Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'Fuel Economy'.
-
Does anyone else notice a big drop in fuel economy when using the air conditioning? For people with automatic climate control do you ever manually turn off the air conditioner?
-
When the Ford Ranger returns to the US market in a few weeks, the EPA window sticker will be a primary strong selling point. The EPA estimates for the Ranger have been announced and it beats any other gasoline powered pickup on the market. The two-wheel drive Ranger will have a 21mpg city / 26 highway / 23 combined rating. That combined rating ties the combined rating of the diesel-powered Chevy Colorado. The 4wd model gets a 20 city / 24 highway / 22 combined rating of which the city and combined rating are the highest in the class. The Ranger starts around $25,395 and offers only one engine, a 2.3 liter 4-cylinder, that will tow and haul more than the V6 offerings from Nissan, Toyota, and Ford. The U.S. mid-size truck market is heating up with Ranger as just the newest entry in the mix. The 2020 Jeep Gladiator will be arriving next year but has not yet been rated by the EPA.-
- 2
-
-
- ford
- fuel economy
- (and 2 more)
-
“I can’t believe we’re going to make it” This thought passed through my head as I brought the vehicle to a stop on an off-ramp. Somehow, I was able to travel from my house in the outskirts of Metro Detroit to my hometown of Midland, Michigan on just a quarter-tank of gas. That may not seem like a huge accomplishment except when you look at the vehicle I was driving, the 707 horsepower Jeep Grand Cherokee Trackhawk. Originally, I wasn’t planning on traveling to Midland in the Trackhawk. Earlier in the week, I had driven it down to an event in Ann Arbor to drive a couple of Mitsubishi vehicles. The trip revealed the thirst of the supercharged 6.2L V8 by using up a third of the gas tank. My plan for the rest of the time would be running errands and some small trips to get a feel of the vehicle. Over the weekend, I would get some work done and take photos. But that would be thrown out the window when my brother brought up the idea of heading to the Northwood Auto Show in Midland. The Northwood show takes place on the grounds of Northwood University. It is a unique auto show as the students of the school run all of the aspects of the show ranging from the planning to being the product specialists for each brand. This is part of their automotive and aftermarket degree programs. When I lived in Midland, the show was something I looked forward to every year as I would get the chance to sit in various new vehicles. Also, I would come home with a big bag of brochures that I would be reading throughout the year, letting all of the information seep into my brain. This may explain why I became so crazy about vehicles. It had been a few years since I last attended the show due to various factors such as not knowing when it would be put on. But I was surprised that it would be taking place around the same time I would have the Trackhawk. At first, I was hesitant to go. But then, my brother said the magic words, “I would be willing to pay for gas. I want to go for a ride in the Trackhawk.” Once those words came out of his mouth, I had decided that it would be a good idea to go to Northwood. But something else crept into my head. Would it be possible to travel to the show on a limited amount of gas? I decided to put it to the test. Saturday morning, my brother and I got into the Trackhawk to head towards Midland. Starting up the vehicle, the supercharged V8 thundered to life and the gas gauge rose to just a hair over a quarter of a tank. My plan was to put the vehicle into Eco mode and use the radar cruise control to travel at a steady speed of 75 mph. The instant fuel economy screen would be up in the instrument cluster to let me monitor and make adjustments as needed. I would stop for gas when the distance to empty notification reached 15 miles or under. As I began to pull away from the house, my brother noticed that the vehicle was in Eco mode. “I think its more of a suggestion than an actual mode,” I said when he brought it up. To demonstrate what I meant, I pushed the throttle to almost the floor on an on-ramp. The V8 engine roared into life with the supercharged screeching. Even in Eco, it is quite shocking how fast this brick picks up speed. “I get what you mean by this being a suggestion,” my brother said to me as we merged onto I-75. The trip from my house to Northwood is about 90 miles. The trip computer told me that I would be out of gas in 90 miles. Cue “Challenge Accepted” picture. The first 15 to 20 miles of the trip was a bit nerve-racking. Watching the instant fuel economy fluctuate between 10 to 15 as the vehicle would slow down and accelerate as other vehicles came into its path. I began to worry about my goal of reaching Midland was all for naught. But as we traveled further on I-75, my confidence began to grow. The engine settled down and cruise at just a hair above 2,000 rpms. The fuel gauge was steadily going down, but my average fuel economy was rising. It wasn’t till we passed the small town of Auburn, that car flashed its low fuel light. The vehicle said it had 30 miles till it reached empty. I knew that Midland was only ten or so miles away and decided to push it. The gauge continued to fall as did the distance to empty. I held my breath until we got onto the off-ramp. Just a few hundred feet away was a gas station. We had done it with just 20 miles to spare. According to the car, I had an average of 15.1 mpg for the trip. I know there will be someone who will be saying: “Why did you this? Aren’t you missing the point of this vehicle?!” No, I know the point of the Grand Cherokee Trackhawk is to go stupid fast. Defy the laws of physics. But that is what every review (including mine that will be coming in the near future) goes on about. I wanted to do something a bit different and look at it from a different angle. I think my brother said it best about this whole experience as I got back into the car after getting some gas, “I wasn’t expecting that to happen.” View full article- 4 replies
-
- 3
-
-
-
- afterthoughts
- fuel economy
- (and 3 more)
-
Afterthoughts: Going the Distance in A Grand Cherokee Trackhawk
William Maley posted an article in Opinion
“I can’t believe we’re going to make it” This thought passed through my head as I brought the vehicle to a stop on an off-ramp. Somehow, I was able to travel from my house in the outskirts of Metro Detroit to my hometown of Midland, Michigan on just a quarter-tank of gas. That may not seem like a huge accomplishment except when you look at the vehicle I was driving, the 707 horsepower Jeep Grand Cherokee Trackhawk. Originally, I wasn’t planning on traveling to Midland in the Trackhawk. Earlier in the week, I had driven it down to an event in Ann Arbor to drive a couple of Mitsubishi vehicles. The trip revealed the thirst of the supercharged 6.2L V8 by using up a third of the gas tank. My plan for the rest of the time would be running errands and some small trips to get a feel of the vehicle. Over the weekend, I would get some work done and take photos. But that would be thrown out the window when my brother brought up the idea of heading to the Northwood Auto Show in Midland. The Northwood show takes place on the grounds of Northwood University. It is a unique auto show as the students of the school run all of the aspects of the show ranging from the planning to being the product specialists for each brand. This is part of their automotive and aftermarket degree programs. When I lived in Midland, the show was something I looked forward to every year as I would get the chance to sit in various new vehicles. Also, I would come home with a big bag of brochures that I would be reading throughout the year, letting all of the information seep into my brain. This may explain why I became so crazy about vehicles. It had been a few years since I last attended the show due to various factors such as not knowing when it would be put on. But I was surprised that it would be taking place around the same time I would have the Trackhawk. At first, I was hesitant to go. But then, my brother said the magic words, “I would be willing to pay for gas. I want to go for a ride in the Trackhawk.” Once those words came out of his mouth, I had decided that it would be a good idea to go to Northwood. But something else crept into my head. Would it be possible to travel