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

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by baloo

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). < AND especially whack HYBRIDS>

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.

Its actually somewhat worse than that.

With no real explanation, they went ahead and fudge factored diesels down knowing that that would increase the already negative misrepresentation of their mileage.

They literally decided to increase the error.

Hey, its all for a good cause .

Obviously battery hybrids need all the help they can get since they're basically untenable in the real world - when you look at the whole picture and not just part.

Also, its not so much about the actual test loop results - its mostly about shaving the numbers mathematically on paper.

Roughly, 25% of the error is test driven and 75% is the other.

The Fix is in.

No other nation has this size ratio anomaly between gassers and hybrids on one hand, and diesels on the other in terms of real world data and 'estimated' mileage.

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by 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.

Wouldn't doubt it. As an example in support;

Compare Old and New EPA MPG Estimates

2004 Volkswagen Jetta

Automatic (S5)
4 Cylinders
1.9 Liters
Diesel

Diesel Vehicle

OLD 32 CITY
36 COMBINED
43 HIGHWAY



NEW 28 CITY

32 COMBINED

39 HIGHWAY

MPG Estimates from Drivers Like You Average based on 6 vehicles.

40.0

[Hitman1970]

They could have at least called it the "LeMans: Mark II" for the cheese factor alone. It does get another gas-saver on the lot for BPG.

[baloo]

Originally Posted by AMERICA 123

Wouldn't doubt it. As an example in support;

Compare Old and New EPA MPG Estimates

Same story with the '06 Jetta TDI:

Old EPA - 38 mpg combined

New EPA - 33 mpg combined

User Avg. - 42.0 mpg (based on 53 cars)


The old numbers were 10% too low already, the new numbers are a whopping 27% off.

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by baloo

Same story with the '06 Jetta TDI:

Old EPA - 38 mpg combined

New EPA - 33 mpg combined

User Avg. - 42.0 mpg (based on 53 cars)


The old numbers were 10% too low already, the new numbers are a whopping 27% off.

Its along those lines.
The only question is T2B5 and how it effects things
I meant to post it earlier and forgot - one of the 'concerns' of the EPA concerning the new 5 'section' procedure seemed to imply recognition that it would possibly cause unique OEM diesel 'hardships' - Vw might be feelin' something like that ie they are not fully capable - yet.

The thing thats not going away anytime soon is the AFU mathmatical correction.

[baloo]

Originally Posted by AMERICA 123

Its along those lines.
The only question is T2B5 and how it effects things

I don't think it's much of an issue. The '09 TDIs are rated slightly better than the '06's, despite making like 40% more power.

I meant to post it earlier and forgot - one of the 'concerns' of the EPA concerning the new 5 'section' procedure seemed to imply recognition that it would possibly cause unique OEM diesel 'hardships' - Vw might be feelin' something like that ie they are not fully capable - yet.

Hm, which hardships would that be?

[PURPLEIMPALA]

One word- G2.
Now you can panic. Not a chop.
Here's the link: http://www.pontiac.com.mx/content_da...mensiones.html

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by baloo

Hm, which hardships would that be?

I'll try and find it - had to do with the three new additional 'drive/duty cycles' (slang term ) and the revisions for temp if I'm remembering correctly.

I was somewhat surprised the first time I saw it mentioned - in a sense.

There appears to be a wider than previous range of fuel economy performance developing in the diesel community for these first two years or so of T2B5 - both in terms of estimates which are BS here for sure but also possibly in terms of real world as well.

We shall see.

I'm really looking forward to all this regardless of who does and says what.

One way or another, it will get done - in the real world - at least in certain garage spaces.

[baloo]

I'm asking because there isn't a whole lot you can do to a diesel to drop its mileage. Cold starts, idling, driving at very low speeds, driving at very high speeds, there's virtually no scenario where diesels start guzzling.

This is in stark contrast to gas engines which are pretty inefficient at idle/low speeds because of pumping losses (throttle), inefficient at very high speeds because they run very rich at wide open throttle and they also suffer at low temps because they run rich and have to disable deceleration fuel cut.

[377Z]

On www.fueleconomy.org for the 2006 Jetta TDi automatic the combined EPA estimate is 33 MPG. Drivers report 40.8 MPG.

If you apply a 'correction' to the 2009 Jetta with the automatic based on the disparity , the figures go from 29/40 city/hwy to 36/49 city/hwy. The combinde number for the '09 is also 33 MPG, so drivers may actually achieve around 40 MPG.

Very assumptive, I know, but just food for thought, especially if you compare these very theoretical numbers with a 2008 Jetta 2.5 with 21/29 MPG estimates (chosen since 2009's don't have any driver reported figures yet). Combined estimate is 24 MPG, and this is the average of the reported figures.

40 MPG is 67% higher than 24 MPG. (40/24)*100 (%)

You would spend 40% less on fuel. ((40-24)/40)*100 (%)

Currently diesel is roughly 18-25% more expensive, so you still have a net savings.

I drive about 13,000 miles a year now. I see gas around $4.20/gal & diesel around $5.25/gal where I am. getting a 40 MPG diesel sedan over its 24 MPG gas counterpart would save me personally $570 per year. From a purely economic standpoint this would need to be weighed against the diesel's higher inital price. Of course, this doesn't take into account my opinion of diesels--I think they're cool, and would be willing to get one (provided I like the underlying car) even if the cost issue was a wash.

[Elk]

Ok I’m waiting where are all you Daewoo defenders at. I know you’re out there I’ve been arguing with you about the Aveo on here for a long time.

Come on tell us all how Daewoo is GM’s “small car experts” and how an Aveo rebadge G3 is going to be way better then if GM America tried to build a new sub-compact for Pontiac.

Or better yet tell us how GM dumping Suzuki which could have given this car for Pontiac to rebadge and keeping Daewoo was a good move: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lU89JpVmtwk

[bog]

So you thing the price is high in US, here in Europe we pay 9,3 US dollar per gallon diesel.
think of that in the future.
the oil wells vill stay 40 more years?

[Gagarin]

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....

Anyone remember the Pontiac Piranah concept? Now that would have been awesome. What we got was the Aztek...

[Elk]

Originally Posted by Gagarin

Anyone remember the Pontiac Piranah concept? Now that would have been awesome. What we got was the Aztek...

The Piranah was a Sunfire type car. I think you're thinking of the REV: