• 2
We record Episode #259 of the Autoblog Podcast tonight, and you can drop us your questions via our Q&A module below. Check out our discussion topics or chime in to help determine what else the crew chats about this evening. Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes if you haven't already done so, and if you want to take it all in live, tune in to our UStream (audio only) channel at 10:00 PM Eastern tonight.

Discussion Topics for Autoblog Podcast Episode #259
[UStream] Interact LIVE at UStream – 10PM Eastern on Monday, December 5, 2011
[iTunes] Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes
[RSS] Add the Autoblog Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator



I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 2 Comments
      BC
      • 3 Years Ago
      "Was hyundai using test cars that where far different then production or is the EPA making mistakes?" Why does it have to be either? Why is it so hard to understand this? The EPA fuel economy is *an average number for that test cycle*. The EPA window sticker specifically states (for now; the revised sticker omits this IMO critical information for more comparisons to other vehicles) that for a given test average, there is an expected range for different drivers in different conditions. For a car that achieves 40 mpg average on the EPA cycle, that range is 32 mpg to 48 mpg. For a car that achieves 30 mpg average on the EPA cycle, it's 24 mpg to 36 mpg. It's analogous to a standard deviation, so there will still be some drivers in some conditions who will manage to be even more extreme outliers. Even aside from the differences in the way drivers behave, the number and steepness of grades; the temperature, humidity, and precipitation; the amount of traffic; the type of road surface; the quality and formulation of fuel; etc. all vary more than the EPA can incorporate into any relatively brief test, so they sensibly don't attempt to.
      BC
      • 3 Years Ago
      "Was hyundai using test cars that where far different then production or is the EPA making mistakes?" Why does it have to be either? Why is it so hard to understand this? The EPA fuel economy is *an average number for that test cycle*. The EPA window sticker specifically states (for now; the revised sticker omits this IMO critical information for more comparisons to other vehicles) that for a given test average, there is an expected range for different drivers in different conditions. For a car that achieves 40 mpg average on the EPA cycle, that range is 32 mpg to 48 mpg. For a car that achieves 30 mpg average on the EPA cycle, it's 24 mpg to 36 mpg. It's analogous to a standard deviation, so there will still be some drivers in some conditions who will manage to be even more extreme outliers. Even aside from the differences in the way drivers behave, the number and steepness of grades; the temperature, humidity, and precipitation; the amount of traffic; the type of road surface; the quality and formulation of fuel; etc. all vary more than the EPA can incorporate into any relatively brief test, so they sensibly don't attempt to.