the EPA does not have the same standards as Internet trolls?

$107,500,000- now there's some incentive to do it right.

Error in calculating aerodynamics? Here's an idea, build a car, fill it with gas, dive it over a programmed course, and see how much gas it used.
On a side note I'd love to see a published steady state 65mph economy number for every car. So of a realistic level open highway economy. That would show both aerodynamics and overall drivetrain efficiency.
On another side note, I work for the postal service and because a parking ticket is a form local tax we get to park wherever we want without tickets because states can't tax federal property!