Topic: Hyundai Fudges Fuel Economy Numbers For New Sonata Before Release

[Erik]

My Crosstrek is rated by the EPA at 9.4 city, 7.1 highway. It's currently sitting at 9.6, and that's all short trips in the city in what has been a brutally cold winter. Last summer we went on a road trip to Cypress hills and averaged 6.6L for the trip.
The numbers seem pretty representative to me.

Let's just see what you get in "real world" conditions, i.e. every day driving, not in the winter.  Highway driving isn't every day driving for most people, stop and go on the highway and the city yes.  We'll chat then.

Short trips in the city in the winter is about as bad as driving conditions can get, how is that not real world?

Okkkkk ... then let your 9.6 is "real world" and for average, that is abysmal.   Subaru lied just like the other manufacturers.  A good average would be right in the middle between 7.1 and 9.4.  You are nowhere near.  Like I said, most manufacturers lie and MOST average "real world" consumption in North America is usually WORSE than the city number offered by manufacturers, which make them huge liers and very deceitful sale practices our government tolerates.

Huh?
In the middle of a brutally cold winter, he is within 2 tenths of the rated mileage, and that's somehow abysmal? I think that's incredibly good.

[fstrdr]

My Crosstrek is rated by the EPA at 9.4 city, 7.1 highway. It's currently sitting at 9.6, and that's all short trips in the city in what has been a brutally cold winter. Last summer we went on a road trip to Cypress hills and averaged 6.6L for the trip.
The numbers seem pretty representative to me.

Let's just see what you get in "real world" conditions, i.e. every day driving, not in the winter.  Highway driving isn't every day driving for most people, stop and go on the highway and the city yes.  We'll chat then.

Short trips in the city in the winter is about as bad as driving conditions can get, how is that not real world?

Okkkkk ... then let your 9.6 is "real world" and for average, that is abysmal.   Subaru lied just like the other manufacturers.  A good average would be right in the middle between 7.1 and 9.4.  You are nowhere near.  Like I said, most manufacturers lie and MOST average "real world" consumption in North America is usually WORSE than the city number offered by manufacturers, which make them huge liers and very deceitful sale practices our government tolerates.

Huh?
In the middle of a brutally cold winter, he is within 2 tenths of the rated mileage, and that's somehow abysmal? I think that's incredibly good.

For average, you think that's good, when the AVERAGE, meaning adding the two numbers and dividing by two, should be somewhere in the middle, of course it's abysmal.  That is why people, like yourself, tolerate this and do not know how it works, and buy cars sold this way.  A "good" real world, meaning average between city and highway, would be a little higher than half in the middle, not higher than the highest consumption.

[micha]

My Crosstrek is rated by the EPA at 9.4 city, 7.1 highway. It's currently sitting at 9.6, and that's all short trips in the city in what has been a brutally cold winter. Last summer we went on a road trip to Cypress hills and averaged 6.6L for the trip.
The numbers seem pretty representative to me.

Let's just see what you get in "real world" conditions, i.e. every day driving, not in the winter.  Highway driving isn't every day driving for most people, stop and go on the highway and the city yes.  We'll chat then.

Short trips in the city in the winter is about as bad as driving conditions can get, how is that not real world?

Okkkkk ... then let your 9.6 is "real world" and for average, that is abysmal.   Subaru lied just like the other manufacturers.  A good average would be right in the middle between 7.1 and 9.4.  You are nowhere near.  Like I said, most manufacturers lie and MOST average "real world" consumption in North America is usually WORSE than the city number offered by manufacturers, which make them huge liers and very deceitful sale practices our government tolerates.

Huh?
In the middle of a brutally cold winter, he is within 2 tenths of the rated mileage, and that's somehow abysmal? I think that's incredibly good.

For average, you think that's good, when the AVERAGE, meaning adding the two numbers and dividing by two, should be somewhere in the middle, of course it's abysmal.  That is why people, like yourself, tolerate this and do not know how it works, and buy cars sold this way.  A "good" real world, meaning average between city and highway, would be a little higher than half in the middle, not higher than the highest consumption.

Let me bold and color that for you. It was all city driving.

Also, I have beaten NRC numbers quite a few times. Most people just haven't learned how to drive frugally.

[Ex-airbalancer]

My Crosstrek is rated by the EPA at 9.4 city, 7.1 highway. It's currently sitting at 9.6, and that's all short trips in the city in what has been a brutally cold winter. Last summer we went on a road trip to Cypress hills and averaged 6.6L for the trip.
The numbers seem pretty representative to me.

