Print 43 comment(s) - last by freedom4556.. on Dec 16 at 2:39 PM

The Mazda CX-5 is one of the most fuel efficient crossovers in its class.
EPA says average efficiency has increased 22% since 2004

According to the EPA, the fuel efficiency of 2012 model year cars and trucks in the U.S. hit an all-time high. The average for all 2012 model vehicles was 23.6 miles per gallon. The EPA says that overall fuel economy increased by 1.2 mpg compared to fleet wide 2011 economy numbers, making it the second highest gain in fuel efficiency in the last 30 years.
The overall fuel efficiency increase was attributed to two factors: an industry-wide move towards “greener” powertrains in vehicles and higher fuel prices which in turn pushed customers towards more efficient vehicles.
Mazda was the most fuel-efficient automaker with an average of 27.1 mpg in 2012, up 2.1 mpg compared to the previous year. Honda was second at 26.6mpg, and Toyota was third at 25.6 mpg.
Ford was in eighth place with an overall average of 22.8 mpg followed by GM in ninth with 21.7 mpg. Both of those automakers count trucks among their best selling vehicles.
Both Kia and Hyundai were left out of the rankings due to investigations over false fuel efficiency claims. Those automakers had to change window stickers to reflect corrected fuel efficiency measurements once the EPA did some snooping following customer complaints of poor fuel economy.
Fuel efficiency has increased by 22% since the 2004 model year, and the EPA notes that current trends show that 2013 model year vehicles should boost the average to 24 mpg.

Source: Detroit News

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: Losing battle
By chaos386 on 12/13/2013 11:54:38 AM , Rating: 5
I did a quick check:

2014 Chevy Malibu LT, 197 hp, 25/36 MPG, $23,510
2004 Chevy Malibu LT, 200 hp, 23/32 MPG, $22,870 ($28,275 when adjusted for inflation)

2004 source:

Nope, looks like cars are getting cheaper, too.

RE: Losing battle
By Jeffk464 on 12/13/2013 11:59:30 AM , Rating: 4
Plus the 2004 was a turd and the 2014 is a good car.

RE: Losing battle
By degobah77 on 12/13/2013 12:41:42 PM , Rating: 2
Looks like one car may be cheaper, sure.

RE: Losing battle
By Mint on 12/13/2013 2:08:10 PM , Rating: 3
It's not one car.

(google "us average new car price" and click on the first link. DT's f***ing spam filter is a joke and won't let me post the link.)

That works out to 1.7% per year, i.e. less than inflation, and you're getting a WAY better product as well. If you take a well equipped $30k car from 10 years ago and match it feature for feature, it'll be cheaper today.

RE: Losing battle
By Reclaimer77 on 12/13/2013 6:11:20 PM , Rating: 1
DT's f***ing spam filter is a joke and won't let me post the link.)

I would classify most of your posts as useless spam, so I think it's working as intended. :)


RE: Losing battle
By Spuke on 12/13/2013 7:29:04 PM , Rating: 2
I would classify most of your posts as useless spam, so I think it's working as intended. :)

"Well, we didn't have anyone in line that got shot waiting for our system." -- Nintendo of America Vice President Perrin Kaplan

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki