Poll: Adopt the EPA's "New" FE Figures? - Page 2 - Fuelly Forums

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

View Poll Results: Adopt the New EPA Estimates?
Yes 25 69.44%
No 6 16.67%
I dunno, ummm... 5 13.89%
Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 03-04-2007, 03:58 AM   #11
Team GasMisers5!
 
landspeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 440
Country: United States
I'm just about to update to the new figures then And vote yes for now.

Just seen I had overestimated the old combined EPA by 3% anyway
__________________

__________________

Team GasMisers5 - #1 for first three rounds of the original GS Fuel Economy Challenge
Miles displaced by e-bike since 1 Jan 2008: 62.6 (0 kWh used)
Hypomiler
landspeed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 04:02 AM   #12
Team GasMisers5!
 
landspeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 440
Country: United States
Well, that puts me at #7 for above EPA . From the previous thread on this I see that some people were using old, some new. I vote to go with the new, for the reasons above.

- If everyone uses the new figures, then no-one will be disadvantaged. Also, new cars coming in will only use the new figures anyway, so we need to allow a fair comparison.
- The new figures compare our hypermiling performance, to the current state of fuel consumption + driving habits for 'normal' drivers.
__________________

__________________

Team GasMisers5 - #1 for first three rounds of the original GS Fuel Economy Challenge
Miles displaced by e-bike since 1 Jan 2008: 62.6 (0 kWh used)
Hypomiler
landspeed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 04:06 AM   #13
FE nut
 
diamondlarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,020
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by repete86 View Post
With the new figures, a higher percentage should be required for hypermiler status.
Over at cleanmpg.com they are considering the following revisions for hypermiler status:
Old New

Hypermiler 100% 125%

Expert 125% 150%

Elite 150% 175%
__________________
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 03-04-2007, 05:40 AM   #14
Registered Member
 
skewbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 771
Country: United States
Problem #1, *deleted*

Problem #2, *deleted*

Problem #3, The new figures come up short for accounting for variances in local terrain, traffic, length of commute, average temperature, average local fuel quality, local atmoshpheric pressure, etc. etc.

Problem #4, EPA is a USA thing. The web is not.

Problem #5, *deleted*

Problem #6, (revised) It seems that some vehicles may never be fairly compared with others. I really think we should take the vehicle make/model out of the comparison since the epa accuracy varies greatly from vehicle to vehicle.

Sorry if I'm repeating myself, but I want to hear what other people think? Is there no value in doing a golf/bracket racing type comparison where people are given a "handicap" based on their personal performance compared to the group?
__________________
Standard Disclaimer
skewbe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 07:41 AM   #15
Driving on E
 
Matt Timion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,110
Country: United States
I'm back and forth on this issue. For comparison to current vehicles I think it's a good idea.

However, the "new values" are just a flat percentage below the previous ones. No new tests were run. This introduces a great amout of error into the situation.

I'm also a bit reluctant to do it if the default EPA values are not the new ones. People will definately be confused.

Perhaps I should write a small page that emulates the EPA site yet gives the new values.
Matt Timion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 09:08 AM   #16
Registered Member
 
skewbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 771
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Timion View Post
...However, the "new values" are just a flat percentage below the previous ones. No new tests were run.
My Bad, Strike points #1, #2 and #5.
__________________
Standard Disclaimer
skewbe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 10:57 AM   #17
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 409
Country: United States
Out with the old, in with the new. The new ones are supposed to be more accurate, so it only seems right we go by them. That and there is no way my stock car could have got my old highway epa, unless they were going 40 mph.
__________________
red91sit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 11:35 AM   #18
Registered Member
 
The Toecutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 612
Country: United States
Send a message via AIM to The Toecutter
I voted no. The way the EPA conducts their tests is very flawed. they measure the amount of CO2 generated and estimate fuel consumption from there, and they do not measure the actual amount of fuel consumed. Estimated also is aerodynamic drag.

I think the tests would be more accurate if a FE number was given at various speeds and the test actually measured the amount of fuel consumed.
The Toecutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 11:41 AM   #19
Supporting Member
 
cfg83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,779
Country: United States
diamondlarry -

Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondlarry View Post
Over at cleanmpg.com they are considering the following revisions for hypermiler status:
Old New

Hypermiler 100% 125%

Expert 125% 150%

Elite 150% 175%
I do like the multiple categories, but 100%?!? !?!?! If our Hypermiler matched theirs, I would want "lower categories" to give me some goals.

There should also be a special "top ten" gold star for people that are in the top ten list. It could be in same location as the red and blue stars.

Medals and ribbons for all!!!!

CarloSW2
__________________
Old School SW2 EPA ... New School Civic EPA :

What's your EPA MPG? http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp
cfg83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 11:43 AM   #20
*shrug*
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 6,195
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Toecutter View Post
I voted no. The way the EPA conducts their tests is very flawed. they measure the amount of CO2 generated and estimate fuel consumption from there, and they do not measure the actual amount of fuel consumed. Estimated also is aerodynamic drag.

I think the tests would be more accurate if a FE number was given at various speeds and the test actually measured the amount of fuel consumed.
By your explanation, your no vote seems to have nothing to do with the question that's actually being asked. Rick is not asking if we like the EPA or not, he's asking which set of values should be used...
__________________

SVOboy 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 03:05 PM.


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