Consumer watchdog urges Elantra MPG retest

[silvrsvt]

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/newsrelease/consumer-watchdog-urges-epa-re-test-elantra-40-mpg-claim-hold-hyundai-account

 

“However, a notable exception to this rule has caught the attention of Consumer Watchdog. For the two most recent model years, Hyundai Motors has actively marketed its base models of the Elantra on their very high 29/40 MPG, and 33 MPG average, leaving a trail of disappointed drivers. An Edmunds online Town Hall discussion on the Elantra attracted scores of drivers who can't, no matter how hard they try, duplicate such numbers. One very public example of this was USA Today tech writer Jefferson Graham, whose Sept. 22 article on his new Elantra expressed his disappointment that he averaged only 22 MPG, a gap that no "break-in" period seems likely to fill.

 

“Additionally, while Motor Trend named the 2011 Elantra Car of the Year in its class, the magazine's on-road testers achieved only a very disappointing 26.5 MPG average, bad enough to get special note in the review. Consumers Union found similar fault in with the 2012 Elantra, a redesign. While CU's highway mileage was 39, its city mileage, with experienced drivers who know how to drive a low-mileage auto, was only 20 MPG--very far from the listed 29 MPG. …

 

[FordBuyer]

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/newsrelease/consumer-watchdog-urges-epa-re-test-elantra-40-mpg-claim-hold-hyundai-account

 

So is the EPA actually doing a thorough test using multiple vehicles of same model or in some cases falling down on the job and taking the word of manuacturer instead of doing thorough test? Looks like something fell between the cracks with the Elantra. Something did seem kind of fishy here with so many Hyuandi's getting 40mpg all of a sudden.

[fordmantpw]

So is the EPA actually doing a thorough test using multiple vehicles of same model or in some cases falling down on the job and taking the word of manuacturer instead of doing thorough test? Looks like something fell between the cracks with the Elantra. Something did seem kind of fishy here with so many Hyuandi's getting 40mpg all of a sudden.

 

From my understanding, the EPA does NOT test every vehicle from every manufacturer. They will take the manufacturer's word for it in a lot of cases unless there are huge discrpancies, or a reason to test. Sounds like this is a reason to test.

[Ovaltine]

As an owner of a 2004.5 Kia Spectra, I can attest to the fact that great MPG is NOT one of its many virtues. It's got over 85k on it now, and has been a great performing car in nearly every aspect. But the day-to-day city MPG has always been low for a 2.0 IMHO (anywhere from 20 to 24 mpg), and merely adequate on the highway under optimal load and weather conditions (30-32 mpg).

 

I had hoped that after licking the durability issues, that the next gen H/K drivetrains would have the MPG bugaboo resolved, but real world numbers apparently are not bearing that out. I'm not surprised. I'm sure that wringing optimum MPG out of a vehicle is an "art" that is only perfected after many, many years of development and manufacturing experience.

 

-Ovaltine

[akirby]

So is the EPA actually doing a thorough test using multiple vehicles of same model or in some cases falling down on the job and taking the word of manuacturer instead of doing thorough test? Looks like something fell between the cracks with the Elantra. Something did seem kind of fishy here with so many Hyuandi's getting 40mpg all of a sudden.

 

They only test about 10% or less. They rely on the manufacturers to test and report and they do random verifications of those mfr tests.

[DC Car Examiner]

Yeah, I couldn't get to 33 mpg in mixed driving in the Elantra I drove for a week either. I only got to 32.9.

 

For every car, whether you hit EPA depends on your driving conditions. If this group has any evidence that the Elantra is any different from another car in that regard, it hasn't presented it.

[akirby]

Yeah, I couldn't get to 33 mpg in mixed driving in the Elantra I drove for a week either. I only got to 32.9.

 

For every car, whether you hit EPA depends on your driving conditions. If this group has any evidence that the Elantra is any different from another car in that regard, it hasn't presented it.

 

But you should be able to drive it reasonably close to the EPA test and get close. With such big discrepancies it seems prudent for the EPA to at least run a test to validate. It wouldn't be the first time that a production change caused a change to test results (exhaust on mustang cobras?).

[RangerM]

When I test drove an Elantra, I tended to push a little harder on the gas because the car seemed sluggish. Some people's expectations of acceleration may be a little higher than the 1.8L is giving. Don't know if that might be a possible reason for the (seemingly) huge variations in reported MPG.

 

I will say my wife's Santa Fe seemed to get at or above the EPA rating since Day 1. I think its city driving MPG has improved as it's got some mileage on it. It's easier to beat the EPA rating now.

[aneekr]

If this group has any evidence that the Elantra is any different from another car in that regard, it hasn't presented it.