Let's just see what you get in "real world" conditions, i.e. every day driving, not in the winter.  Highway driving isn't every day driving for most people, stop and go on the highway and the city yes.  We'll chat then.

Short trips in the city in the winter is about as bad as driving conditions can get, how is that not real world?

Okkkkk ... then let your 9.6 is "real world" and for average, that is abysmal.   Subaru lied just like the other manufacturers.  A good average would be right in the middle between 7.1 and 9.4.  You are nowhere near.  Like I said, most manufacturers lie and MOST average "real world" consumption in North America is usually WORSE than the city number offered by manufacturers, which make them huge liers and very deceitful sale practices our government tolerates.

Huh?
In the middle of a brutally cold winter, he is within 2 tenths of the rated mileage, and that's somehow abysmal? I think that's incredibly good.

For average, you think that's good, when the AVERAGE, meaning adding the two numbers and dividing by two, should be somewhere in the middle, of course it's abysmal.  That is why people, like yourself, tolerate this and do not know how it works, and buy cars sold this way.  A "good" real world, meaning average between city and highway, would be a little higher than half in the middle, not higher than the highest consumption.

And I thought I was fack up 

[fstrdr]

My Crosstrek is rated by the EPA at 9.4 city, 7.1 highway. It's currently sitting at 9.6, and that's all short trips in the city in what has been a brutally cold winter. Last summer we went on a road trip to Cypress hills and averaged 6.6L for the trip.
The numbers seem pretty representative to me.

Let's just see what you get in "real world" conditions, i.e. every day driving, not in the winter.  Highway driving isn't every day driving for most people, stop and go on the highway and the city yes.  We'll chat then.

Short trips in the city in the winter is about as bad as driving conditions can get, how is that not real world?

Okkkkk ... then let your 9.6 is "real world" and for average, that is abysmal.   Subaru lied just like the other manufacturers.  A good average would be right in the middle between 7.1 and 9.4.  You are nowhere near.  Like I said, most manufacturers lie and MOST average "real world" consumption in North America is usually WORSE than the city number offered by manufacturers, which make them huge liers and very deceitful sale practices our government tolerates.

Huh?
In the middle of a brutally cold winter, he is within 2 tenths of the rated mileage, and that's somehow abysmal? I think that's incredibly good.

For average, you think that's good, when the AVERAGE, meaning adding the two numbers and dividing by two, should be somewhere in the middle, of course it's abysmal.  That is why people, like yourself, tolerate this and do not know how it works, and buy cars sold this way.  A "good" real world, meaning average between city and highway, would be a little higher than half in the middle, not higher than the highest consumption.

Let me bold and color that for you. It was all city driving.

Also, I have beaten NRC numbers quite a few times. Most people just haven't learned how to drive frugally.

Then you shouldn't be in this discussion.  Your 9.6 isn't Average, that is your city consumption, and it's higher than posted.  Like all other people who buy new cars, you're probably ashamed of your purchase and don't want to admit that is your average consumption, and that's ok.  I get above NRC and EPA with my Diesel every day, a bit higher in the winter, but still within their posted numbers.  That is real world consumption and I do average both city and highway in a week.  Gas cars can never get better than posted numbers because the POSTED numbers are a FRAUD.  What Hyundai does, every manufacturer does.

[PJ]

My Crosstrek is rated by the EPA at 9.4 city, 7.1 highway. It's currently sitting at 9.6, and that's all short trips in the city in what has been a brutally cold winter. Last summer we went on a road trip to Cypress hills and averaged 6.6L for the trip.
The numbers seem pretty representative to me.

Let's just see what you get in "real world" conditions, i.e. every day driving, not in the winter.  Highway driving isn't every day driving for most people, stop and go on the highway and the city yes.  We'll chat then.

Short trips in the city in the winter is about as bad as driving conditions can get, how is that not real world?

Okkkkk ... then let your 9.6 is "real world" and for average, that is abysmal.   Subaru lied just like the other manufacturers.  A good average would be right in the middle between 7.1 and 9.4.  You are nowhere near.  Like I said, most manufacturers lie and MOST average "real world" consumption in North America is usually WORSE than the city number offered by manufacturers, which make them huge liers and very deceitful sale practices our government tolerates.

Huh?
In the middle of a brutally cold winter, he is within 2 tenths of the rated mileage, and that's somehow abysmal? I think that's incredibly good.

For average, you think that's good, when the AVERAGE, meaning adding the two numbers and dividing by two, should be somewhere in the middle, of course it's abysmal.  That is why people, like yourself, tolerate this and do not know how it works, and buy cars sold this way.  A "good" real world, meaning average between city and highway, would be a little higher than half in the middle, not higher than the highest consumption.