to the show on a limited amount of gas? I decided to put it to the test. Saturday morning, my brother and I got into the Trackhawk to head towards Midland. Starting up the vehicle, the supercharged V8 thundered to life and the gas gauge rose to just a hair over a quarter of a tank. My plan was to put the vehicle into Eco mode and use the radar cruise control to travel at a steady speed of 75 mph. The instant fuel economy screen would be up in the instrument cluster to let me monitor and make adjustments as needed. I would stop for gas when the distance to empty notification reached 15 miles or under. As I began to pull away from the house, my brother noticed that the vehicle was in Eco mode. “I think its more of a suggestion than an actual mode,” I said when he brought it up. To demonstrate what I meant, I pushed the throttle to almost the floor on an on-ramp. The V8 engine roared into life with the supercharged screeching. Even in Eco, it is quite shocking how fast this brick picks up speed. “I get what you mean by this being a suggestion,” my brother said to me as we merged onto I-75. The trip from my house to Northwood is about 90 miles. The trip computer told me that I would be out of gas in 90 miles. Cue “Challenge Accepted” picture. The first 15 to 20 miles of the trip was a bit nerve-racking. Watching the instant fuel economy fluctuate between 10 to 15 as the vehicle would slow down and accelerate as other vehicles came into its path. I began to worry about my goal of reaching Midland was all for naught. But as we traveled further on I-75, my confidence began to grow. The engine settled down and cruise at just a hair above 2,000 rpms. The fuel gauge was steadily going down, but my average fuel economy was rising. It wasn’t till we passed the small town of Auburn, that car flashed its low fuel light. The vehicle said it had 30 miles till it reached empty. I knew that Midland was only ten or so miles away and decided to push it. The gauge continued to fall as did the distance to empty. I held my breath until we got onto the off-ramp. Just a few hundred feet away was a gas station. We had done it with just 20 miles to spare. According to the car, I had an average of 15.1 mpg for the trip. I know there will be someone who will be saying: “Why did you this? Aren’t you missing the point of this vehicle?!” No, I know the point of the Grand Cherokee Trackhawk is to go stupid fast. Defy the laws of physics. But that is what every review (including mine that will be coming in the near future) goes on about. I wanted to do something a bit different and look at it from a different angle. I think my brother said it best about this whole experience as I got back into the car after getting some gas, “I wasn’t expecting that to happen.”- 4 comments
-
- 4
-
-
- afterthoughts
- fuel economy
- (and 3 more)
-
When the Ford Ranger returns to the US market in a few weeks, the EPA window sticker will be a primary strong selling point. The EPA estimates for the Ranger have been announced and it beats any other gasoline powered pickup on the market. The two-wheel drive Ranger will have a 21mpg city / 26 highway / 23 combined rating. That combined rating ties the combined rating of the diesel-powered Chevy Colorado. The 4wd model gets a 20 city / 24 highway / 22 combined rating of which the city and combined rating are the highest in the class. The Ranger starts around $25,395 and offers only one engine, a 2.3 liter 4-cylinder, that will tow and haul more than the V6 offerings from Nissan, Toyota, and Ford. The U.S. mid-size truck market is heating up with Ranger as just the newest entry in the mix. The 2020 Jeep Gladiator will be arriving next year but has not yet been rated by the EPA. View full article
-
As expected, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have unveiled a proposal that will suspend increases in fuel economy put forth by the Obama administration, and take away California's ability regulate vehicle emissions. The new proposal is called the "Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule." Under the new proposal, the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) would be capped at the 2020 level of 37 mpg through 2025. Under the rules that were created during the Obama administration, automakers would need to have a fleet average of 54 mpg in 2026. The proposal would also remove Calfornia's ability to set their own emissions state based on a 1975 federal law that prohibits states from setting their own greenhouse gas limits. It needs to be noted that two federal judges have rejected this argument when it was brought to court. "EPA is proposing to withdraw the waiver granted to California in 2013 for the GHG [Greenhouse Gas] and ZEV [Zero Emissions Vehicles] requirements of its Advanced Clean Cars program," the proposal states. "In short, the agencies propose to maintain one national standard -- a standard that is set exclusively by the Federal government." What are the benefits to this new proposal? The one that has been getting the most headlines is reduced fatalities and crashes. If you're scratching your head as to how this makes sense, here is what the proposal argues. People who buy fuel-efficient vehicle will drive more, increasing the odds that they will get into a crash. Fuel-efficient vehicles will be more expensive, thus slowing down the rate people buy new cars with advanced safety features. Fuel-efficient vehicles tend to be lighter, thus are less capable of withstanding a crash. The proposal claims that this will prevent 12,700 fatalities and many more injuries on American roads. There has been a lot of disagreement on this part, especially on the weight part. While it is true that a heavier vehicle won't sustain as much damage as lighter vehicle, experts have realized that the size of vehicle is more important to overall safety. Plus, the New York Times points out this point only accounts for one percent of the estimated fatalities in the proposal. Other benefits include reduced costs for new vehicles - the proposal says the stricter emission rules add about an average of $2,430 to the price of new vehicles. “We think we can have a win-win, if we lock in at 2020 levels. We’re not imposing undue costs on manufacturers. We’re not imposing undue costs on consumers who want affordable vehicles. And therefore we think as a result of these standards we will be able to have our cake and eat it too,” said Bill Wehrum, the assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation on a call today. Reactions to this are very mixed. “I applaud the Trump administration for proposing new standards for cars and trucks. Unless the Obama administration’s punishing standards are changed, consumer choice will be limited and the cost of vehicles will skyrocket,” said Senator John Barrasso (R-WY), chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. "Automakers support continued improvements in fuel economy and flexibilities that incentivize advanced technologies while balancing priorities like affordability, safety, jobs, and the environment," said the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and and the Association of Global Automakers in a statement. "The administration's effort to roll back these standards is a denial of basic science and a denial of American automakers' engineering capabilities and ingenuity," said John M. DeCicco, research professor at the University of Michigan Energy Institute. "This was a predictable move, as the current administration has been working hard to dismantle Obama-era regulations across the board. And while there's little demand today for smaller, more-efficient or electrified vehicles in the U.S., as gas prices remain low, these lower fuel economy targets proposed by the administration will likely spark an unwanted war between Washington and the California Air Resources Board. While few stakeholders were happy with the tough targets in the current regulations, unraveling those standards will likely be even more painful," said Michelle Krebs, executive analyst at Autotrader. Unsurprisingly, California is not pleased by this new proposal. The state along with 18 others and the District of Columbia have announced they would challenge the proposal in court. “The Trump Administration has launched a brazen attack, no matter how it is cloaked, on our nation’s Clean Car Standards,” said Xavier Becerra, California’s attorney general. California “will use every legal tool at its disposal to