2009 U.S. EPA Ratings List A Pontiac "G3 Hatchback"; VW Jetta Diesel Rated @ 30/41MPG

[Strapping.Young.Lad]

Originally Posted by Extreme4x4

Well gosh, then I guess we will need to change the window stickers........... to read.......... instead of EPA estimates........... Fordrules Dads Estimates (FDE estimates).

Do realize that most people can consistantly beat the EPA numbers, in anything, if they drive conservatively. However, I have never read a window sticker, where there was a number that was titled "Fuel economy you might get if the conditions are perfect, and you drive like you have eggshells under your gas pedal."

My Dad drives like an idiot, way above the speed limit, the EPA is biased against Diesel cars, they don't want em.

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by Extreme4x4

Well gosh, then I guess we will need to change the window stickers........... to read.......... instead of EPA estimates........... Fordrules Dads Estimates (FDE estimates).

Do realize that most people can consistantly beat the EPA numbers, in anything, if they drive conservatively. However, I have never read a window sticker, where there was a number that was titled "Fuel economy you might get if the conditions are perfect, and you drive like you have eggshells under your gas pedal."

The point is that diesels consistently demonstrate a better and easier to achieve 'beat the numbers' performance than any gasser has to date.

Vw's have been as good or better than anyone elses in those terms.

[Cassie]

With gas creeping up to 4 bucks a gallon, Pontiac can't afford NOT to have a small econobox in the line up IMO. Plus with rising EPA demands, it will help the division meet average MPG goals for the division.... remember the Geo Metro XFI?

[fast2furious0688]

I remember reading somewhere that Pontiac will get a version of the new upcoming Saab 9-1 hatchback too. It will be built on the Delta II platform and use GMs new turbo engines. Could this be our new G-3? I doubt GM would use the Aveo for pontiac, seeing how bad the G5 is doing. We can only pray that Bob Lutz will give pontiac a hatchback with some G8 style cues in it. Give it the 2.0 Turbo ecotec and call it a GXP. Sounds good to me! Pontiac is in need of some mini Muscle!

[TruckMan]

Originally Posted by t-rex

I don't see why Pontiac "fans" are so averse to the idea of Pontiac crossovers. I don't mean crossovers like the Lambdas, I'm thinking more along the lines of Infiniti FX and BMW X6. While crossovers may not fit in with the Joe Dirt image of Pontiac that its hardcore fans have, the bottom line is that crossovers sell, and are poised to become one of the market's most lucrative segments as buyers shy away from SUVs and trucks.

This thing is just begging to become a Pontiac....




With a dearth of affordable sporty-themed crossovers, something like this might bring a lot of traffic into Pontiac showrooms. Why let the Mazda CX7 dominate this segment?

Put this on the market, call it something like Pontiac Typhoon CrossCoupe, power it with a turbo Ecotec four or optional 3.6 DI V6, and watch 'em fly off the lots.

People may hate crossovers, or the idea of one with a Pontiac badge (yeah like Pontiac's sooooo revered by the public), but the bottom line is they sell. Ford's ancient Escape is selling better than it ever has. GM needs to muscle in on this segment, and something like this might just be the ticket.

Well it was an idea....

I like it! The Infiniti EX has been selling like crazy this year. And with the new FX coming out in a couple of months, I'd bet Infiniti has a good year.

In my opinion Pontiac needs to get away from the "affordable" niche and concentrate on a "sporty" image. Pontiac could be a decent brand with a sporty Vibe, G6, G8, Solstice, Firebird/GTO, and a sporty crossover or two. Let Chevy and Saturn satisfy the "affordable" crowd.

[K Dawg ONE]

If people will buy 40+k cars that get 10mpg, why not put some content into a small car? I mean, if they pay 40+ for 10mpg, then theyll surely pay 20+ for 30mpg as long as it has power pass and dr. seats, nav, dvd option, HID headlights, and some nice dcent sized wheels.
How come if its good on gas, its gotta be an econo box with no content?

[cmoore]

Interesting reading all the negative comments about Aveo.

Last year I bought 2007 Aveo 5 LT automatic. Fully loaded - AC, PW, PL, Sunroof, Cruise, 6 Cd in dash changer - got this for just over 15K Cdn + taxes. Try getting a Yaris or Fit with all these options for that price... not going to happen. Got this to drive instead of my Grand AM GT. Gas bill currently about $40 per week and I drive over 100 km round trip to each day to work.

