backtop


Print 68 comment(s) - last by Jedi2155.. on Dec 10 at 6:10 AM

Organization claims a high number of drivers are unable to come close to mileage estimates

Most drivers know that when they buy a vehicle the estimates for fuel economy on the window stickers are just estimates. In the real world, driving the fuel economy can be much different. There has been more than the typical number of complaints about the fuel economy that Hyundai is claiming for its new Elantra.
 
Hyundai is claiming that the Elantra gets 29 mpg in the city and 40 mpg on the highway for an combined rated of 33 mpg. The problem is that according to the higher than usual number of complaints about the efficiency of the Elantra, the real world mileage is in the mid-20 mpg range. Drivers that purchased the vehicle based in large part on the efficiency claims are understandably upset by the real world figures. 
 
 
Consumer Watchdog is asking the EPA to investigate the mileage claims for the Elantra. The letter sent to the EPA read in part:
 
A notable exception to this rule has caught the attention of Consumer Watchdog. For the two most recent model years, Hyundai Motors has actively marketed its base models of the Elantra on their very high 29/40 MPG, and 33 MPG average, leaving a trail of disappointed drivers. An Edmunds online Town Hall discussion on the Elantra attracted scores of drivers who can't, no matter how hard they try, duplicate such numbers. One very public example of this was USA Today tech writer Jefferson Graham, whose Sept. 22 article on his new Elantra expressed his disappointment that he averaged only 22 MPG, a gap that no "break-in" period seems likely to fill.
 
Consumer Watchdog also pointed out that while automotive publication Motor Trend named the 2012 Elantra a Car of the Year contender, the fuel economy it achieved in testing was only 26.5 mpg. That number was poor enough compared to estimates for Motor Trend to mention it in the review. The consumer organization is asking the EPA to retest the Elantra and if it finds the estimates Hyundai is giving aren't accurate to impose a fine on the automaker to compensate drivers.
 
 
One of the big selling pints of the Elantra was that the 40 mpg highway claim was for the normal model of the car whereas other automakers needed special trims to hit 40 mpg. Hyundai also has the Accent with the same 40 mpg claim. Chevy has touted a version of its Cruze, the Eco, which gets 40 mpg on the highway. Ford has a special version of the Focus with a claimed 40 mpg highway rating that is called the SFE.
 
In October of this year, Hyundai announced that it planned to offer a plug-in hybrid to go against the Prius called the Elantra Touring

Source: Consumer Watchdog



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Ford Focus
By The Raven on 12/7/2011 1:55:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Checked isn't the same as actually doing the testing. People 'check' a lot of things without actually checking anything.
Correct. This is what I am saying. You left out the important part
quote:
and [the gov't] said, "Yup, you guys are right on the money! We'll endorse your car with our seal of accuracy!"
This is why you were mislead. Because of this number that the EPA put on the window.
quote:
I got your point and you seem to be missing mine. 70 mph is real world conditions [sic]. MN and Iowa both have interstate speed limits of 70 mph.
70mph may be real world conditions, but do it for 300 miles and it no longer is. The EPA says that they factor in speeds up to 80mph. We don't know at what distance, and that is an important factor.

I'm not going to argue with you about what the number or conditions should be, I was just pointing out that it sounds like you let your guard down because of these numbers that the manufs and gov't collectively come up with. You should've checked C&D and others where they let you know specifics of their testing methods and they do them independent of the manufs (or political agendas). You are the one saying that you feel cheated. I agree. Screw the EPA. Don't defend their deception. (All this said, I find EPA estimates to be relatively accurate based on personal exp. I just think this is completely unnecessary.)


"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki