Hyundai Overstated MPG On Over 1 Million Cars 238
Hugh Pickens writes "Reuters reports that Hyundai and its affiliate Kia Motors conceded that they overstated the fuel economy on more than 1 million recently sold vehicles, and agreed to compensate owners for the additional fuel costs after the EPA found the errors in 13 Kia and Hyundai models from the 2011 to 2013 model years. The findings were a blow to the two carmakers, which have centered their marketing campaigns on superior fuel economy. The mileage on most labels will be reduced by 1 to 2 miles per gallon, with the largest adjustment being a 6-mpg highway reduction for one version of the Kia Soul, the EPA said. Hyundai previously touted the fact that many of its models get 40 miles per gallon on the highway. Now three Hyundai models, the Elantra, Accent and Veloster, as well as the Kia Rio fall short of that mark, as will the Hyundai Sonata and Kia Optima hybrids."
MPG testing (Score:5, Insightful)
If they were comparable to real life it'd be nice: It makes no adjustment for whether some cars coast better than others downhill, effects of wind resistance, effect on drag of the car's turning geometry.... In the real world some cars do significantly better than their official mileages and others can't even get close.
My VW Passat 2.0i 16v (1991) once managed 56mpg on one long run and always beat 45mpg when it was officially meant to do no more than 42mpg, my 1.8D Ford Escort didn't even come close to its official range of 50-60mpg on long runs and my dad's Passat 1.8 20v likewise drank far more than the label indicated it should, and both my mondeo 1.8TD and Volvo V40 2.0i 16v significantly beat their official figures (the Mondeo with ease, it once managed 932 miles on a single tank, the V40 takes careful handling).
TL:DR? Summary: "Official mileage figures are unreliable, live with it"
Re:MPG testing - just to add (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm in the US and the MPG figures are not perfect, but they seem to be a little pessimistic. I can beat them by 5 or 6 percent, typically, for both city and highway driving. Of course, if you drive more aggressively, you can also see the opposite result. But I've never owned a car where I couldn't beat the EPA estimates.
I have noticed that even when you adjust for the gallon size difference, the UK/EU testing cycle gives much more optimistic results for the same vehicle compared to the US testing cycle. So when comparing, one has to adjust both for that, and the gallon difference.
Re:Oddly enough... (Score:5, Insightful)
But I was suspicious about the MPG claims. I've always been able to easily exceed the US MPG ratings on my cars, but on this one I was barely able to meet them. Especially frustrating considering that the test was de-rated a few years ago. I can easily exceed the 40 MPG rating, but only on dead flat ground at 55 MPH. I can probably get about 50 - 60 MPG in that use case. But if I up the speed or climb a grade, its mileage suffers quickly.
However, it's stated 33 MPG in combined driving is pretty much dead on. I average 31-34 all the time.
I'm disappointed at Hyundai for doing this, because they really didn't have to. They have worked really hard at improving their cars in the last 10 years, and this stupid blunder will harm their reputation. In many categories, their cars are top in class, and fudging the MPG numbers really wasn't going to get them very much more in sales.
Re:Oh No! Global warming is wrong! (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course, your own mileage will vary, based on ambient temperature, road conditions, tire pressure/type, the gas you're using, your level of wakefulness, and your level of anger/stress. It's extremely unlikely that your real-world mileage will be even close to the EPA posted mileage.
Re:A Modus Operandi from American manufacturers (Score:5, Insightful)
The tradeoff is that every now and then, a sensor fails and you have to replace it. The problem is that they are more difficult to diagnose. You need to know how the engine's control systems work, and you very often need diagnostic equipment to pinpoint which sensor is the source of the problem. Dudes who grew up fixin' on cars by feel and superstition have no idea what to do, and just throw parts at the problem until it disappears- either the problem eventually gets fixed by one of the parts, or the customer goes away.
Very few people understand the important part of machine diagnosis: narrow the failure down to which part *actually* failed. Advising customers to replace rather than repair is giving up on that- its hard to do diagnosis, so the easy way out is to just replace the whole thing.
A classic example of dumb-ass diagnosis is the oxygen sensor system in a car. There is a sensor that tests for the right mixture, and then there is a sensor after the catalytic converter that makes sure the converter is working right. If the first sensor gets stupid, the catalytic sensor will think the catalytic converter is broken, and idiots replace that sensor, and then the catalytic converter, and then throw up their hands. If you know that the first sensor can feed false information to the rest of the system, you know to test it first.
Re:MPG testing - just to add (Score:3, Insightful)
Even still litres per 100 km is the better representation than mpg or km per litre
Not at all. It's the same information.
Re:I am not sure I understand (Score:4, Insightful)
I read the article (yes, I know fop-aux) but how can they "overstate" mileage? They submit the car to the EPA and the EPA tells them the numbers. There is no testing at the car manufacturers site. The EPA farms this out, but that is still the rule of law by the EPA. Were they not listing the numbers provided by the EPA? Then fine Hyundai's ass into oblivion. If they marked on the window stickers what the EPA told them, even if Hyundai knew the numbers were wrong, then there is no issues in my mind and people should sue the hell out of the EPA.
That's not correct. For most cars, the manufacturer's self-declare "EPA Mileage." The EPA spot-checks some models each year.
Re:MPG testing - just to add (Score:4, Insightful)
It's the same information presented in an easier to use form, because it's easier to multiply in your head than to divide.
Nonsense. You would have to divide as well. For example, while figuring out how many miles you can go on your tank of gas. There's no benefit here.