defend today’s national standards and reaffirm the facts and science behind them.” California Governor Jerry Brown was more blunt in his reaction to this, "California will fight this stupidity in every conceivable way possible.” A legal fight could mean a lot of headaches for automakers as it might result in two different emission standards they would have to meet. "With today's release of the Administration's proposals, it's time for substantive negotiations to begin. We urge California and the federal government to find a common sense solution that sets continued increases in vehicle efficiency standards while also meeting the needs of America's drivers," said the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and and the Association of Global Automakers. The next step is giving the public 60 days to comment on this proposal. Source: Bloomberg, New York Times, (2), Reuters, EPA U.S. EPA and DOT Propose Fuel Economy Standards for MY 2021-2026 Vehicles WASHINGTON — Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) released a notice of proposed rulemaking, the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks (SAFE Vehicles Rule), to correct the national automobile fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards to give the American people greater access to safer, more affordable vehicles that are cleaner for the environment. The SAFE Vehicles Rule is the next generation of the Congressionally mandated Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards. This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) is the first formal step in setting the 2021-2026 Model Year (MY) standards that must be achieved by each automaker for its car and light-duty truck fleet. In today’s proposal, EPA and NHTSA are seeking public comment on a wide range of regulatory options, including a preferred alternative that locks in MY 2020 standards through 2026, providing a much-needed time-out from further, costly increases. The agencies’ preferred alternative reflects a balance of safety, economics, technology, fuel conservation, and pollution reduction. It is anticipated to prevent thousands of on-road fatalities and injuries as compared to the standards set forth in the 2012 final rule. The joint proposal initiates a process to establish a new 50-state fuel economy and tailpipe carbon dioxide emissions standard for passenger cars and light trucks covering MY 2021 through 2026. “We are delivering on President Trump’s promise to the American public that his administration would address and fix the current fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards,” said EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler. “Our proposal aims to strike the right regulatory balance based on the most recent information and create a 50-state solution that will enable more Americans to afford newer, safer vehicles that pollute less. More realistic standards can save lives while continuing to improve the environment. We value the public’s input as we engage in this process in an open, transparent manner.” “There are compelling reasons for a new rulemaking on fuel economy standards for 2021-2026,” said Secretary Elaine L. Chao. “More realistic standards will promote a healthy economy by bringing newer, safer, cleaner and more fuel-efficient vehicles to U.S. roads and we look forward to receiving input from the public.” The current standards have been a factor in the rising cost of new automobiles to an average of $35,000 or more—out of reach for many American families. Indeed, compared to the preferred alternative in the proposal, keeping in place the standards finalized in 2012 would add $2,340 to the cost of owning a new car, and impose more than $500 billion in societal costs on the U.S. economy over the next 50 years. Additionally, a 2018 government study by NHTSA shows new model year vehicles are safer, resulting in fewer deaths and injuries when involved in accidents, as compared to older models. Therefore, the Administration is focused on correcting the current standards that restrict the American people from being able to afford newer vehicles with more advanced safety features, better fuel economy, and associated environmental benefits. On April 2, 2018, EPA issued the Mid-Term Evaluation Final Determination which found that the MY 2022-2025 GHG standards are not appropriate and should be revised. For more than a year, the agencies worked together to extensively analyze current automotive and fuel technologies, reviewed economic conditions and projections, and consulted with other federal agency partners to ensure the most reliable and accurate analysis possible. EPA and NHTSA are seeking public feedback to ensure that all potential impacts concerning today’s proposal are fully considered and hope to issue a final rule this winter. The public will have 60 days to provide feedback once published at the Federal Register -
As expected, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have unveiled a proposal that will suspend increases in fuel economy put forth by the Obama administration, and take away California's ability regulate vehicle emissions. The new proposal is called the "Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule." Under the new proposal, the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) would be capped at the 2020 level of 37 mpg through 2025. Under the rules that were created during the Obama administration, automakers would need to have a fleet average of 54 mpg in 2026. The proposal would also remove Calfornia's ability to set their own emissions state based on a 1975 federal law that prohibits states from setting their own greenhouse gas limits. It needs to be noted that two federal judges have rejected this argument when it was brought to court. "EPA is proposing to withdraw the waiver granted to California in 2013 for the GHG [Greenhouse Gas] and ZEV [Zero Emissions Vehicles] requirements of its Advanced Clean Cars program," the proposal states. "In short, the agencies propose to maintain one national standard -- a standard that is set exclusively by the Federal government." What are the benefits to this new proposal? The one that has been getting the most headlines is reduced fatalities and crashes. If you're scratching your head as to how this makes sense, here is what the proposal argues. People who buy fuel-efficient vehicle will drive more, increasing the odds that they will get into a crash. Fuel-efficient vehicles will be more expensive, thus slowing down the rate people buy new cars with advanced safety features. Fuel-efficient vehicles tend to be lighter, thus are less capable of withstanding a crash. The proposal claims that this will prevent 12,700 fatalities and many more injuries on American roads. There has been a lot of disagreement on this part, especially on the weight part. While it is true that a heavier vehicle won't sustain as much damage as lighter vehicle, experts have realized that the size of vehicle is more important to overall safety. Plus, the New York Times points out this point only accounts for one percent of the estimated fatalities in the proposal. Other benefits include reduced costs for new vehicles - the proposal says the stricter emission rules add about an average of $2,430 to the price of new vehicles. “We think we can have a win-win, if we lock in at 2020 levels. We’re not imposing undue costs on manufacturers. We’re not imposing undue costs on consumers who want affordable vehicles. And therefore we think as a result of these standards we will be able to have our cake and eat it too,” said Bill Wehrum, the assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation on a call today. Reactions to this are very mixed. “I applaud the Trump administration for proposing new standards for cars and trucks. Unless the Obama administration’s punishing standards are changed, consumer choice will be limited and the cost of vehicles will skyrocket,” said Senator John Barrasso (R-WY), chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. "Automakers support continued improvements in fuel economy and flexibilities that incentivize advanced technologies while balancing priorities like affordability, safety, jobs, and the environment," said the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and and the Association of Global Automakers in a statement. "The administration's effort to roll back these standards is a denial of basic science and a denial of American