Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday July 29, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > News & Rumors > Non-Subaru News & Rumors

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-02-2012, 01:30 PM   #26
2.5RSMatt
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 30497
Join Date: Nov 2002
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: San Diego, CA
Vehicle:
00 RSTi
FUK HDR

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ocellaris View Post
The bigger problem is the credibility issue, not the actual monetary hit. Hyundai has been touting "best in class" MPG numbers in multiple areas, this draws a lot of people to the cars and certainly helped them sell more vehicles than if they had "slightly above average" MPG numbers. "40 MPG" sells a lot more easily than 38 MPG (Elantra). Heck Hyundai even went out of their to note that ALL Elantras got 40 MPG and you didn't have to buy the special "aero package" like other compacts.

Those best in class numbers are one of the top reasons Hyundai we doing so well in the US for the last few years. People like to buy the best.
World's best Hamburgers!
World's Biggest!
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
2.5RSMatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 01:52 PM   #27
coldmm803
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 229343
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Allentown, PA
Vehicle:
12 WRX SWP sedan
09 LGT RIP

Default

I didn't check the articles posted here but the one I saw suggesting they are going to lower numbers an average of 3%. I don't have a vehicle from either brand and haven't looked at their forums but is 3% really enough? I feel like it should be more and that only lowering numbers by 3% would be more of a slap in the face to current owners because the difference still isn't true and that Hyundai is only trying have a minimal impact on their products. If the cars are actually getting 10-15% under current rating they are afraid to say so because it sounds worse than it really is.

Also, I feel like it makes EPA look worse than Hyundai because they don't test enough vehicles. If they need to hire more staff and build more test fixtures then do it. They should only need to hire technician not engineers.
coldmm803 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 02:00 PM   #28
justincredible
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 83633
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: The Mountains
Vehicle:
2012 bright green
box

Default

The Kia Soul will be lowering by 6mpg highway, while some of the others will only be gong down 1-2 mpg.

6mpg on the Soul is a pretty big hit.

Below is a chart showing the change for each model.
http://epa.gov/fueleconomy/labelchange.htm

Last edited by justincredible; 11-02-2012 at 02:55 PM.
justincredible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 02:08 PM   #29
REX8
*** Banned ***
 
Member#: 24038
Join Date: Sep 2002
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Godspeed Cale...
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by justincredible View Post
The Kia Soul will be lowering by 6mpg highway.
REX8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 02:46 PM   #30
Paidfor
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 267815
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Workn on my LSX swap
Vehicle:
Be in awe
dont hate .)

Default

Id be more concerned with the fact that i just bought a Kia instead of the couple of mpg difference i got screwed out of lol
Sorry i just had to......Kia has came a long way, they better mind their Ps and Qs if they wanna stay credible.
Paidfor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 04:12 PM   #31
BoboTheMonkey
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 224615
Join Date: Sep 2009
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: La Crosse, WI
Vehicle:
2004 WRX
San Remo Red

Default

I can see how this can affect their credibility, but those are also EPA estimates. Yes, they were off, but also estimates. The blame appears to lie in the testing, but at least they came out and said it, not just went with it like many manufacturers. 3MPG isn't that much when you are talking about 40mpg vehicles. My old F-150 that got 14mpg on the other hand, now that would be a difference. 4wd it went down to 9mpg. I would buy that back if it got an extra 3mpg.
BoboTheMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 04:27 PM   #32
SoDealer
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 67960
Join Date: Aug 2004
Default

I pointed this out a long, long time ago. Hyundai & Kia having been lying about MPG and HP for awhile.
SoDealer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 07:27 PM   #33
aeoporta
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 334126
Join Date: Oct 2012
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: New York
Vehicle:
2013 5mt Sp Premium
Venetian Red & Dark Gray

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoDealer View Post
I pointed this out a long, long time ago. Hyundai & Kia having been lying about MPG and HP for awhile.
+1 when recently shopping for vehicle I was stuck with a few hyundai/kias and noticed immediately the epa numbers were all bs, you always got the lowest number quoted and only if you drove like a grandma could you maybe maybe get the epa numbers. I drove the kia soul, rio, hyundai santa fe, and elantra, apart from the quality issues of which there were many the mpg one was pretty hillarious. I told everyone I knew not to buy them because they would pay for it at the pump, most ignored me. Oh well such is life.
aeoporta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 08:08 PM   #34
Concillian
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 4414
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Dublin, CA
Vehicle:
2002 WRX Sedan
Midnight Black

