2007MY for New Tundra to Take Advantage of Old EPA

[Variance]

2007MY for New Tundra to Take Advantage of Old EPA Figures

New rules that will lower window-sticker fuel economy numbers on vehicles are already affecting carmakers' behavior, but perhaps not in the way regulators intended.

The new figures are intended to reflect real-world fuel economy more closely than today's fuel-economy ratings. Shoppers use the figures to compare vehicles' operating costs. Listed fuel economy rates are expected to fall 7% to 15% under the new standard.

To take advantage of higher miles per gallon results under the old testing procedures, Toyota Motor Corp.'s big new Tundra full-size pickup will be called a 2007 model when it debuts, despite the fact that none will reach dealerships until mid-February at the earliest.

Detroit Free Press

[Intrepidation]

Sneaky bastards...still trying to make the big pig look fuel efficient.

[grandmarquis]

and the worst part is the media will give them a free pass. let's see gm or ford try that.

[Croc]

Do you really think the old figures will be that impressive?

[K.C.]

Isnt it just like the Wal-Mart of automakers to find loopholes to use for their own advantage. I'm not normally the type to wish others to fail, but I'll make an exception for Toyota. Oh, and the Tundrea looks like a pig thats run itself into a brick wall a few times. <G>

[Hudson]

Really? This is what is considered "Toyota bashing" on this site? C'mon, can't you do better than that?

Toyota introduces a "2007 1/2" truck (used to be done all the time) and you're complaining that it's being measured under the same standards as the Silverado/Sierra which were introduced only a few months earlier? Please.

If Toyota introduced this truck as a 2008, they would be advertising fuel economy that would be automatically put on a scale that is 7-15% lower than the competition. Wouldn't that just be plain stupid?

This doesn't sound like a loophole (like Chrysler did with its 1999 Ram Trucks that were introduced in Januarly 1998 to avoid CAFE charges), it sounds like good business.

To use regular comments found on this site, if GM had done it, you would be bragging that they did what was necessary.

Edited December 18, 2006 by Hudson

[AAS]

...

This doesn't sound like a loophole (like Chrysler did with its 1999 Ram Trucks that were introduced in Januarly 1998 to avoid CAFE charges), it sounds like good business.

...

229363[/snapback]

True in the short-term, but won't it make things look much worse when (assuming things go unchanged) in its next model year the Tundra's mileage drops 7-15%?

[Camino LS6]

Non-issue.

Any manufacturer would have done the same.

Of course that won't help the fact that the Tundra is terminally ugly both inside and out.

[Variance]

This was written on Sunday. Guess it was a slow news day.

[FAPTurbo]

Doesn't matter. Besides, the previous fuel figures sucked anyway, so what do I care.

[pow]

Doesn't matter. Besides, the previous fuel figures sucked anyway, so what do I care.

229420[/snapback]

No, they're using old EPA test procedures on a brand new truck. The MPG won't be carried over.

[regfootball]

and the worst part is the media will give them a free pass. let's see gm or ford try that.

229313[/snapback]

outllook acadia are both 2007's. no surprise that virtually none will be sold prior to Jan 1, 2007.

Edited December 18, 2006 by regfootball