automakers' engineering capabilities and ingenuity," said John M. DeCicco, research professor at the University of Michigan Energy Institute. "This was a predictable move, as the current administration has been working hard to dismantle Obama-era regulations across the board. And while there's little demand today for smaller, more-efficient or electrified vehicles in the U.S., as gas prices remain low, these lower fuel economy targets proposed by the administration will likely spark an unwanted war between Washington and the California Air Resources Board. While few stakeholders were happy with the tough targets in the current regulations, unraveling those standards will likely be even more painful," said Michelle Krebs, executive analyst at Autotrader. Unsurprisingly, California is not pleased by this new proposal. The state along with 18 others and the District of Columbia have announced they would challenge the proposal in court. “The Trump Administration has launched a brazen attack, no matter how it is cloaked, on our nation’s Clean Car Standards,” said Xavier Becerra, California’s attorney general. California “will use every legal tool at its disposal to defend today’s national standards and reaffirm the facts and science behind them.” California Governor Jerry Brown was more blunt in his reaction to this, "California will fight this stupidity in every conceivable way possible.” A legal fight could mean a lot of headaches for automakers as it might result in two different emission standards they would have to meet. "With today's release of the Administration's proposals, it's time for substantive negotiations to begin. We urge California and the federal government to find a common sense solution that sets continued increases in vehicle efficiency standards while also meeting the needs of America's drivers," said the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and and the Association of Global Automakers. The next step is giving the public 60 days to comment on this proposal. Source: Bloomberg, New York Times, (2), Reuters, EPA U.S. EPA and DOT Propose Fuel Economy Standards for MY 2021-2026 Vehicles WASHINGTON — Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) released a notice of proposed rulemaking, the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks (SAFE Vehicles Rule), to correct the national automobile fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards to give the American people greater access to safer, more affordable vehicles that are cleaner for the environment. The SAFE Vehicles Rule is the next generation of the Congressionally mandated Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards. This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) is the first formal step in setting the 2021-2026 Model Year (MY) standards that must be achieved by each automaker for its car and light-duty truck fleet. In today’s proposal, EPA and NHTSA are seeking public comment on a wide range of regulatory options, including a preferred alternative that locks in MY 2020 standards through 2026, providing a much-needed time-out from further, costly increases. The agencies’ preferred alternative reflects a balance of safety, economics, technology, fuel conservation, and pollution reduction. It is anticipated to prevent thousands of on-road fatalities and injuries as compared to the standards set forth in the 2012 final rule. The joint proposal initiates a process to establish a new 50-state fuel economy and tailpipe carbon dioxide emissions standard for passenger cars and light trucks covering MY 2021 through 2026. “We are delivering on President Trump’s promise to the American public that his administration would address and fix the current fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards,” said EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler. “Our proposal aims to strike the right regulatory balance based on the most recent information and create a 50-state solution that will enable more Americans to afford newer, safer vehicles that pollute less. More realistic standards can save lives while continuing to improve the environment. We value the public’s input as we engage in this process in an open, transparent manner.” “There are compelling reasons for a new rulemaking on fuel economy standards for 2021-2026,” said Secretary Elaine L. Chao. “More realistic standards will promote a healthy economy by bringing newer, safer, cleaner and more fuel-efficient vehicles to U.S. roads and we look forward to receiving input from the public.” The current standards have been a factor in the rising cost of new automobiles to an average of $35,000 or more—out of reach for many American families. Indeed, compared to the preferred alternative in the proposal, keeping in place the standards finalized in 2012 would add $2,340 to the cost of owning a new car, and impose more than $500 billion in societal costs on the U.S. economy over the next 50 years. Additionally, a 2018 government study by NHTSA shows new model year vehicles are safer, resulting in fewer deaths and injuries when involved in accidents, as compared to older models. Therefore, the Administration is focused on correcting the current standards that restrict the American people from being able to afford newer vehicles with more advanced safety features, better fuel economy, and associated environmental benefits. On April 2, 2018, EPA issued the Mid-Term Evaluation Final Determination which found that the MY 2022-2025 GHG standards are not appropriate and should be revised. For more than a year, the agencies worked together to extensively analyze current automotive and fuel technologies, reviewed economic conditions and projections, and consulted with other federal agency partners to ensure the most reliable and accurate analysis possible. EPA and NHTSA are seeking public feedback to ensure that all potential impacts concerning today’s proposal are fully considered and hope to issue a final rule this winter. The public will have 60 days to provide feedback once published at the Federal Register View full article
-
Whenever an automaker introduces a redesigned model or makes some significant mechanical changes, usually the fuel economy go slightly up. But there are cases where those numbers remain the same or worse, go down. The New York Daily News reports that certain versions of the 2019 Chevrolet Camaro see a slight drop in fuel economy. 2019 Camaro V6: 1 mpg drop on highway with the manual (27 vs. 28 on the 2018 model), 1 mpg drop in combined with the 8-speed automatic (22 vs. 23) 2019 Camaro V8: 1 mpg drop on highway with the manual (24 vs. 25), 1 mpg drop in city with the 10-speed automatic (16 vs. 17) 2019 Camaro ZL1: 1 mpg drop in combined with the 10-speed automatic (15 vs. 16) Other Camaros, such as those equipped with the 2.0L turbo-four remain unchanged in their fuel economy figures. This is bit bizarre, especially on models equipped with the new 10-speed transmission. Some think it could be the Camaro's new face, which has received mixed reactions could be less aerodynamic than before. But if this was case, wouldn't all of the Camaro variants see some sort of drop? Source: New York Daily News -
Whenever an automaker introduces a redesigned model or makes some significant mechanical changes, usually the fuel economy go slightly up. But there are cases where those numbers remain the same or worse, go down. The New York Daily News reports that certain versions of the 2019 Chevrolet Camaro see a slight drop in fuel economy. 2019 Camaro V6: 1 mpg drop on highway with the manual (27 vs. 28 on the 2018 model), 1 mpg drop in combined with the 8-speed automatic (22 vs. 23) 2019 Camaro V8: 1 mpg drop on highway with the manual (24 vs. 25), 1 mpg drop in city with the 10-speed automatic (16 vs. 17) 2019 Camaro ZL1: 1 mpg drop in combined with the 10-speed automatic (15 vs. 16) Other Camaros, such as those equipped with the 2.0L turbo-four remain unchanged in their fuel economy figures. This is bit bizarre, especially on models equipped with the new 10-speed transmission. Some think it could be the Camaro's new face, which has received mixed reactions could be less aerodynamic than before. But if this was case, wouldn't all of the Camaro variants see some sort of drop? Source: New York Daily News View full article
-
Fuel Economy Figures Come Out On CX-5 Diesel... And it Isn't So Good
William Maley posted an article in Mazda