My average mileage is about 38 mpg combined city/highway with about a 20%/80% split. On one long trip I got over 40 mpg. Not bad. Check out the long term test mileage for the Honda Fit in Car and Driver. For 40K miles average MPG was 34 if I remember correctly.

While I think it is critical that GM design and build a good domestic subcompact to compete with the Yaris and Fit, the Aveo is not a bad stop gap measure.

I have 30K on the car and it has not been back to dealer yet for anything other than scheduled maintenance. Wish I could have said the same for my Grand AM when it was at the same mileage point.

[I-Love-Pontiac]

Originally Posted by crooner214

It would be nice if GM brought in the three-door Aveo as a Pontiac.

That's the kind of crap that has ruined the brand image.

[JeffInDFW]

From Edmonds.com 9-26-2007:

"Volkswagen estimates the TDI will post city fuel economy "in the 40s" and highway economy "in the 50s." A 50-state legal Touareg is on its way soon."

What happened? How could they have been off THIS BAD? I see where several people here are saying the EPA does not like Diesels so they give them bad ratings....Please explain. Don't they just have the cars drive the same loop the same way and publish the results? Do they attach a 10,000 pound sled to the back bumper of all diesels they test?

OR, are we seeing the result of the change in the way the milage numbers are calculated? Remember, they did just change how they test all the cars just a little while back.....

[PhishPhood]

Originally Posted by JeffInDFW

From Edmonds.com 9-26-2007:

"Volkswagen estimates the TDI will post city fuel economy "in the 40s" and highway economy "in the 50s." A 50-state legal Touareg is on its way soon."

What happened? How could they have been off THIS BAD? I see where several people here are saying the EPA does not like Diesels so they give them bad ratings....Please explain. Don't they just have the cars drive the same loop the same way and publish the results? Do they attach a 10,000 pound sled to the back bumper of all diesels they test?

OR, are we seeing the result of the change in the way the milage numbers are calculated? Remember, they did just change how they test all the cars just a little while back.....

There's no difference in the testing procedures whether it's a gasser or a diesel. Again it's the automakers themselves that do the testing in house according to the EPA rules then they submit the results to the EPA which verifies the procedures and then certifies the results.

The EPA can then ask for a vehicle to do its own testing. The question is...'Why would VW allow the impression to get out into the public that the new Jetta was going to get these high number since it must have been doing its own in-house testing.' 'Why get the public's hopes up then dash them on the rocks of OK but not spectacular FE numbers.'

Poor Marketing IMO. Maybe VW should learn a lesson from its comptetitors....Just Zip It!!!

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by JeffInDFW

From Edmonds.com 9-26-2007:

"Volkswagen estimates the TDI will post city fuel economy "in the 40s" and highway economy "in the 50s." A 50-state legal Touareg is on its way soon."

What happened? How could they have been off THIS BAD? I see where several people here are saying the EPA does not like Diesels so they give them bad ratings....Please explain. Don't they just have the cars drive the same loop the same way and publish the results? Do they attach a 10,000 pound sled to the back bumper of all diesels they test?

OR, are we seeing the result of the change in the way the milage numbers are calculated? Remember, they did just change how they test all the cars just a little while back.....

For 2008-2011? an OEM has a couple of choices in how to test and calculate. This unusual transition/choice period is provided for in order to 'help' OEMs who might feel an extra burden from the new ratings methodology in terms of cost, complexity and time constraints.

For gassers this isn't a big deal but it might really matter for a turbo diesel.

I am not saying this is what happened, but if Vw grabbed the quicker cheaper one in order to support the June08 one car per dealer 'demo' program then its entirely possible that by October08 when these truly go on sale and are available for delivery that there maybe a revised number thats better - derived from an allowed, different and 'better' method.

In terms of expectations much of the press has said the same thing or really can be clustered around two sets of numbers.

The lower group was 36/45 US.

I imagine Vw will eventually offer an explanation.

No matter what, remember that when the EPA revised their method, they had very, very few diesels in any of the comparison data bases used to develop the corrections.