Default

So what it sounds like is the MFRs test their own fuel economy, then EPA audits periodically. This is actually what we do for quality in a completely different industry. It's much cheaper than older methods, but it definitely leaves the door open to short term corruption.
Concillian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2012, 08:38 PM   #35
REX8
*** Banned ***
 
Member#: 24038
Join Date: Sep 2002
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Godspeed Cale...
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoDealer View Post
I pointed this out a long, long time ago. Hyundai & Kia having been lying about MPG and HP for awhile.
Yes, you're wonderful and smarter than anyone else (!)
REX8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 12:59 AM   #36
gpshumway
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 43950
Join Date: Sep 2003
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Vehicle:
07 WRX LTD Wagon
Satin White Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by REX8 View Post
Those are the things consumer "should" be considering when deciding which $20,000 car is for them. Not a small MPG difference that results in a marginal increase or decrease in fuel costs over the ownership period of the car. My opinion was, if, for example, you like the Accord more (you think it drives better, etc.), but you bought the Hyundai simply because it was rated at 1-2 more MPG on the highway, you're silly, IMHO.
That's not the way it came across to me in your original post. Maybe it was the context, but you seemed to be saying that people who make a purchase decision based on a couple of MPG difference are stupid. My apologies.

I'm simply saying that the market for affordable cars is so competitive that even someone who does a personal version of a car magazine comparo to decide on their next car can end up with a tie based on the "should" factors which is broken by a small difference in fuel economy.

I agree some people are too enamored with the shiny object that is 40 mpg.
gpshumway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 01:29 AM   #37
Uncle Scotty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 16200
Join Date: Mar 2002
Vehicle:
OK Houston
we have an Uncle

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by REX8 View Post
Never under-estimate the stupidity of the American consumer.
Uncle Scotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 01:35 AM   #38
REX8
*** Banned ***
 
Member#: 24038
Join Date: Sep 2002
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Godspeed Cale...
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gpshumway View Post
That's not the way it came across to me in your original post. Maybe it was the context, but you seemed to be saying that people who make a purchase decision based on a couple of MPG difference are stupid. My apologies.
That's exactly what I'm saying. Did you not read my post?

As shown above, it's about $75/year with a 2 mpg difference, $6 a month. If that's a deciding factor in buying a $20k car, there's a problem with their car-buying logic.

I know people do it, just like 1.99 vs. 2.01. That doesn't make it sensible.
REX8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 01:37 AM   #39
REX8
*** Banned ***
 
Member#: 24038
Join Date: Sep 2002
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Godspeed Cale...
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Scotty View Post
What are you going on about, you spend 10 hours a day on here calling people stupid.

You think it's logical for people to decide which car they buy base on a few dollars a month in car?
REX8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 02:24 AM   #40
Uncle Scotty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 16200
Join Date: Mar 2002
Vehicle:
OK Houston
we have an Uncle

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by REX8 View Post
What are you going on about, you spend 10 hours a day on here calling people stupid.

You think it's logical for people to decide which car they buy base on a few dollars a month in car?


i was agreeing and amplifying......the fact that people are just bloody brain dead here in the usa

proper brainless, brainwashed consumers as they are all trained to be
Uncle Scotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 03:47 AM   #41
Jake1050
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 135059
Join Date: Dec 2006
Default

My Subaru is rated for 31 MPG highway and I sometimes see as high as 34 on long trips. I hope Subaru Does not find out and want me to pay them some more money.
Jake1050 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 08:49 AM   #42
shikataganai
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 92634
Join Date: Aug 2005
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Vehicle:
2007 Land Cruiser
2013 LEAF

Default

MPGate: We Take a Second Look at Our Hyundai and Kia Fuel Economy Figures
http://wot.motortrend.com/mpgate-we-...es-286419.html
shikataganai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 11:46 AM   #43
Dex
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 163775
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ceti Debent
Vehicle:
1992 Cat 245D
Yellow rust

Default

I bought a 2012 1.6 six speed mt soul for commuting six months ago, the dealer quoted 25/31 mpg. I get 27-29 mixed depending on how and where I drive. I got the car because it was 14K out the door with 2.5 apr. Mileage was a factor or course, but ultimately it was the price.
Dex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 12:07 PM   #44
express_wagon
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 68346
Join Date: Aug 2004
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Vehicle:
1996 LC
2014 JK