I wouldn't count on it. Apparently, battling villians within the insurance industry, "Big Oil", and Google hasn't been sufficient to keep Consumer Watchdog's litigators and advocates occupied.

[DC Car Examiner]

But you should be able to drive it reasonably close to the EPA test and get close.

 

The EPA test isn't about telling you what mileage you will get. It's about letting you make a comparison among different cars.

 

Say one person lives in Vermont and one person lives in Florida. The temperature, elevation and hilly-driving differences positively guarantee that no one test will predict the gas mileage each of the two will get. All it can do is give a sense of how much better one car is than another.

[akirby]

The EPA test isn't about telling you what mileage you will get. It's about letting you make a comparison among different cars.

 

Say one person lives in Vermont and one person lives in Florida. The temperature, elevation and hilly-driving differences positively guarantee that no one test will predict the gas mileage each of the two will get. All it can do is give a sense of how much better one car is than another.

 

That's why I said close. We know some drivers can exceed the EPA rating in normal driving, so if one tried really hard they should be able to get within a few mpg even in the worst conditions. If the best you can do is 6-8 mpg less than EPA then that should raise some red flags and would lead me to believe that the production vehicles may not be the same as the one that was tested.

 

It's at least worth an investigation.

[DC Car Examiner]

That's why I said close. We know some drivers can exceed the EPA rating in normal driving, so if one tried really hard they should be able to get within a few mpg even in the worst conditions. If the best you can do is 6-8 mpg less than EPA then that should raise some red flags and would lead me to believe that the production vehicles may not be the same as the one that was tested.

 

It's at least worth an investigation.

 

You're sticking by the fallacy that the EPA estimate is designed to tell you what mileage you will get, which it is not.

[fordmantpw]

You're sticking by the fallacy that the EPA estimate is designed to tell you what mileage you will get, which it is not.

 

No, the EPA estimate is just that, an estimate. But if the actual, when driving in the absolute best conditions, is 20-25% off from the estimate, then the estimate needs to be fixed to be a better estimate.

 

Hell, why not give the F150 an EPA rating of 40. We know that's not what you're going to get, but it's just an estimate, so close enough, right?

Edited December 16, 2011 by fordmantpw

[akirby]

You're sticking by the fallacy that the EPA estimate is designed to tell you what mileage you will get, which it is not.

 

Brady - you're not getting it.

 

I'm not talking about normal driving. I'm talking about going out and specifically attempting to replicate the EPA test by driving at similar speeds under similar circumstances with regards to A/C, max speed, idle time, etc. There will always be weather, temperature or other factors but if you can't come CLOSE to the EPA mileage under controlled test conditions then it should raise an eyebrow. You could even use another control vehicle on the same test and see how it did compared to its EPA ratings. If that control vehicle was within 2 mpg of EPA ratings then you'd expect the other one to be in the same range (or percentage).

 

It doesn't necessarily mean there is a problem - it just means that it's really suspicious and should be investigated.

[DC Car Examiner]

Brady - you're not getting it.

 

I'm not talking about normal driving. I'm talking about going out and specifically attempting to replicate the EPA test by driving at similar speeds under similar circumstances with regards to A/C, max speed, idle time, etc. There will always be weather, temperature or other factors but if you can't come CLOSE to the EPA mileage under controlled test conditions then it should raise an eyebrow. You could even use another control vehicle on the same test and see how it did compared to its EPA ratings. If that control vehicle was within 2 mpg of EPA ratings then you'd expect the other one to be in the same range (or percentage).

 

It doesn't necessarily mean there is a problem - it just means that it's really suspicious and should be investigated.

 

Sure, if you try to duplicate the EPA conditions, you're much more likely to hit their numbers. The consumer complaints do not say that the owners were checking their driving against the EPA idle time.

[DC Car Examiner]

No, the EPA estimate is just that, an estimate. But if the actual, when driving in the absolute best conditions, is 20-25% off from the estimate, then the estimate needs to be fixed to be a better estimate.

 

Hell, why not give the F150 an EPA rating of 40. We know that's not what you're going to get, but it's just an estimate, so close enough, right?

 

I was within a tenth of a mpg of the EPA rating on the Elantra I drove. But that's beside the point, because each driver's "absolute best condition" is entirely contingent on where they drive. That is to say, you can change your driving style, but you can't change that you live on a hill.

 

Some people already beat EPA and others don't, regardless of what they're driving.

[fordmantpw]

I was within a tenth of a mpg of the EPA rating on the Elantra I drove. But that's beside the point, because each driver's "absolute best condition" is entirely contingent on where they drive. That is to say, you can change your driving style, but you can't change that you live on a hill.

 

Some people already beat EPA and others don't, regardless of what they're driving.

