1 2 3
Javelin
Javelin MegaDork
11/2/12 10:39 a.m.

Read this article for the details. Apparently Hyundai/KIA have been gaming their window stickers. Only 2 cars since 2000 for all manufacturers have lowered their sticker numbers and now they have to lower the mileage on 35% of the cars they've sold since 2010! Three of their four "40MPG" cars are dropping to 37/38.

Ouch

They are paying back customers based on odometer readings and 15% over the cash value, which isn't much per individual owner (unless your aussieman, doesn't he have like 100K on his Elantra already?), but times a couple million cars...

The fallout over this one will be interesting to say the least...

EvanB
EvanB PowerDork
11/2/12 10:44 a.m.

Oh no, only 38mpg instead of 40.

Javelin
Javelin MegaDork
11/2/12 10:51 a.m.

In reply to EvanB:

Consumer perception. If it had been GM or Toyota there would be rioting in the streets right now. Look at how much flak Mazda (RX-8) and Ford (Mustang Cobra) still get for over-selling horsepower!

joey48442
joey48442 UberDork
11/2/12 10:54 a.m.
Javelin wrote: In reply to EvanB: Consumer perception. If it had been GM or Toyota there would be rioting in the streets right now. Look at how much flak Mazda (RX-8) and Ford (Mustang Cobra) still get for over-selling horsepower!

They did it with the Miata as well.

Joey

z31maniac
z31maniac PowerDork
11/2/12 10:54 a.m.

I'd like to see a big fine for knowingly false advertising.

yamaha
yamaha Dork
11/2/12 10:55 a.m.

Wait a sec......I thought the fuel economy numbers were based on Gov't tests.

N Sperlo
N Sperlo PowerDork
11/2/12 10:57 a.m.
z31maniac wrote: I'd like to see a big fine for knowingly false advertising.

Paying the customers back some is kind of what that is. kind of.

yamaha
yamaha Dork
11/2/12 10:57 a.m.
Javelin wrote: In reply to EvanB: Consumer perception. If it had been GM or Toyota there would be rioting in the streets right now. Look at how much flak Mazda (RX-8) and Ford (Mustang Cobra) still get for over-selling horsepower!

also note, the only cobra that suffered from that was the '99.......it was fixed for the next model year they made them(2001). Something about a revised exhaust that restricted airflow enough to reduce power.

Ranger50
Ranger50 UltraDork
11/2/12 11:09 a.m.
yamaha wrote: also note, the only cobra that suffered from that was the '99.......it was fixed for the next model year they made them(2001). Something about a revised exhaust that restricted airflow enough to reduce power.

Intake manifold and reflash. Lived it with the racing class I was in at the time, NMRA Factroy Stock, that required a stock, as-cast manifold. No port matching, no extrude honing, no nothing allowed. After the recall fix, the 4v picked up quite a bit from where it was before the fix.

Javelin
Javelin MegaDork
11/2/12 11:12 a.m.

In reply to yamaha:

Disagree. The 01/02 Cobra's were dogs, too. In fact, that's how we got the SC Cobra in 03/04. The head of SVT was so pissed off at how slow the cars were he forced the engineers to add forced induction.

But that's off the topic.

What I can't figure out is how Hyundai/KIA did this. The EPA does the numbers, so it should have been easy for someone to look up the EPA numbers and see if it matched the sticker. Either that, or they gamed the EPA test somehow?

I know that a vast majority of new cars (looking you square in the eye FORD!!!) have onboard "mileage computers" that are wildly optimistic (Edmunds is reporting some Fords claiming 4-5 MPG better on the PC than it actually gets), but that's not covered by law.

z31maniac
z31maniac PowerDork
11/2/12 11:18 a.m.

^My Mustang is nearly spot on with the computer.

However, the 3.73s and 5w-50 in the Track Pack cars is killing my mileage more than I had anticipated.

wlkelley3
wlkelley3 Dork
11/2/12 11:22 a.m.

Well, looks like I'll miss out on that. SWMBO drives a 2010 Hyundai Sonata V6, the last year you could get a V6 in the Sonata. So it doesn't count. Although my daughter will probably get enough to get a tank of gas for her 2012 Hyundai Tucsan.

Toyman01
Toyman01 PowerDork
11/2/12 11:23 a.m.

I may be mistaken but I'm pretty sure the EPA outlines the testing procedures but the manufacturer actually does the testing.

HappyAndy
HappyAndy Dork
11/2/12 11:25 a.m.
Javelin wrote: In reply to yamaha: What I can't figure out is how Hyundai/KIA did this. The EPA does the numbers, so it should have been easy for someone to look up the EPA numbers and see if it matched the sticker. Either that, or they gamed the EPA test somehow?

Didn't Cadillac get caught gaming the EPA test some years ago? IIRC the car could tell if it was on rollers or actually on the road, and adjust programming accordingly. If that true its brilliant in a way.

irish44j
irish44j UltraDork
11/2/12 11:35 a.m.