It seems like ages since Mazda announced plans to bring over a diesel engine. Many things have transpired since then with various delays and the Volkswagen diesel emission scandal. While the company said the diesel engine was still in the cards, we started to think it was as real as bigfoot or the loch ness monster. But the engine is one step closer to reality as the EPA has posted the fuel economy figures for the CX-5 diesel. For the front-wheel variant, the CX-5 diesel will return 28 City/31 Highway/29 Combined. All-wheel drive see a slight drop to 27/30/28. Major improvement over gas model, right? Not really. The FWD gas model does trail the diesel in the city by three, but there is only a one mpg difference in the highway and the combined figure is the same. The AWD gas model is pretty much the same story; three mpg difference in the city, two mpg difference on the highway, and the same figure for combined. It gets even worse if we compare it to the Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain Diesel. In FWD guise, EPA figures stand at 28 City/39 Highway/32 Combined. AWD models return 28/38/32. We're guessing that new emissions equipment and harder testing likely affected CX-5 diesel's fuel economy figure. Mazda might sell the diesel engine as a performance upgrade - the 2.2L turbodiesel produces 170 horsepower and 310 pound-feet of torque. No timeframe has been given on when the CX-5 diesel will finally go on sale. Source: EPA -
It seems like ages since Mazda announced plans to bring over a diesel engine. Many things have transpired since then with various delays and the Volkswagen diesel emission scandal. While the company said the diesel engine was still in the cards, we started to think it was as real as bigfoot or the loch ness monster. But the engine is one step closer to reality as the EPA has posted the fuel economy figures for the CX-5 diesel. For the front-wheel variant, the CX-5 diesel will return 28 City/31 Highway/29 Combined. All-wheel drive see a slight drop to 27/30/28. Major improvement over gas model, right? Not really. The FWD gas model does trail the diesel in the city by three, but there is only a one mpg difference in the highway and the combined figure is the same. The AWD gas model is pretty much the same story; three mpg difference in the city, two mpg difference on the highway, and the same figure for combined. It gets even worse if we compare it to the Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain Diesel. In FWD guise, EPA figures stand at 28 City/39 Highway/32 Combined. AWD models return 28/38/32. We're guessing that new emissions equipment and harder testing likely affected CX-5 diesel's fuel economy figure. Mazda might sell the diesel engine as a performance upgrade - the 2.2L turbodiesel produces 170 horsepower and 310 pound-feet of torque. No timeframe has been given on when the CX-5 diesel will finally go on sale. Source: EPA View full article
-
Before the new Corolla hatchback hits dealers later this summer, Toyota has revealed pricing and fuel economy numbers. The base SE will set you back $20,910 (includes a $920 destination charge), while the XSE begins at $23,910. That will net you a new 2.0L four-cylinder with 168 horsepower and a six-speed manual. A CVT is available for an additional $1,100. This is what you get on either trim: SE: Toyota Safety Sense 2.0 with automatic emergency braking with pedestrian detection, adaptive cruise control, and lane departure warning; 8-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay compatibility, and 16-inch wheels. XSE: 18-inch wheels, LED fog lamps, upgraded infotainment system, leather-and-fabric upholstery, and heated front seats. As for fuel economy, the SE with the CVT is the mileage leader with EPA estimates of 32 City/42 Highway/36 Combined. The XSE CVT is next with figures of 30/38/33. For the manual, Toyota only has figures for the SE which are 28/37/31. Numbers on the XSE manual are coming soon. Source: Toyota- 19 comments
-
- 1
-
-
- 2019
- corolla hatchback
- (and 3 more)
-
Before the new Corolla hatchback hits dealers later this summer, Toyota has revealed pricing and fuel economy numbers. The base SE will set you back $20,910 (includes a $920 destination charge), while the XSE begins at $23,910. That will net you a new 2.0L four-cylinder with 168 horsepower and a six-speed manual. A CVT is available for an additional $1,100. This is what you get on either trim: SE: Toyota Safety Sense 2.0 with automatic emergency braking with pedestrian detection, adaptive cruise control, and lane departure warning; 8-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay compatibility, and 16-inch wheels. XSE: 18-inch wheels, LED fog lamps, upgraded infotainment system, leather-and-fabric upholstery, and heated front seats. As for fuel economy, the SE with the CVT is the mileage leader with EPA estimates of 32 City/42 Highway/36 Combined. The XSE CVT is next with figures of 30/38/33. For the manual, Toyota only has figures for the SE which are 28/37/31. Numbers on the XSE manual are coming soon. Source: Toyota View full article
-
We all know someone who takes things a bit a too far. In the case of automakers, that someone is EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. Back in April April, Pruitt announced a serious rollback of fuel economy regulations that were set in stone during the Obama administration. In a summary of the proposed draft, the EPA would rollback the fleetwide average from 46.8 mpg for the 2026 model year to around 37 mpg - the fleetwide average for the 2020 model year. The draft also mentions pre-empting "California's authority" on setting their own emission standards under the 1975 Energy Policy and Conservation Act. This move has caused California and a collation of other states to file suit over the proposed changes. According to Automotive News, the changes proposed by Pruitt go a bit too far for automakers. All they wanted was the emission targets for the 2022-2025 model years to "ratchet up more gradually and offer more compliance flexibility." Now, they have to worry about litigation and uncertainty. "I don't think anybody in industry, when asked for reopening of standards, asked to level out to zero," said an unnamed lobbyist for a major automaker. However, certain groups argue that automakers should have expected something far-reaching under this current administration. "You've got to know your audience. If you go to [EPA Administrator] Scott Pruitt and Donald Trump and say you want relief from the rules and they are going to cost jobs, this is what you end up with," said Andrew Linhardt, deputy director of the Sierra Club's clean energy campaign. Later this week, executives from the major automakers will be meeting with officials at the White House to see if they can get the federal government and California to agree to some sort of comprise. Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required) -
We all know someone who takes things a bit a too far. In the case of automakers, that someone is EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. Back in April April, Pruitt announced a serious rollback of fuel economy regulations that were set in stone during the Obama administration. In a summary of the proposed draft, the EPA would rollback the fleetwide average from 46.8 mpg for the 2026 model year to around 37 mpg - the fleetwide average for the 2020 model year. The draft also mentions pre-empting "California's authority" on setting their own emission standards under the 1975 Energy Policy and Conservation Act. This move has caused California and a collation of other states to file suit over the proposed changes. According to Automotive News, the changes proposed by Pruitt go a bit too far for automakers. All they wanted was the emission targets for the 2022-2025 model years to "ratchet up more gradually and offer more compliance flexibility." Now, they have to worry about litigation and uncertainty. "I don't think anybody in industry, when asked for reopening of standards, asked to level out to zero," said an unnamed lobbyist for a major automaker. However, certain groups argue that automakers should have expected something far-reaching under this current administration. "You've got to know your audience. If you go to [EPA Administrator] Scott Pruitt and Donald Trump and say you want relief from the rules and they are going to cost jobs, this is what you end up with," said Andrew Linhardt, deputy director of the Sierra Club's clean energy campaign. Later this week, executives from the major automakers will be meeting with officials at the White House to see if they can get the federal government and California to agree to some sort of comprise. Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required) View full article
-
When Ford announced the new 3.0L Power Stroke V6 diesel for the 2018 F-150, the company said the engine should return 30 mpg on the highway. Today, the official EPA numbers for the Power Stroke V6 have come out and it will return 22 City/30 Highway/25 Combined. But there is a catch to this. As The Car Connection notes, this is for the two-wheel drive variant. The four-wheel drive variant is more thirsty with EPA figures of 20/25/22. Still, the 3.0L Power Stoke V6 beats the 3.0L EcoDiesel found in the current Ram 1500 - 20/27/23 for 2WD and 19/27/22 for 4WD. “Even a few years ago, customers wouldn’t have imagined an EPA-estimated rating of 30 mpg highway would be possible in a full-size pickup, but our team of crazy-smart engineers rose to the challenge,” said Hau Thai-Tang, Ford executive vice president, product development and purchasing in a statement. Ford says the Power Stroke V6 can tow up to 11,400 pounds and has a max payload of 2,020 pounds for XL and XLT fleet applications (1,940 pounds for retail applications). Source: Ford, The Car Connection New Ford F-150 Power Stroke Diesel Has Best-In-Class EPA-Estimated 30 MPG Highway Fuel Economy Rating Efficient: 2018 F-150 3.0-liter Power Stroke® diesel has a best-in-class EPA-estimated fuel economy rating of 30 mpg highway Powerful: First-ever F-150 Power Stroke diesel engine offers best-in-class 250 diesel horsepower and 440 lb.-ft. of torque Capable: Diesel-equipped F-150 brings best-in-class diesel towing and payload capacity DEARBORN, Mich., April 19, 2018 – The 2018 Ford F-150’s first 3.0-liter Power Stroke® diesel engine officially boasts EPA-estimated ratings of 30 mpg highway, 22 mpg city and 25 mpg combined. These are the highest EPA-estimated ratings available in a full-size pickup truck. These benchmark figures are the result of more than a decade of work developing a lightweight high-strength, military-grade, aluminum-alloy body, a 10-speed SelectShift® transmission, and robust engine construction of aluminum and compacted graphite iron to deliver durability, reduced weight and stump-pulling torque. “Even a few years ago, customers wouldn’t have imagined an EPA-estimated rating of 30 mpg highway would be possible in a full-size pickup, but our team of crazy-smart engineers rose to the challenge,” said Hau Thai-Tang, Ford executive vice president, product development and purchasing. In addition to its leading fuel economy ratings, the all-new F-150 Power Stroke boasts best-in-class* diesel power – 250 horsepower and a stout 440 lb.-ft. of torque – greater torque than a 2019 Ram 1500 Hemi V8. It provides best-in-class diesel towing of 11,400 pounds for pulling boats, horses or RVs. The new engine also provides best-in-class diesel payload – 2,020 pounds for XL and XLT fleet applications, and 1,940 pounds for retail applications – to easily haul equipment, supplies or a slide-in camper. F-150 Power Stroke diesel shares its proven commercial-grade technology with F-Series Super Duty’s 6.7-liter Power Stroke – America’s most powerful, capable heavy-duty pickup truck ever. The 2018 Ford F-150 with all-new 3.0-liter Power Stroke diesel engine will begin shipping to dealers in May. *Class is full-size pickups under 8,500 pounds. GVWR based on Ford segmentation. -
When Ford announced the new 3.0L Power Stroke V6 diesel for the 2018 F-150, the company said the engine should return 30 mpg on the highway. Today, the official EPA numbers for the Power Stroke V6 have come out and it will return 22 City/30 Highway/25 Combined. But there is a catch to this. As The Car Connection notes, this is for the two-wheel drive variant. The four-wheel drive variant is more thirsty with EPA figures of 20/25/22. Still, the 3.0L Power Stoke V6 beats the 3.0L EcoDiesel found in the current Ram 1500 - 20/27/23 for 2WD and 19/27/22 for 4WD. “Even a few years ago, customers wouldn’t have imagined an EPA-estimated rating of 30 mpg highway would be possible in a full-size pickup, but our team of crazy-smart engineers rose to the challenge,” said Hau Thai-Tang, Ford executive vice president, product development and purchasing in a statement. Ford says the Power Stroke V6 can tow up to 11,400 pounds and has a max payload of 2,020 pounds for XL and XLT fleet applications (1,940 pounds for retail applications). Source: Ford, The Car Connection New Ford F-150 Power Stroke Diesel Has Best-In-Class EPA-Estimated 30 MPG Highway Fuel Economy Rating Efficient: 2018 F-150 3.0-liter Power Stroke® diesel has a best-in-class EPA-estimated fuel economy rating of 30 mpg highway Powerful: First-ever F-150 Power Stroke diesel engine offers best-in-class 250 diesel horsepower and 440 lb.-ft. of torque Capable: Diesel-equipped F-150 brings best-in-class diesel towing and payload capacity DEARBORN, Mich., April 19, 2018 – The 2018 Ford F-150’s first 3.0-liter Power Stroke® diesel engine officially boasts EPA-estimated ratings of 30 mpg highway, 22 mpg city and 25 mpg combined. These are the highest EPA-estimated ratings available in a full-size pickup truck. These benchmark figures are the result of more than a decade of work developing a lightweight high-strength, military-grade, aluminum-alloy body, a 10-speed SelectShift® transmission, and robust engine construction of aluminum and compacted graphite iron to deliver durability, reduced weight and stump-pulling torque. “Even a few years ago, customers wouldn’t have imagined an EPA-estimated rating of 30 mpg highway would be possible in a full-size pickup, but our team of crazy-smart engineers rose to the challenge,” said Hau Thai-Tang, Ford executive vice president, product development and purchasing. In addition to its leading fuel economy ratings, the all-new F-150 Power Stroke boasts best-in-class* diesel power – 250 horsepower and a stout 440 lb.-ft. of torque – greater torque than a 2019 Ram 1500 Hemi V8. It provides best-in-class diesel towing of 11,400 pounds for pulling boats, horses or RVs. The new engine also provides best-in-class diesel payload – 2,020 pounds for XL and XLT fleet applications, and 1,940 pounds for retail applications – to easily haul equipment, supplies or a slide-in camper. F-150 Power Stroke diesel shares its proven commercial-grade technology with F-Series Super Duty’s 6.7-liter Power Stroke – America’s most powerful, capable heavy-duty pickup truck ever. The 2018 Ford F-150 with all-new 3.0-liter Power Stroke diesel engine will begin shipping to dealers in May. *Class is full-size pickups under 8,500 pounds. GVWR based on Ford segmentation. View full article
-
In a move that was expected to happen soon, the EPA announced that it plans to revise the fuel-efficiency regulations that were approved during the President Obama administration. “The Obama EPA’s determination was wrong. Obama’s EPA cut the midterm evaluation process short with politically charged expediency, made assumptions about the standards that didn’t comport with reality and set the standards too high,” said EPA chief Scott Pruitt in a statement today. The statement goes on to say that the agency will begin working on new standards for cars for 2022-2025 with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The regulations that were finalized during Obama's tenure would require automakers to have fuel economy fleet average of over 50 mpg by 2025. Automakers have been pushing for the standards to be rolled back as it would cause vehicles to become more expensive, and consumers aren't buying fuel-efficient vehicles. “This was the right decision. To ensure ongoing fuel economy improvement, the wisest course of action is to keep new vehicles affordable so more consumers can replace an older car with a new vehicle that uses much less fuel -- and offers more safety features," said Gloria Bergquist, a spokeswoman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers - a trade group that represents a dozen automakers including GM and Ford. Unsurprisingly, this move has brought forth criticism from both consumer and environmental groups. “EPA’s decision defies the robust record and years of review that show these targets are reasonable and appropriate,” said David Friedman, director of cars and products policy and analysis for Consumers Union, the advocacy division of Consumer Reports. “Undermining these consumer protections will cost consumers more at the pump while fulfilling the wishes of the auto industry.” The EPA also announced that it was considering revoking California's waiver that allows it to set its own emission rules that are tougher than the federal regulations. Aside from California, 12 other states have adopted these standards that together account for a third of car sales in the U.S. Since President Donald Trump entered the white house, the relationship between the EPA and California has become very strained. California officials have vowed to fight back if the EPA goes forward. Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required) View full article
