backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 143 comment(s) - last by teamhonda81.. on Jul 11 at 3:58 PM


Honda Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid owner upset over averaging 32MPG

This past December, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it would revise its fuel economy ratings to reflect current real-world conditions. EPA ratings at the time didn't take into account stop-and-go traffic, cold weather environments or posted speeds of 65MPH or 70MPH currently found today's highways (EPA testing maxed out at 55MPH).

In February, the EPA rolled out its revised testing procedures for 2008 model year vehicles and included a tool on its website that would take old EPA estimates and convert them to the new testing methodology. Not surprisingly, hybrids were some of the big losers with the 2008 EPA estimates.

Popular hybrid models including the Toyota Prius, Toyota Camry Hybrid and Honda Civic Hybrid drop from 60/51 (city/highway), 40/38 and 49/51 to 48/45, 33/34 and 40/45 respectively.

John True, an Ontario, California native, wasn’t amused with the latest MPG mash-ups. True purchased his Civic Hybrid last year when the stated EPA mileage ratings were 49/51. True averaged 32MPG in his Civic Hybrid over the course of 6,000 miles -- even lower than the revised 2008 EPA ratings of 40/55. Consumer Reports also tested a Civic Hybrid in 2005 and averaged just 26MPG in the city.

The poor fuel economy led True to file a class-action lawsuit against American Honda Motor Company. True claims that Honda has misled buyers with false advertising.

"This case does seek relief for tens of thousands of consumers like Mr. True, who purchased the HCH expecting to benefit from its 'remarkable' fuel efficiency, and paid thousands of dollars extra for an HCH that looks identical and performs basically the same as the non-hybrid Honda Civic," said a June 4 court filing.

Even though the suit goes after Honda, the actual party responsible for MPG ratings is the EPA. "I can tell you that the 49/51 figures are EPA numbers, not Honda numbers," said Sage Marie, a Honda spokesman. "Some customers achieve the EPA mpg figures and some don't, as fuel economy performance is a function of conditions, traffic, driving style, load, etc."

Manufacturers have no control over what rating the EPA will give a particular vehicle once it has completed for regular production. It just so happens that hybrid manufacturers like Honda and Toyota have been able to use the inflated EPA scores to entice buyers over the years.

Honda already acknowledged that its Accord Hybrid wasn't up to snuff. Honda promised performance greater than a V6 Accord with fuel economy comparable to a 4-cylinder Accord. Edmunds, however, showed that its Accord Hybrid only managed 23.8MPG after two years and 30,000 miles of driving.

Honda is dropping the hybrid model from the 2008 Accord redesign and instead will go with a 2.2 liter i-CTDi clean diesel.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By KeithTalent on 7/6/2007 11:22:50 AM , Rating: 2
If you are not happy with your car, just freaking sell it and buy something else.

These are EPA numbers and I am sure nobody gets exactly what the posted numbers are anyway.

I hate stupid crap lawsuits like this. What a waste of everyone's time and money.

KT




RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By joemoedee on 7/6/2007 11:38:32 AM , Rating: 5
I don't think it's much of a crap lawsuit.

Now if he was getting like, 1-2 mpg off... then yeah, it's pretty frivolous. But if he's that far off, and as was Consumer Reports... I definitely think it has some legs to it.

If you paid more for a product based upon it's performance, and it turned out to get less performance... significantly less... than I'm certain you'd be upset as well.

Some people buy hybrids for the "environment". Some buy them for the "status". This guy clearly bought it for the gas mileage, and it turns out he spent much more money for a vehicle that does not deliver the promise of gas mileage.


RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By LogicallyGenius on 7/6/07, Rating: -1
RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By Kuroyama on 7/6/07, Rating: -1
RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By Cobra Commander on 7/6/2007 12:31:14 PM , Rating: 4
It's crap because HONDA is using a federal standard - how can Honda get sued for something the federal government is quoted as stating???


RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By chsh1ca on 7/6/2007 12:51:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's crap because HONDA is using a federal standard - how can Honda get sued for something the federal government is quoted as stating???


If they took something that was wrong and used it in their advertising, even if it was someone else's numbers, they're still at fault.

Clearly the EPA needs to review their procedure for testing gas mileage if it's as much as 35-40mpg off.


RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By Slaimus on 7/6/2007 1:18:21 PM , Rating: 5
It is against the law to post something other than the EPA MPG numbers.


RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By Lord 666 on 7/6/07, Rating: -1
By Oregonian2 on 7/6/2007 2:26:23 PM , Rating: 4
If their ads specify that it's EPA numbers, then they're perfectly right to advertise that if they so choose. If someone doesn't understand what EPA number mean (or don't) then it's just their fault. Who runs the test isn't relevant so long as it's the EPA that defines the test (unless their contention is that the car's advertised EPA numbers aren't that what one gets with the EPA testing methods). This also is true for Consumer Report values, they need to be specified as the source because they have their standard of measuring that also may not match up with anybody else.

Else it's like suing a computer company for selling a really slow computer that was advertised with some high dhrystone ver 1.2 rating (that it gets). It's a not-so-good benchmark, but it's well defined.

The EPA has been sued in the past, I recall, for having misleading numbers for MPG. I think this is a permanent situation. Anybody recall how those turned out, I don't remember.


RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By Lord 666 on 7/6/2007 1:01:25 PM , Rating: 1
Honda can get sued because they advertised the federally tested figures within their marketing literature as a sales point or feature. Billboards were everywhere (I work in NYC) focusing on the fuel economy of the new Civic Hybrid.

But my question is, why would anyone buy the Civic Hybrid after a test drive? I test drove one, it was a poor implementation of a hybrid. The transition between electric to gas was too noticeable, brakes were poor performing, and the accerlation was too slow. The Prius honestly performs much better than the Civic Hybrid, but I still question crash safety along with long term radition effects.

Bring on the diesels for 2008.

Disclaimer: Lord 666 owns a 2006 Jetta TDI


RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By TomZ on 7/6/2007 1:29:48 PM , Rating: 1
The EPA and CARB are working extra hard to make sure that diesel is not viable in the U.S. The new 2007 and 2010 emissions standards for diesels are a huge challenge for automakers and are resulting in more complicated and expensive emissions reduction equipment.

Diesels are able to be popular in Europe because they have relatively less stringent emissions standards, despite the perception of being more "green" than the Americans. The reality is the opposite in this case.


By Lord 666 on 7/6/2007 2:04:45 PM , Rating: 2
In the past 6 months or so, I have seen a huge increase in the number of old MB 300Ds on the road. You can always benefit from the increased fuel economy by buying a used diesel. The current EPA rules allow for a car to be legal on the road as long as it meets emmissions requirements of model year, I am not concerned of tighter emission controls.

It begs to question the timing of the new diesel restrictions in conjunction with the current GWB administration and rise in fuel prices. Diesel passenger cars currently only have 1% of the market. It would be a greater public service to ban smoking entirely than restrict diesel emissions to the level the US government is.


RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By Amiga500 on 7/6/2007 3:43:48 PM , Rating: 2
Diesels emit more particulates and NOx.

It has lower CO, CO2 and hydrocarbon emissions.

In my opinion, the effect of particulates are negligible compared to other hazards of everyday life.


RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By TomZ on 7/6/2007 4:41:40 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
In my opinion, the effect of particulates are negligible compared to other hazards of everyday life

Particulate emissions have a direct immediate nevative impact on human respiratory health, compared with CO2 which is naturally occurring in our atmosphere and can't even be rightly considered a pollutant, except for if you buy into the global warming hype.

If you believe that CO2 is causing global warming, then you're going to have to explain how CO2 causes global warming since historically CO2 level increases lag temperature increases. I'm having a hard time with that one myself.


RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By erple2 on 7/6/07, Rating: 0
By Kuroyama on 7/6/2007 6:09:54 PM , Rating: 2
As much as I was hoping for some good talking points, the New Scientist article is very weak. There are a few good rebuttals in there, but for the most part the counterarguments in the article amounts to repeated statements that "although there is some truth to their claim, on the balance scientists say that they are wrong". While this may or may not be true, such a weak discussion is hardly worthy being the cover story. Wasted $5 buying it when I saw it on the newsstand too.


RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By LogicallyGenius on 7/8/2007 12:38:03 AM , Rating: 2
Must be painful being voted down on an important true point

Capitalist's rule here


RE: Good lord, this is ridiculous.
By TomZ on 7/8/2007 9:58:53 PM , Rating: 3
I'm used to it. Ratings are a popularity contest, and sometimes facts appeal and sometimes they don't. And when I am speaking my opinions, I don't care if they earn a good or poor popularity rating.