Let me bold and color that for you. It was all city driving.

Also, I have beaten NRC numbers quite a few times. Most people just haven't learned how to drive frugally.

Then you shouldn't be in this discussion.  Your 9.6 isn't Average, that is your city consumption, and it's higher than posted.  Like all other people who buy new cars, you're probably ashamed of your purchase and don't want to admit that is your average consumption, and that's ok.  I get above NRC and EPA with my Diesel every day, a bit higher in the winter, but still within their posted numbers.  That is real world consumption and I do average both city and highway in a week.  Gas cars can never get better than posted numbers because the POSTED numbers are a FRAUD.  What Hyundai does, every manufacturer does.

There is no such thing as correct real world mileage.  Everyone's drive is different, everyday the weather is different, everyday the traffic is different and so on. 

Think about it for a bit. 

[SaskSpecV]

Gas cars can never get better than posted numbers because the POSTED numbers are a FRAUD.

Well, I guess it was impossible that I could beat the POSTED (NRC) numbers in both the Spec V and the Elantra Touring... Oh wait, I recorded multiple trips in the Spec V at 7.0 or 7.1 L/100 km (rated at 7.3), and below 6.4 L/100 km in the ET (it's rating).  Didn't beat the POSTED numbers very often, but certainly it was possible.  But apparently I didn't realize they were a FRAUD!
 
And that's beating the optimistic NRC.  Beating the EPA estimates is child's play.
I think "YMMV" is lost on this poster...

[Sir Osis of Liver]

My Crosstrek is rated by the EPA at 9.4 city, 7.1 highway. It's currently sitting at 9.6, and that's all short trips in the city in what has been a brutally cold winter. Last summer we went on a road trip to Cypress hills and averaged 6.6L for the trip.
The numbers seem pretty representative to me.

Let's just see what you get in "real world" conditions, i.e. every day driving, not in the winter.  Highway driving isn't every day driving for most people, stop and go on the highway and the city yes.  We'll chat then.

Short trips in the city in the winter is about as bad as driving conditions can get, how is that not real world?

Okkkkk ... then let your 9.6 is "real world" and for average, that is abysmal.   Subaru lied just like the other manufacturers.  A good average would be right in the middle between 7.1 and 9.4.  You are nowhere near.  Like I said, most manufacturers lie and MOST average "real world" consumption in North America is usually WORSE than the city number offered by manufacturers, which make them huge liers and very deceitful sale practices our government tolerates.

Huh?
In the middle of a brutally cold winter, he is within 2 tenths of the rated mileage, and that's somehow abysmal? I think that's incredibly good.

For average, you think that's good, when the AVERAGE, meaning adding the two numbers and dividing by two, should be somewhere in the middle, of course it's abysmal.  That is why people, like yourself, tolerate this and do not know how it works, and buy cars sold this way.  A "good" real world, meaning average between city and highway, would be a little higher than half in the middle, not higher than the highest consumption.

Let me bold and color that for you. It was all city driving.

Also, I have beaten NRC numbers quite a few times. Most people just haven't learned how to drive frugally.

Then you shouldn't be in this discussion.  Your 9.6 isn't Average, that is your city consumption, and it's higher than posted.  Like all other people who buy new cars, you're probably ashamed of your purchase and don't want to admit that is your average consumption, and that's ok.  I get above NRC and EPA with my Diesel every day, a bit higher in the winter, but still within their posted numbers.  That is real world consumption and I do average both city and highway in a week.  Gas cars can never get better than posted numbers because the POSTED numbers are a FRAUD.  What Hyundai does, every manufacturer does.

The rating is 9.4L/100km city, so far this winter I've averaged 9.6, in far worse conditions than the EPA uses, and you think this is bad? 

I will let you know though that this past summer I averaged right around 8L/100km in city only driving, beating the EPA rating by 1.4L/100km.

I took a picture when I returned from Cypress Hills. The trip home averaged 5.9L/100km, the overall average for the trip was 6.6L/100km, both much better than the EPA rating.

The fact that you personally can't hit the EPA numbers is no evidence that the numbers are invalid.

[dkaz]

If you only drive in the city with short trips, you are never going to get anywhere near the pre-2014 NRCAN combined numbers. Even meeting pre-2014 NRCAN city numbers would be a stretch, you're more likely to be in the EPA/post-2015 NRCAN city numbers. Sir O's numbers are definitely as expected.

YMMV.

[quadzilla]

Your 9.6 isn't Average, that is your city consumption, and it's higher than posted. 

Average:  the sum of a list of numbers divided by the size of the list