Comparing Old and New EPA MPG Estimates - Page 5 - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 02-25-2007, 12:51 AM   #41
Supporting Member
 
DracoFelis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 265
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red View Post
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp

Mine has changed from 16/19/17 to 14/17/15
Thanks for the link. Mine seems to have changed from 32/36/33 to 27/33/29.

Of course, I was usually blowing way past the older EPA specs, and the newer ones are even lower. Even in the worst of this winter, I think I only had one tankful that was as bad as 29, and most of my winter tanks have been at least the mid-30's (with some winter tanks in the low 40's). And in the warmer weather I should do even better, as I was fairly consistently getting mid to high 40's last summer...
__________________

DracoFelis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2007, 09:06 AM   #42
FE nut
 
diamondlarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,020
Country: United States
I screwed up when I changed my numbers back. ops: They are fixed now. CO ZX2 is back on top where he belongs.
__________________

__________________
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall, torque is how much of the wall you take with you.

2007 Prius,



Team Slow Burn
diamondlarry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2007, 11:35 AM   #43
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 358
Country: United States
I think that the new EPA ratings should be the standard. If not, every new car that's being bought with only the new ratings available will have falsely inflated percentages over EPA. It might be a good idea to raise the percentage needed to achieve hypermiler status now.
repete86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2007, 11:59 AM   #44
Registered Member
 
Peakster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 467
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by repete86 View Post
It might be a good idea to raise the percentage needed to achieve hypermiler status now.
I agree. It's probably the easiest to just make 30%+ above EPA the new hypermiler percentage.
Peakster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2007, 12:07 PM   #45
*shrug*
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 6,195
Country: United States
I say raise it to 1/3 and stick with the new figures. It probably makes even more sense to figure out the site average over epa and set hypermiler status to make it so that only a certain percentage of members are hypermilers at any given time...
SVOboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2007, 12:59 PM   #46
Driving on E
 
Matt Timion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,110
Country: United States
I don't think we should change our EPA numbers until the EPA lists this new values on their main page.

As it is now, you can't find the new values unless you know what you're looking for.

ETA: I do like the idea of changing it to 30% over combined for hypermiler status.

Until the EPA makes the new numbers the official numbers, it is going to be too confusing to change them in the garage.

Now, if the EPA never plans on changing them, I may have to write a converter to automatically convert the values to a modern day equivilant. This is also doable, but I want to try to keep the garage as simplistic as possible (code wise). Adding a bunch of random conditions is just going to confuse me when I go to make new changes in the future.
Matt Timion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2007, 07:12 PM   #47
|V3|2D
 
thisisntjared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,186
Country: United States
Send a message via AIM to thisisntjared
Quote:
Originally Posted by BluEyes View Post
What about putting in boxes for both old and new mileage figures and have the site calculate percentages based on both?
that works.

to go back to the mainstream of the thread: i have a lot of beef with 'calculated averages'. they cannot be accurate, especially when all they do is multiply by some percentage. if they are to stretch the acceleration from the cruising strains on the engine there will be large variations between cars.

in my car alone: if i were to put a modest turbo on my car with a good tune my highway mpg would go up and my city driving would go waaay down. now if you were to compare the 2 cars with the new and old epa estimates and only ran the tests for one while basing the 'calculation' for the other off the only car with the fresh test then it WILL be inaccurate.

all cars have different fuel economy ranges across different driving conditions and generic calculations are crap.

the fact that i have NEVER gotten lower than 30mpg vouches for this. and ben can vouche for the fact that i use a heavy throttle everywhere.
__________________
don't waste your time or time will waste you
thisisntjared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2007, 07:44 PM   #48
Registered Member
 
skewbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 771
Country: United States
Folks, there sure is a lot of focus on the mpg rating for a given vehicle, any thoughts on OTHER ways to quantify the saved gas? i.e. a number of passengers multiplier? Or a way to quantify efforts to reduce the amount of unnecessary driving that someone does?

Is the point to save gas? or just to get a car to get good mpg regardless of how much extra driving is wasted at that mpg rating?
__________________
Standard Disclaimer
skewbe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2007, 08:07 PM   #49
Registered Member
 
zpiloto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,225
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by skewbe View Post
Folks, there sure is a lot of focus on the mpg rating for a given vehicle, any thoughts on OTHER ways to quantify the saved gas? i.e. a number of passengers multiplier? Or a way to quantify efforts to reduce the amount of unnecessary driving that someone does?

Is the point to save gas? or just to get a car to get good mpg regardless of how much extra driving is wasted at that mpg rating?
Amen
zpiloto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2007, 08:39 PM   #50
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 125
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by skewbe View Post
Folks, there sure is a lot of focus on the mpg rating for a given vehicle, any thoughts on OTHER ways to quantify the saved gas? i.e. a number of passengers multiplier? Or a way to quantify efforts to reduce the amount of unnecessary driving that someone does?

Is the point to save gas? or just to get a car to get good mpg regardless of how much extra driving is wasted at that mpg rating?
if you ride your bike/walk to work you should get to add that distance to your distance number.
__________________

white90crxhf is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.