Al

Indeed. Pumping those tires up helps a lot.

Cat Slave wrote:
> I think it largely depends on how you drive the car. Maybe there is
> also something wrong with the vehicle. I have a 2005 Hybrid Civic and I
> get roughly 47mpg commuting in heavy traffic 70 miles every day.
> Inflating the tires to 35PSI improved mileage by about 10% for me. Also
> I rarely ever exceed 70mph, and I don't floor the accellerator when I
> accellerate...... If you drive appropriately you should be able to get
> 40+ if not sth is probably wrong with the car....
>

Al

Indeed. Pumping those tires up helps a lot.

Cat Slave wrote:
> I think it largely depends on how you drive the car. Maybe there is
> also something wrong with the vehicle. I have a 2005 Hybrid Civic and I
> get roughly 47mpg commuting in heavy traffic 70 miles every day.
> Inflating the tires to 35PSI improved mileage by about 10% for me. Also
> I rarely ever exceed 70mph, and I don't floor the accellerator when I
> accellerate...... If you drive appropriately you should be able to get
> 40+ if not sth is probably wrong with the car....
>

jthorner

"muzz" <jmuzz@charter.net> wrote in message
news:10rqt0dnpjqbpnk4739ccev9o7s6m25glo@4ax.com...
> When my Civic hybrid had run 5 or 6 tanks of gas and was only getting
> 33 mpg, <snip>
> 33 mpg is patently ridiculous don't you agree?
>
>

There are many stories out there like this. I think that Honda and others
have gamed their hybrid systems somewhat so as to optimize the results on
the EPA tests, even if those gamed results are unlikely to be duplicated in
normal driving.

This sort of thing is commonplace in the work of computer system design
where all kinds of tricks are used to maximize performance on benchmark
tests, even when that performance is unlikely to translate into similar
results for real users.

The existing EPA test cycles were a response to rampant creative advertising
during th 70s where the car makers would make all sorts of fuel economy
claims based on things like only driving downhill. The EPA test cycles
were designed to attempt to represent typical driving conditions and they
have served well with the technologies for which they were designed.

However, hybrids are as much computer software as they are a hardware set
and provide many more opportunities to tweak for the test, sort of like
craming for SATs. Do you think that a student who raises their SAT score
100 points by taking an SAT prep class has actually gotten any smarter or
any more likely to do well in college? Absolutely not.

The hybrid fuel economy testing situation is in my view much the same.

John

jthorner

"muzz" <jmuzz@charter.net> wrote in message
news:10rqt0dnpjqbpnk4739ccev9o7s6m25glo@4ax.com...
> When my Civic hybrid had run 5 or 6 tanks of gas and was only getting
> 33 mpg, <snip>
> 33 mpg is patently ridiculous don't you agree?
>
>

There are many stories out there like this. I think that Honda and others
have gamed their hybrid systems somewhat so as to optimize the results on
the EPA tests, even if those gamed results are unlikely to be duplicated in
normal driving.

This sort of thing is commonplace in the work of computer system design
where all kinds of tricks are used to maximize performance on benchmark
tests, even when that performance is unlikely to translate into similar
results for real users.

The existing EPA test cycles were a response to rampant creative advertising
during th 70s where the car makers would make all sorts of fuel economy
claims based on things like only driving downhill. The EPA test cycles
were designed to attempt to represent typical driving conditions and they
have served well with the technologies for which they were designed.

However, hybrids are as much computer software as they are a hardware set
and provide many more opportunities to tweak for the test, sort of like
craming for SATs. Do you think that a student who raises their SAT score
100 points by taking an SAT prep class has actually gotten any smarter or
any more likely to do well in college? Absolutely not.

The hybrid fuel economy testing situation is in my view much the same.