This was interesting because according to their analysis of that skimpy data , the old method was underestimating diesel real world mileage between 5.7% ? and 18.??%. In spite of this, they went ahead and applied a conventional 'normal' mileage gasoline correction factor anyway.

Soooo........ the previously flawed method was almost for certain not corrected properly for diesels and we don't know the story at Vw's end.

Whether or not Vw posts higher numbers later due to whatever set of reasons right now an educated expectation is that the real world mileage will mimic to a large extent percentage wise the consistently better numbers Vw owners have experienced previously.

That means an expectation of real world, decent conditions highway mileage between 44 - 50 is totally feasible as a worse case range.

Bottomline is we have to wait and see - there are other possibilities out there and we don't know any of the real situation.

Consider these preliminary numbers subject to change.

.

[mrgto]

Originally Posted by K Dawg ONE

I cant beleive that a website full of GM enthusists dont even know that the Aveo is already sold as the WAVE under Pontiac here in Canada (and has been since day one).
I mean, come on, I know that you guys have the GTO and I dont even live in the US, lol...

We don't care about what goes in on Canada the way you guys do about what is going on down here.

[Michael_S]

Originally Posted by cmoore

Interesting reading all the negative comments about Aveo.

Last year I bought 2007 Aveo 5 LT automatic. Fully loaded - AC, PW, PL, Sunroof, Cruise, 6 Cd in dash changer - got this for just over 15K Cdn + taxes. Try getting a Yaris or Fit with all these options for that price... not going to happen. Got this to drive instead of my Grand AM GT. Gas bill currently about $40 per week and I drive over 100 km round trip to each day to work.

My average mileage is about 38 mpg combined city/highway with about a 20%/80% split. On one long trip I got over 40 mpg. Not bad. Check out the long term test mileage for the Honda Fit in Car and Driver. For 40K miles average MPG was 34 if I remember correctly.

While I think it is critical that GM design and build a good domestic subcompact to compete with the Yaris and Fit, the Aveo is not a bad stop gap measure.

I have 30K on the car and it has not been back to dealer yet for anything other than scheduled maintenance. Wish I could have said the same for my Grand AM when it was at the same mileage point.

My brother has an Aveo, and as long as he cruises below 60 mph on the highway, he also gets about 38 miles per gallon. But if he cruises at 70 mph or more, his mileage drops down to 30.

His only real complaint is that the speakers in his are awful. He can turn the volume all of the way up on some of his CDs, and still not hear the music over regular road noise and wind noise.

On the other hand, Car and Driver, Edmunds, and a lot of other professional review sites drive every car they get for reviews as if it's trying to be a Ferrari. These people could somehow get 20 miles per gallon out of a pair of roller skates. If I was considering a Honda Fit, I would ask regular people who own one, not the magazines.

[baloo]

Originally Posted by JeffInDFW

From Edmonds.com 9-26-2007:

"Volkswagen estimates the TDI will post city fuel economy "in the 40s" and highway economy "in the 50s." A 50-state legal Touareg is on its way soon."

What happened? How could they have been off THIS BAD? I see where several people here are saying the EPA does not like Diesels so they give them bad ratings....Please explain. Don't they just have the cars drive the same loop the same way and publish the results?

VW's estimates were right, it's the EPA that is off, and the problem is their testing procedure. The test loop doesn't really include certain scenarios (or at least doesn't give them enough weight) that occur in the real world and that have a very negative effect on a gassers mileage (such as cold starts and extensive idling).

Instead of changing the test loop to reflect real world conditions they try to appropriate this negative effect and apply a "fudge factor" to the test results.

The mileage of a diesel car on the other hand is not affected a whole lot by cold starts and idling, so if you hit them with the same "fudge factor" you get unrealistically low mileage figures. This is exactly what is happening here, and this is also why diesel cars get much better than sticker mileage.

The whole concept of a "fudge factor" is a travesty if you're trying to rate vastly different engine types.

[t-rex]

I give ZERO credence to EPA figures, and so should the public. Buyers are better off obtaining fuel economy figures from independent testing.

My son's 04 Jetta TDI averages 36mpg in daily driving, and gets 47-48mpg on the highway at strict (and legal!) 70mph.

That's much higher than the EPA ratings, although it's not the same model.