Odd, my parents have a 2011 Sonata and have actually been getting several MPG better than the window sticker says, for over 40k miles. And dad calculates mileage based on fill-ups, not based on the computer.

I always thought the MPG on the sticker said "estimated" or something like that anyhow.

irish44j
irish44j UltraDork
11/2/12 11:36 a.m.

on a side note, my WRX trip computer is consistently 2mpg better than reality. Real mileage is dead-on with the window sticker, both city and highway. And I have a lead foot

EvanB
EvanB PowerDork
11/2/12 11:36 a.m.

I think the difference between 37 to 40 mpg is solidly within the range of different driving styles.

failboat
failboat SuperDork
11/2/12 11:41 a.m.

I've been getting over the rated highway mpg in my Hyundai for years. Mine is not rated for 40mpg hwy, only 33. I get 35mpg on the reg, and have got as high as 41 mpg on a tank when I was really trying to see the best I could get.

Anyone knows its easy to get under the rated mpg in any car. I don't doubt that maybe a few aren't getting the advertised mileage, but also wouldn't be surprised many of them are just idiots and need to change their driving habits, or just have unreasonable expectations of fuel mileage given the type of driving they do.

irish44j wrote: I always thought the MPG on the sticker said "estimated" or something like that anyhow.

It most certainly does, if you read the fine print it, it gives you an estimated range that your mpg might fall into. The range falls both above and below the "rated" numbers by a few mpg. My 41mpg tank beat the estimated high range on my window sticker, and this was all 50-60mph driving, accelerating slow, coasting in neutral every time I needed to slow down, no over the top shiny happy person hypermiler tactics.

Gearhead_42
Gearhead_42 Dork
11/2/12 11:42 a.m.
Javelin wrote: What I can't figure out is how Hyundai/KIA did this. The EPA does the numbers, so it should have been easy for someone to look up the EPA numbers and see if it matched the sticker. Either that, or they gamed the EPA test somehow?

The numbers on the stickers are estimates based on the manufacturers interpretation of the test procedure set out by the EPA. It's only months (sometimes years) after a model is released that the gubmint gets around to testing them for themselves.

Hell, the only thing I see that they did "wrong" was estimate mileage closer to what actual drivers will get in their own cars, rather than a government bureaucrat's version of an average driver...

SlickDizzy
SlickDizzy UltraDork
11/2/12 11:44 a.m.

Wasn't the 4+3 transmission in the early C4 'Vettes also designed to fool the EPA test or something?

92CelicaHalfTrac
92CelicaHalfTrac MegaDork
11/2/12 11:45 a.m.

So how much were the 2001-2002 (if we care about the 2002, since it was never sold in the states) overrated in terms of HP?

Javelin
Javelin MegaDork
11/2/12 11:56 a.m.
EvanB wrote: I think the difference between 37 to 40 mpg is solidly within the range of different driving styles.

This is very true. However The big deal is that the EPA estimated 37 and Hyundai stickered them as 40. Then they did a massive ad campaign touting how they had more 40MPG cars than anyone else, and with no special packages. If the reality is they get 37, would as many of the people bought them? Would you pissed because you bought a 400HP/1G car that only had 370HP/.92G?

Javelin
Javelin MegaDork
11/2/12 11:58 a.m.
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote: So how much were the 2001-2002 (if we care about the 2002, since it was never sold in the states) overrated in terms of HP?

Que? If you're talking about the Mustang, it was 2000 that they skipped. And they did do revisions for the 01/02 models, but they were still underpowered and over-estimated. Find any car magazine from back them. Hot Rod did a very in depth piece in mid-02 when the SC 03 Cobra came along, including the head of SVT/blower story.

BoxheadTim
BoxheadTim PowerDork
11/2/12 11:58 a.m.
HappyAndy wrote:
Javelin wrote: In reply to yamaha: What I can't figure out is how Hyundai/KIA did this. The EPA does the numbers, so it should have been easy for someone to look up the EPA numbers and see if it matched the sticker. Either that, or they gamed the EPA test somehow?

Didn't Cadillac get caught gaming the EPA test some years ago? IIRC the car could tell if it was on rollers or actually on the road, and adjust programming accordingly. If that true its brilliant in a way.

BMW definitely did something along those lines for emissions on their 650 singles a while ago. If it can be done for a bike it's not exactly inconceivable that it would be done for cars, too.

EvanB
EvanB PowerDork
11/2/12 11:59 a.m.

I probably wouldn't be pissed but that's just me. Horsepower is more of a concrete figure, it doesn't change based on driving style.

1 2 3
Our Preferred Partners
loshNQNZfOk3PxOcJDiYoPxEFih2nYimtaB9aa84mwz0g5t9ksvpPZbVSHPymmcJ