John

Michael Pardee

"jthorner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:10u9e9brfq2at17@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "muzz" <jmuzz@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:10rqt0dnpjqbpnk4739ccev9o7s6m25glo@4ax.com...
>> When my Civic hybrid had run 5 or 6 tanks of gas and was only getting
>> 33 mpg, <snip>
>> 33 mpg is patently ridiculous don't you agree?
>>
>>
>
> There are many stories out there like this. I think that Honda and others
> have gamed their hybrid systems somewhat so as to optimize the results on
> the EPA tests, even if those gamed results are unlikely to be duplicated
> in normal driving.
>
> This sort of thing is commonplace in the work of computer system design
> where all kinds of tricks are used to maximize performance on benchmark
> tests, even when that performance is unlikely to translate into similar
> results for real users.
>
> The existing EPA test cycles were a response to rampant creative
> advertising during th 70s where the car makers would make all sorts of
> fuel economy claims based on things like only driving downhill. The EPA
> test cycles were designed to attempt to represent typical driving
> conditions and they have served well with the technologies for which they
> were designed.
>
> However, hybrids are as much computer software as they are a hardware set
> and provide many more opportunities to tweak for the test, sort of like
> craming for SATs. Do you think that a student who raises their SAT score
> 100 points by taking an SAT prep class has actually gotten any smarter or
> any more likely to do well in college? Absolutely not.
>
> The hybrid fuel economy testing situation is in my view much the same.
>
> John
>
>
These complaints about EPA fuel economy results have been around nearly as
long as I have been driving, and they are valid. The EPA response is that
the figures are not intended to be real world numbers ("your mileage may
vary"). When CAFE was introduced EPA fuel economy testing became mandatory.

Hybrid technology can indeed greatly improve fuel economy, but mostly in
congested in-town driving. Our 2002 Prius gets 50 mpg or better around town,
dropping into the mid or lower 40s in the winter. It loves hills, too,
averaging over 60 mpg on a round trip from Flagstaff to Sedona. But on the
freeway the economy is much like a typical economy car, only benefitting
from the engine downsizing allowed by using electricity to do the heavy
lifting during acceleration.

To add to the frustration many people feel, more efficient cars lose their
edge faster than the guzzlers. Running the heater full blast makes nearly no
difference in our 85 Volvo - it continues to get 20 mpg. The Prius can drop
from 45 mpg to the 20s on the fairly accurate fuel economy display if I turn
the heater on full and open the windows.

I imagine these issues will sharpen as hybrid technology improves, with more
electric power available and more models using it. The essence of
hybridization is to separate engine power from acceleration performance, and
to allow the car to operate more time without running the engine at all.
(Even the Honda IMA can do this by opening the valves.)

Mike

Michael Pardee

"jthorner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:10u9e9brfq2at17@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "muzz" <jmuzz@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:10rqt0dnpjqbpnk4739ccev9o7s6m25glo@4ax.com...
>> When my Civic hybrid had run 5 or 6 tanks of gas and was only getting
>> 33 mpg, <snip>
>> 33 mpg is patently ridiculous don't you agree?
>>
>>
>
> There are many stories out there like this. I think that Honda and others
> have gamed their hybrid systems somewhat so as to optimize the results on
> the EPA tests, even if those gamed results are unlikely to be duplicated
> in normal driving.
>
> This sort of thing is commonplace in the work of computer system design
> where all kinds of tricks are used to maximize performance on benchmark
> tests, even when that performance is unlikely to translate into similar
> results for real users.
>
> The existing EPA test cycles were a response to rampant creative
> advertising during th 70s where the car makers would make all sorts of
> fuel economy claims based on things like only driving downhill. The EPA
> test cycles were designed to attempt to represent typical driving
> conditions and they have served well with the technologies for which they
> were designed.
>
> However, hybrids are as much computer software as they are a hardware set
> and provide many more opportunities to tweak for the test, sort of like
> craming for SATs. Do you think that a student who raises their SAT score
> 100 points by taking an SAT prep class has actually gotten any smarter or
> any more likely to do well in college? Absolutely not.
>
> The hybrid fuel economy testing situation is in my view much the same.
>
> John
>
>
These complaints about EPA fuel economy results have been around nearly as
long as I have been driving, and they are valid. The EPA response is that
the figures are not intended to be real world numbers ("your mileage may
vary"). When CAFE was introduced EPA fuel economy testing became mandatory.