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dex View Post
I bought a 2012 1.6 six speed mt soul for commuting six months ago, the dealer quoted 25/31 mpg. I get 27-29 mixed depending on how and where I drive. I got the car because it was 14K out the door with 2.5 apr. Mileage was a factor or course, but ultimately it was the price.
That is honestly pretty awful for a car & engine that small. But hey, cheap car is cheap car.
express_wagon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 12:56 PM   #45
quentinberg007
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 7887
Join Date: Jun 2001
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dex View Post
I bought a 2012 1.6 six speed mt soul for commuting six months ago, the dealer quoted 25/31 mpg. I get 27-29 mixed depending on how and where I drive. I got the car because it was 14K out the door with 2.5 apr. Mileage was a factor or course, but ultimately it was the price.
The old rating of your car was 35mpg.
quentinberg007 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 09:40 PM   #46
coldmm803
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 229343
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Allentown, PA
Vehicle:
12 WRX SWP sedan
09 LGT RIP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by justincredible View Post
The Kia Soul will be lowering by 6mpg highway, while some of the others will only be gong down 1-2 mpg.

6mpg on the Soul is a pretty big hit.

Below is a chart showing the change for each model.
http://epa.gov/fueleconomy/labelchange.htm
So, the Soul with a 2.0 L (no turbo) engine is currently rated for 26 city / 34 highway and being lowered by 3/6
The Sonata with 2.0 L turbo making 274hp and only requiring 87 octane fuel is rated at 22c/34h and not being lowered at all
coldmm803 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 11:50 PM   #47
ocellaris
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 302559
Join Date: Nov 2011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by coldmm803

So, the Soul with a 2.0 L (no turbo) engine is currently rated for 26 city / 34 highway and being lowered by 3/6
The Sonata with 2.0 L turbo making 274hp and only requiring 87 octane fuel is rated at 22c/34h and not being lowered at all
It would be pretty difficult to make a less aerodynamic vehicle than the Soul. Aside from the Nissan Cube.
ocellaris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 12:47 AM   #48
Len
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 39937
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Vehicle:
2011 328i 6MT
LMB

Default

They are now saying it was an honest mistake, due to the ambiguity of the regulation (which I'm sure exist). This would be believable if their mistakes went both ways. Instead, they all went in one direction, to inflate their numbers.

I can believe that they never intended to cheat EPA by this much on purpose. But they were clearly pushing at the edge of what was acceptable, to get to some magic numbers (like 40MPG), and went too far.

As someone who is in the business of measuring things, I very much understand the temptation to tweak things a little bit, especially things that are subjective and ambiguous (systematics in my case, ambiguity of regulations in theirs), to make the outcome of the measurement come out the way you want. At every step of the way, it's just one little thing, something that isn't outright wrong, something you feel you could convince yourself (but not others) it's ok to do. But of course that is a slippery slope if there ever was one, and you quickly lose your integrity.

It seems that they are now planning a massive ad campaign to do damage control. Good luck with that. I've been cheering for Hyundai/Kia for quite some time (although, admittedly, not with my wallet but with my fat mouth), but this is so very disappointing. I hope they get hit hard by this.
Len is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 12:56 AM   #49
BigElm
Always under your radar!
Moderator
 
Member#: 1568
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Hawtlanta!!!
Default

This has not been the first time an auto maker has 'confessed' of altering MPG's. I'm sure it won't be the last...
BigElm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 01:23 AM   #50
arghx7
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 232940
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: cold
Default

Don't believe the "honest mistake" part for a minute. You realize that these vehicles are certified with witness tests? It's the same procedure for every manufacturer. The fuel economy is calculated from 5 different tests: FTP75, FTP @ 20F, US06, SC03, and HWFET. Basically, they run the tests with a 3rd party witness to certify the results. They punch the results into an EPA formula (basically, a spreadsheet). The dyno cell has to be certified as well.

I would be very surprised if they literally made up numbers. They had to have a legit paper trail. The only way to do it is to bring in ringers. There must have been something different about the vehicles themselves.

If the EPA is clamping down on them, it's not due to the "real world" fuel economy. It's due to chassis dyno re-tests. The EPA doesn't test "real world" economy on the road in any official capacity. They follow their own chassis dyno procedures.
arghx7 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
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.