EPA mileage estimate changes

EPA mileage estimate changes

Due to numerous complaints about people getting nowhere near the mileage estimates posted on the sales sticker of their car, the EPA has decided to change things up. Essentially the same test is run on the same rolling road, except now the tests are done with brisker acceleration, having the AC on, and some cold weather testing is included. This has unfortunately caused some issues.

The first issue caused stems from the fact that almost no one knows that the EPA testing standards have been changed. 2008 model cars fall under the new standards and the 2007 models are still under the old standards. So if you’re currently buying a small car, and you drop into the local Mitsubishi dealership to look at the new 2008 Lancer, you’ll laugh at the mileage figure. 22/29? The Mazda 3 which develops more power gets 26/32! Naturally, if you care about fuel economy, you’ll exit the Mitsubishi showroom laughing like a maniac, and drop by the Mazda dealership to sign some papers. However, most Mazda 3’s are still 2007’s and the 2008 Mazda 3’s fuel figures are actually more or less the same as the Lancer!

Another issue occurs if you’re just replacing your old car. If you own a Toyota Camry, and you decide its time to get a new one, you might have a heart attack when you see the window sticker on the new car. I’m sure a lot of people will proclaim that technological progress is no more and ask the dealer, “Why is the fuel consumption on the new Camry so much worse than the old one?” Then after the dealer tries to explain that the mileage has actually improved, but under the new standards they look worse, the buyer might feel a little thick, or not believe the dealer and think it was all a part of some sales pitch to hide the truth. On a more practical stand point, this means you can no longer compare the fuel consumption of cars produced past the 2008 model year to older cars.

This all brings me to the main crux of this editorial. I personally like the idea that the actual mileage I will be getting is now closer to the estimates, but personally I don’t feel that was the point of the estimates. The fuel consumption estimates are a standard, like the kilogram, or the minute. In my mind I have a set idea of what is good mileage for a certain class of car, but now I have to reset it and redo my research before complaining about or praising a car’s fuel consumption figures. I never cared that most people couldn’t actually get 41 mpg out of a Corolla on the highway, I just cared that the Corolla put out superior figures compared to a Cobalt (just to serve as an example). Even after the estimation changes a Corolla will still get better mileage than a Cobalt, but now everything gets shifted over. Personally I never used the EPA mileage estimates for anything other than a shopping comparison with other cars and in fact there’s some small print on the window sticker telling you that’s what the mileage estimates are there for. An analogy to better explain what I mean involves people on a diet. So let’s say Jane currently weighs 160 pounds, and ideally she would like to weigh 115, because that’s what most women her height should weigh. Then suddenly, the scientific community gets together and changes the pound into something heavier than before. Jane suddenly weighs 115, but it still doesn’t change the fact that she’s fat.

Another point I wish to make is that it was always possible to achieve the mileage estimates put up in the past, just no one bothered to try. I for one have tried to drive in a relaxed fashion to see if my car could reach the elusive estimates of old, and I actually beat it! The trouble is, most drivers on the road are in a hurry and are a little too happy to slam their foot on the pedals. Contrary to what some people say, applying the brakes doesn’t use up fuel (I’ve heard this said by many people, and I have no idea where it comes from); however, slowing down means that you’ll have to spend more time holding the “gas” pedal down and that does use up your fuel. So if everyone drove like an elderly person and was less nervous on the gas and brake pedals while driving, they would get mileage closer to the old estimates. Sadly, this is not the case. Back to the diet example, only this time with a diet… If Jane decided to go on the Shuh Huqua diet, which promised to cut her weight down to 115 in four to six months, and six months later she weighed 145, she would be furious and say the diet sucked. Now let’s say the diet said to only eat salads with fat free dressing and to go jogging for at least a mile a day; and now let’s say Jane only jogged every other week, and every Friday ate hot dogs and cheese burgers. Naturally Jane won’t get the desired results.

If there is one thing I’m enjoying about the new EPA mileage estimates, it would be how it effects the hardcore environmentalist. The car’s hit hardest by this new mileage estimation system are the hybrids; and the big gas guzzling SUV’s and sports cars that I love as a petrol head, are hardly effected at all. It’s easy to see why too. A Prius has, as far as I’m concerned, no power. A dash to 60 takes the better part of your life, and after the other part of your life the car will top out at 100 mph. So, even if you’re not in a rush you’ll have your foot down all the time just to make the car move. Sports cars clearly don’t have this problem, so meeting the new “faster acceleration” part of the new EPA tests means pressing the throttle a tiny bit more than before. As for big SUV’s, these cars get such bad mileage to begin with that a change of 10% in the mileage estimates means a one mpg difference, which feels negligible.

So, the new testing standards have brought about a bit of confusion, the inability to compare the fuel consumption of a modern vehicle to an older one, and some headache to the environmentalists harping about how buying a hybrid will get you a million miles per gallon. In the end I feel that the new EPA regulations on fuel estimates is a waste of time, because the estimates should only be used for comparison purposes and the old regulations did just that.