Hybrid technology can indeed greatly improve fuel economy, but mostly in
congested in-town driving. Our 2002 Prius gets 50 mpg or better around town,
dropping into the mid or lower 40s in the winter. It loves hills, too,
averaging over 60 mpg on a round trip from Flagstaff to Sedona. But on the
freeway the economy is much like a typical economy car, only benefitting
from the engine downsizing allowed by using electricity to do the heavy
lifting during acceleration.

To add to the frustration many people feel, more efficient cars lose their
edge faster than the guzzlers. Running the heater full blast makes nearly no
difference in our 85 Volvo - it continues to get 20 mpg. The Prius can drop
from 45 mpg to the 20s on the fairly accurate fuel economy display if I turn
the heater on full and open the windows.

I imagine these issues will sharpen as hybrid technology improves, with more
electric power available and more models using it. The essence of
hybridization is to separate engine power from acceleration performance, and
to allow the car to operate more time without running the engine at all.
(Even the Honda IMA can do this by opening the valves.)

Mike

tomamaron

muzz wrote:

> however, 33 mpg is patently ridiculous don't you agree?

It's low, but getting good gas mileage from the Civic is half how you drive.
Constant speeding, using the AC, abrupt stops, short trips, and cold weather
all drop milage. As mentioned, check your air filter and tire pressure, they
also effect mileage. When I don't drive the car that often, it gets milage
in the range you describe. But on regular commutes, my '03 gets in low 40's,
even higher if I'm stingy.

tomamaron

muzz wrote:

> however, 33 mpg is patently ridiculous don't you agree?

It's low, but getting good gas mileage from the Civic is half how you drive.
Constant speeding, using the AC, abrupt stops, short trips, and cold weather
all drop milage. As mentioned, check your air filter and tire pressure, they
also effect mileage. When I don't drive the car that often, it gets milage
in the range you describe. But on regular commutes, my '03 gets in low 40's,
even higher if I'm stingy.

Al

Maybe not patently ridiculous, but ridiculous.

Try an experiment. Pump up the tires. Lay off the
accelerator - although that shouldn't make much of
a difference with a hybrid. Don't do any short trips
- make sure the shortest trip is no less than 10 miles.
Don't go fast - keep it under 50 m/hr. Don't drive when
the outside temperature is less than 60 F. Lay off the pizza.
Do that for one full tank and see what happens.

I have a 98 Civic HX and, in the summer, I never get
less than 50 m/gal. However, I do occasionally get a
digital gesture from a little old lady. I get them
all the time from SUV's.

tomamaron wrote:
> muzz wrote:
>
>
>>however, 33 mpg is patently ridiculous don't you agree?
>
>
> It's low, but getting good gas mileage from the Civic is half how you drive.
> Constant speeding, using the AC, abrupt stops, short trips, and cold weather
> all drop milage. As mentioned, check your air filter and tire pressure, they
> also effect mileage. When I don't drive the car that often, it gets milage
> in the range you describe. But on regular commutes, my '03 gets in low 40's,
> even higher if I'm stingy.
>
>

Al

Maybe not patently ridiculous, but ridiculous.

Try an experiment. Pump up the tires. Lay off the
accelerator - although that shouldn't make much of
a difference with a hybrid. Don't do any short trips
- make sure the shortest trip is no less than 10 miles.
Don't go fast - keep it under 50 m/hr. Don't drive when
the outside temperature is less than 60 F. Lay off the pizza.
Do that for one full tank and see what happens.

I have a 98 Civic HX and, in the summer, I never get
less than 50 m/gal. However, I do occasionally get a
digital gesture from a little old lady. I get them
all the time from SUV's.

tomamaron wrote:
> muzz wrote:
>
>
>>however, 33 mpg is patently ridiculous don't you agree?
>
>
> It's low, but getting good gas mileage from the Civic is half how you drive.
> Constant speeding, using the AC, abrupt stops, short trips, and cold weather
> all drop milage. As mentioned, check your air filter and tire pressure, they
> also effect mileage. When I don't drive the car that often, it gets milage
> in the range you describe. But on regular commutes, my '03 gets in low 40's,
> even higher if I'm stingy.
>
>