Why are EPA milage estimates so wrong?

[Doppel]

FWIW I have pretty decent luck with its ratings, sometimes worse, often better. I find its highway rating on one of my cars is optimistic while on the other pessimistic and I regularly get better.

 

[Dirigible]

Because the testing people don't realize that I have zero patience and gotta floor it from every stop.

My car is rated 19/24. I get something horrible like 12mpg in city driving. There are lots of stop signs and lots of steep hills where I drive though, in addition to my impatience. When the lion's share of a tank is freeway driving I get a bit over 24mpg. And that's driving at about 10mph over the limit.

Overall I can't complain.

 

[Bignate603]

notice the magic words bolded.
there are alot of claims of MPG out there for cars that I have owned that I was never able to get within 25% of. Example claims like 98 Pontiac Bonneville getting 36MPG, meanwhile when I owned one I was lucky to get 28MPG. meh, the internet (and people, for that matter) are filled with misinformation.

That must be the old rating system, under the updated estimates the Bonneville is 17 city /26 highway.

 

[Jumpem]

They aren't. I usually average the highway estimate.

Fit was rated 31/37. I averaged 36-37.
Outback is rated 22/29. I average 30.

 

[KentState]

My car is pretty close is not slightly better than the EPA estimates. Been that way on pretty much anything that I've owned or driven for a significant amount of time.

 

[thomsbrain]

everyone so far has evidence going against my OP.

so maybe i'm wrong.

but my sources were Chevy Equinox which lists 32 highway but I heard it gets in the 26mpg highway range.

also the Kia Sportage lists 29mpg highway but supposedly gets closer to about 24mpg.

The Equinox in particular was a car where the transmission was tuned to game the EPA test. Real world driving means it can't shift up so quickly.

I generally meet or exceed the highway figures for my cars in mixed driving. Now the OLD figures were totally bogus.

 

[Kroze]

It depends on how you drive. That and some manufacturers overstate/overly optimistic about their fuel mileage. I find that Honda/Toyota is very accurate and actually get advertised fuel economy or better.

 

[makken]

I'm rated at 18/26. I hover between 30 and 31 combined, which is 90% freeway 10% city (with lots of stop signs)

 

[Zivic]

They aren't. I usually average the highway estimate.

Fit was rated 31/37. I averaged 36-37.
Outback is rated 22/29. I average 30.

I had a fit and never got near the ratings. come to think of it, I don't think I own a car that gets close to its rated mileage.

my fit averaged about 28 mpg

my little cars never got their rated milage. my beater 98 protege averages about 22 mpg, but almost never sees the highway.

2 reasons why EPA mileage and real world mileage don't match
1.) EPA = government.... when is the government actually correct in real world terms?
2.) everyone's driving style and driving conditions are different

 

[Imdmn04]

How you drive HIGHLY affects mpg.

When I drive like a pussy, coasting to stop signs, very light gas pedal, shift at 2k, I get 2-3 MPG better than the EPA estimate.

When I drive aggressive, I get 2-3MPG below the estimate.

 

[NutBucket]

People laugh at my CR-Z for its crappy EPA ratings (31/37) but after 5k miles I'm averaging about 39-40mpg. My driving is split fairly evenly between highway/city and traffic conditions ranging from very heavy to very light. I really can't complain.

 

[kaerflog]

The issue is that most people simply don't understand how much of their driving is really "city" cycle and not actually "highway." The only time you really get a tank full of "highway" driving is when you're making a 400+ mile trip on the interstate. A daily commute, even if it's on the freeway, isn't going to get you close to the EPA highway rating over the course of a full tank.

For example, I have a 22 mile (one-way) commute. All but 2 miles is "highway," that is, it's signed for 55 mph or more. The problem is that those 2 miles are full of stoplights. My average for a tank is only about 21.5 mpg when I'm commuting. When I run free on long road trips, however, I'll get 26-27 mpg, but that means absolutely zero stop-and-go traffic. People simply don't realize just how much affect a very small bit of city driving will have on mileage.

ZV

Ding ding ding winnar..

 

[kaerflog]

My 2006 Civic is rated at 26/36 and I get between 35-40mpg.
My one way work trip is ~30miles with 4 miles stop and go.

 

[ShawnD1]

Almost every new car gets much lower actual mpg than what is listed on the sticker.

Every car I've driven greatly exceeds the EPA mileage. Their test assumes your city driving consists of constant stop and go traffic then their highway test assumes you're going 300mph up hill.

Still a valid test though. When going 300mph up a hill, which car gets better mileage? It's a controlled test :thumbsup:

 

[Eli]

People laugh at my CR-Z for its crappy EPA ratings (31/37) but after 5k miles I'm averaging about 39-40mpg. My driving is split fairly evenly between highway/city and traffic conditions ranging from very heavy to very light. I really can't complain.

You can get it up near 50 if you try in the CR-Z.

I just think people were expecting more along 1st generation Insight MPG from the CR-Z. I know 1st generation Insight owners were. But you inherently expect "good" MPG from a small two seater. It seems with the widespread adoption of the Prius, 50MPG has become the old 40MPG...

 

[punjabiplaya]

Every car I've driven greatly exceeds the EPA mileage. Their test assumes your city driving consists of constant stop and go traffic then their highway test assumes you're going 300mph up hill.

Still a valid test though. When going 300mph up a hill, which car gets better mileage? It's a controlled test :thumbsup:

 

[Eli]

LMFAO :thumbsup:

 

[Eli]

damn FF, the hell was that?