 

I agree with you there, but if you can meet or beat EPA with car A, you should be able to do it with car B (or come close). Again, the EPA ratings allow you to compare one car to another, and if car a is falling within 5% of EPA for 90% of the people, but car b is falling outside of 25% for 90% of the people, would logic lead you to believe there is a (potential) issue with the rating for car b?

 

Maybe it turns out that people that buy car b tend to live in a hilly area, where car a buyers tend to live in flat lands. That's entirely possible, but an investigation would bring light to that.

[DC Car Examiner]

I agree with you there, but if you can meet or beat EPA with car A, you should be able to do it with car B (or come close). Again, the EPA ratings allow you to compare one car to another, and if car a is falling within 5% of EPA for 90% of the people, but car b is falling outside of 25% for 90% of the people, would logic lead you to believe there is a (potential) issue with the rating for car b?

 

Maybe it turns out that people that buy car b tend to live in a hilly area, where car a buyers tend to live in flat lands. That's entirely possible, but an investigation would bring light to that.

 

That's the thing: This site isn't presenting evidence that any more people are short of EPA in the Elantra than any other car. It's just saying "some people have complained they're not getting EPA, ergo we must investigate whether Hyundai committed fraud."

[fordmantpw]

That's the thing: This site isn't presenting evidence that any more people are short of EPA in the Elantra than any other car. It's just saying "some people have complained they're not getting EPA, ergo we must investigate whether Hyundai committed fraud."

 

I guess this quote threw me off into thinking the Elantra had more complaints:

 

The Elantra has attracted an unusual number of consumer complaints about real-world MPG averaging in the mid-20s, far from Hyundai’s stated average of 33, said Consumer Watchdog.

[akirby]

That's the thing: This site isn't presenting evidence that any more people are short of EPA in the Elantra than any other car. It's just saying "some people have complained they're not getting EPA, ergo we must investigate whether Hyundai committed fraud."

 

I saw plenty of complaints that Hyundais were 6-10 mpg below the city ratings which seems to be much lower than other makes and models. If it was only an isolated case it wouldn't be an issue.

 

And please understand we're not saying there IS a problem we're saying there is a lot of anecdotal evidence piling up that indicates there MIGHT be a problem and it MIGHT be worth an EPA retest to be sure.

[V8-X]

Are these people driving with low air pressure in their tires? Clean air filter? What grade fuel (85, 87, 93) are they running? Where are they buying their fuel? What is their driving style? How many people drive the vehicle, and how does each drivers driving style vary? Are they letting their cars sit and idle to warm up in the mornings? Like others state, what is the terrain (flat, hilly) like? Too many variables in my opinion to truly say it must be retested.

 

If they make the Elantra re-test, then why not the EB F150? There's plenty of people out there that aren't bringing home close to EPA ratings. But many of those differences could be from the above scenarios as well.

[DC Car Examiner]

I guess this quote threw me off into thinking the Elantra had more complaints:

 

Them saying that doesn't make it true. They don't offer any evidence that there have been more complaints.

[V8-X]

Thanks for marking me down fellas.

 

Anyways. Funny how people in this thread want the Elantra retested, because owners aren't bringing home close to the vehicles EPA rating without knowing the owners driving style, terrain or any of the details. But those same people in one of the F150 threads (think the MT TOTY), people back the EPA's claim and blame the lack of mpg's in the F150 (EB models) on the drivers driving style, the terrain and what not. Just love the hypocrisy thrown around these boards. It's so refreshing being on these boards.

[fordmantpw]

Thanks for marking me down fellas.

 

Anyways. Funny how people in this thread want the Elantra retested, because owners aren't bringing home close to the vehicles EPA rating without knowing the owners driving style, terrain or any of the details. But those same people in one of the F150 threads (think the MT TOTY), people back the EPA's claim and blame the lack of mpg's in the F150 (EB models) on the drivers driving style, the terrain and what not. Just love the hypocrisy thrown around these boards. It's so refreshing being on these boards.

 

A few complaints vs. an abnormally high number of complaints. See the difference?

 

 

 

Probably not.

[akirby]

Thanks for marking me down fellas.

 

Anyways. Funny how people in this thread want the Elantra retested, because owners aren't bringing home close to the vehicles EPA rating without knowing the owners driving style, terrain or any of the details. But those same people in one of the F150 threads (think the MT TOTY), people back the EPA's claim and blame the lack of mpg's in the F150 (EB models) on the drivers driving style, the terrain and what not. Just love the hypocrisy thrown around these boards. It's so refreshing being on these boards.

 

Elantra owners are reporting 25% less mpg than EPA ratings - not just a few mpg and not just a few isolated owners.

 

Show me the same number of complaints about the EB F150 getting 25% less than EPA estimates and I'll say it should be retested too.

 

Everything isn't a conspiracy or kool-aid. Try looking at the facts for a change.