- 54 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- epa
- fuel economy
- (and 2 more)
-
In a move that was expected to happen soon, the EPA announced that it plans to revise the fuel-efficiency regulations that were approved during the President Obama administration. “The Obama EPA’s determination was wrong. Obama’s EPA cut the midterm evaluation process short with politically charged expediency, made assumptions about the standards that didn’t comport with reality and set the standards too high,” said EPA chief Scott Pruitt in a statement today. The statement goes on to say that the agency will begin working on new standards for cars for 2022-2025 with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The regulations that were finalized during Obama's tenure would require automakers to have fuel economy fleet average of over 50 mpg by 2025. Automakers have been pushing for the standards to be rolled back as it would cause vehicles to become more expensive, and consumers aren't buying fuel-efficient vehicles. “This was the right decision. To ensure ongoing fuel economy improvement, the wisest course of action is to keep new vehicles affordable so more consumers can replace an older car with a new vehicle that uses much less fuel -- and offers more safety features," said Gloria Bergquist, a spokeswoman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers - a trade group that represents a dozen automakers including GM and Ford. Unsurprisingly, this move has brought forth criticism from both consumer and environmental groups. “EPA’s decision defies the robust record and years of review that show these targets are reasonable and appropriate,” said David Friedman, director of cars and products policy and analysis for Consumers Union, the advocacy division of Consumer Reports. “Undermining these consumer protections will cost consumers more at the pump while fulfilling the wishes of the auto industry.” The EPA also announced that it was considering revoking California's waiver that allows it to set its own emission rules that are tougher than the federal regulations. Aside from California, 12 other states have adopted these standards that together account for a third of car sales in the U.S. Since President Donald Trump entered the white house, the relationship between the EPA and California has become very strained. California officials have vowed to fight back if the EPA goes forward. Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required) -
Most new cars and trucks sitting on dealer lots have fuel economy estimates on their window sticker. The only group of vehicles that don't are heavy-duty trucks. This is due to the EPA not requiring automakers to publish estimates on trucks with gross weight ratings that exceed 8,500 pounds. This makes it difficult for folks to compare the heavy-duty trucks with one another or comparing the diesel variants with the light-duty gas versions. Consumer Reports doesn't believe it should be this way and is working on an effort to change this. Consumer Reports recently tested a Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD, Ford F-250 Super Duty, and Ram 2500 equipped with their optional diesel engines to gauge fuel economy and compare it to their light-duty gas counterparts. Their results show the HD trucks were 1 to 2 MPGs lower than their light-duty counterparts. Of course, you might be saying, that's because heavy-duty trucks have more weight to move. Also, most buyers who are going for this type of truck tend to know what they're getting into. Heavy-duty trucks begin to show their advantage when it comes to intense workloads, becoming more efficient than a similarly-equipped gas truck. Still, we think heavy-duty trucks should have fuel economy estimates to help buyers when it comes time to purchase a heavy-duty truck. “Heavy-duty pickup shoppers shouldn't be left in the dark when it comes to fuel economy,” said David Friedman, director of cars and product policy and analysis for Consumers Union, the policy and mobilization arm of Consumer Reports. Source: Consumer Reports, Letter to Congress (PDF) View full article
-
Most new cars and trucks sitting on dealer lots have fuel economy estimates on their window sticker. The only group of vehicles that don't are heavy-duty trucks. This is due to the EPA not requiring automakers to publish estimates on trucks with gross weight ratings that exceed 8,500 pounds. This makes it difficult for folks to compare the heavy-duty trucks with one another or comparing the diesel variants with the light-duty gas versions. Consumer Reports doesn't believe it should be this way and is working on an effort to change this. Consumer Reports recently tested a Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD, Ford F-250 Super Duty, and Ram 2500 equipped with their optional diesel engines to gauge fuel economy and compare it to their light-duty gas counterparts. Their results show the HD trucks were 1 to 2 MPGs lower than their light-duty counterparts. Of course, you might be saying, that's because heavy-duty trucks have more weight to move. Also, most buyers who are going for this type of truck tend to know what they're getting into. Heavy-duty trucks begin to show their advantage when it comes to intense workloads, becoming more efficient than a similarly-equipped gas truck. Still, we think heavy-duty trucks should have fuel economy estimates to help buyers when it comes time to purchase a heavy-duty truck. “Heavy-duty pickup shoppers shouldn't be left in the dark when it comes to fuel economy,” said David Friedman, director of cars and product policy and analysis for Consumers Union, the policy and mobilization arm of Consumer Reports. Source: Consumer Reports, Letter to Congress (PDF) -
Upcoming Study Questions Fuel-Efficiency Technologies
William Maley posted an article in Automotive Industry
Automakers have been trying different technologies and ideas in an effort to boost fuel economy and reduce emissions. On paper, the new technologies do make a difference. But in the real world, it is a completely different matter. Emissions Analytics, an independent U.K.-based company has been investigating what technologies actually make a difference in reducing emissions and fuel consumption. For the past four years, the company has tested over 500 vehicles in the U.S. since 2013 in real-world driving situations. Globally, it has tested over 1,000 vehicles. Next month, the company will be releasing a study showing which of those technologies help and hurt. "You can only decide if you have the right information. The EPA sticker is — I would say — good up to a point, but we can give a lot more information," said Nick Molden, Emissions Analytics' founder and CEO. Their data shows that over four years of testing in the U.S., there is "no actual improvement in overall fuel economy and no decrease in CO2 emissions," despite new technologies and complex powertrains. EA's data also revealed that downsized turbo engines show huge discrepancies between the EPA's findings and the real world. In the lab, the engines aren't put under stress and can produce high fuel economy figures. But it is a different story out in the real world when the turbos are engaged to keep up with traffic and becomes less efficient than a non-turbocharged engine. "Downsizing is a good thing up to a point. You go past a certain inflection point and actually you can find that the real-world mpg will actually get worse if you go too small," said Molden. "As soon as you start going below 2 liters, that's where we start seeing the gaps open up between EPA sticker and real world." The study did deliver some good news for hybrids. EA found traditional hybrid vehicle provided high fuel economy figures and reduced emissions. Other technologies such as multispeed transmissions, adding lightness, and picking the right tires provide a meaningful impact. Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required) -
Automakers have been trying different technologies and ideas in an effort to boost fuel economy and reduce emissions. On paper, the new technologies do make a difference. But in the real world, it is a completely different matter. Emissions Analytics, an independent U.K.-based company has been investigating what technologies actually make a difference in reducing emissions and fuel consumption. For the past four years, the company has tested over 500 vehicles in the U.S. since 2013 in real-world driving situations. Globally, it has tested over 1,000 vehicles. Next month, the company will be releasing a study showing which of those technologies help and hurt. "You can only decide if you have the right information. The EPA sticker is — I would say — good up to a point, but we can give a lot more information," said Nick Molden, Emissions Analytics' founder and CEO. Their data shows that over four years of testing in the U.S., there is "no actual improvement in overall fuel economy and no decrease in CO2 emissions," despite new technologies and complex powertrains. EA's data also revealed that downsized turbo engines show huge discrepancies between the EPA's findings and the real world. In the lab, the engines aren't put under stress and can produce high fuel economy figures. But it is a different story out in the real world when the turbos are engaged to keep up with traffic and becomes less efficient than a non-turbocharged engine. "Downsizing is a good thing up to a point. You go past a certain inflection point and actually you can find that the real-world mpg will actually get worse if you go too small," said Molden. "As soon as you start going below 2 liters, that's where we start seeing the gaps open up between EPA sticker and real world." The study did deliver some good news for hybrids. EA found traditional hybrid vehicle provided high fuel economy figures and reduced emissions. Other technologies such as multispeed transmissions, adding lightness, and picking the right tires provide a meaningful impact. Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required) View full article
-
Another piece of the 2017 Chevrolet Cruze Diesel puzzle has been revealed. The official EPA numbers have been released and they are quite impressive. Six-Speed Manual: 30 City/52 Highway/37 Combined Nine-Speed Automatic: 31 City/47 Highway/37 Combined “Chevrolet is dedicated to offering customers a wide range of propulsion options. We know there are customers looking for the right combination of fuel efficiency, driving dynamics, fuel type and more. With the EPA-estimated 52-mpg highway Cruze Diesel Sedan, they can get it all,” said Steven Majoros, director of Chevrolet Marketing in a statement. A quick refresher on the Cruze Diesel: it will use a turbocharged 1.6-liter four-cylinder producing 137 horsepower and 240 pound-feet of torque. The sedan will be arriving in the coming weeks with prices beginning at $24,670. The hatchback will get the diesel option next year. Source: Chevrolet Press Release is on Page 2 CRUZE DIESEL SEDAN SETS 52-MPG BENCHMARK EPA Certifies Segment-Best Highway Mileage DETROIT — The 2017 Cruze Diesel Sedan offers up to an EPA-estimated highway mileage of 52 mpg — the highest highway fuel economy of any non-hybrid/non-EV in America. Based upon the EPA highway estimate, Cruze Diesel with the six-speed manual transmission has an estimated range of up to 702 highway miles on one tank of diesel fuel. “Chevrolet is dedicated to offering customers a wide range of propulsion options. We know there are customers looking for the right combination of fuel efficiency, driving dynamics, fuel type and more. With the EPA-estimated 52-mpg highway Cruze Diesel Sedan, they can get it all,” said Steven Majoros, director of Chevrolet Marketing. The 2017 Cruze Diesel Sedan features a new Ecotec 1.6-liter inline four-cylinder turbo-diesel engine offering an SAE-certified 137 horsepower (102 kW) and 240 lb-ft of torque (325 Nm). Cruze Diesel passed all stringent U.S. environmental standards and validation, including Tier 3 Bin 125 emissions standards. Buyers will be able to option their Cruze Diesel Sedans with either a standard six-speed manual or a new, optional Hydra-Matic nine-speed automatic transmission that includes fuel-saving stop/start technology. In addition to its segment-leading EPA-estimated 52 mpg highway fuel economy, Cruze Diesel with the six-speed manual returns an EPA-estimated city mileage of 30 mpg, resulting in 37 mpg combined. Cruze Diesel with the nine-speed automatic achieves an EPA-estimated highway economy of up to 47 mpg and 31 city mpg, which results in 37 mpg combined. A suite of connectivity features complements the Cruze Diesel Sedan’s inherent efficiency. These include available OnStar with 4G LTE connectivity and built-in Wi-Fi hotspot and available Android Auto and Apple CarPlay compatibility through Chevrolet MyLink.* Pricing for 2017 Cruze Diesel Sedan starts at $24,670 including $875 destination charge. Cruze Diesel Hatch will follow Cruze Diesel Sedan later this year for the 2018 model year.- 20 comments
-
- 2
-
-
- chevrolet
- cruze diesel
- (and 3 more)
-
Another piece of the 2017 Chevrolet Cruze Diesel puzzle has been revealed. The official EPA numbers have been released and they are quite impressive. Six-Speed Manual: 30 City/52 Highway/37 Combined Nine-Speed Automatic: 31 City/47 Highway/37 Combined “Chevrolet is dedicated to offering customers a wide range of propulsion options. We know there are customers looking for the right combination of fuel efficiency, driving dynamics, fuel type and more. With the EPA-estimated 52-mpg highway Cruze Diesel Sedan, they can get it all,” said Steven Majoros, director of Chevrolet Marketing in a statement. A quick refresher on the Cruze Diesel: it will use a turbocharged 1.6-liter four-cylinder producing 137 horsepower and 240 pound-feet of torque. The sedan will be arriving in the coming weeks with prices beginning at $24,670. The hatchback will get the diesel option next year. Source: Chevrolet Press Release is on Page 2 CRUZE DIESEL SEDAN SETS 52-MPG BENCHMARK EPA Certifies Segment-Best Highway Mileage DETROIT — The 2017 Cruze Diesel Sedan offers up to an EPA-estimated highway mileage of 52 mpg — the highest highway fuel economy of any non-hybrid/non-EV in America. Based upon the EPA highway estimate, Cruze Diesel with the six-speed manual transmission has an estimated range of up to 702 highway miles on one tank of diesel fuel. “Chevrolet is dedicated to offering customers a wide range of propulsion options. We know there are customers looking for the right combination of fuel efficiency, driving dynamics, fuel type and more. With the EPA-estimated 52-mpg highway Cruze Diesel Sedan, they can get it all,” said Steven Majoros, director of Chevrolet Marketing. The 2017 Cruze Diesel Sedan features a new Ecotec 1.6-liter inline four-cylinder turbo-diesel engine offering an SAE-certified 137 horsepower (102 kW) and 240 lb-ft of torque (325 Nm). Cruze Diesel passed all stringent U.S. environmental standards and validation, including Tier 3 Bin 125 emissions standards. Buyers will be able to option their Cruze Diesel Sedans with either a standard six-speed manual or a new, optional Hydra-Matic nine-speed automatic transmission that includes fuel-saving stop/start technology. In addition to its segment-leading EPA-estimated 52 mpg highway fuel economy, Cruze Diesel with the six-speed manual returns an EPA-estimated city mileage of 30 mpg, resulting in 37 mpg combined. Cruze Diesel with the nine-speed automatic achieves an EPA-estimated highway economy of up to 47 mpg and 31 city mpg, which results in 37 mpg combined. A suite of connectivity features complements the Cruze Diesel Sedan’s inherent efficiency. These include available OnStar with 4G LTE connectivity and built-in Wi-Fi hotspot and available Android Auto and Apple CarPlay compatibility through Chevrolet MyLink.* Pricing for 2017 Cruze Diesel Sedan starts at $24,670 including $875 destination charge. Cruze Diesel Hatch will follow Cruze Diesel Sedan later this year for the 2018 model year. View full article
- 20 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- chevrolet
- cruze diesel
- (and 3 more)
