Dieselio

[Ty]

As you wish...
View attachment 640

LOL. Well played!

 

[Velnias]

I wouldn't say I'm done researching, but for now I think I have found a reasonable source on Wikipedia that will explain the mpg discrepancies:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_automobiles

And in more basic speak from click an clack: http://www.cartalk.com/content/why-do-european-cars-get-better-mpg-their-us-equivalents

The European cycle to test L/100km (USmpg or whatever units you want to use) is not close to real life testing. That is why the same or similar car in Europe will list a vastly different equivalent mpg. It is also why people complain in Europe that they can't get close to the rated mpg's. Sure people complain here, as people will do, but the data that can be found from voluntary mpg websites that are out there proves that the latest EPA cycle is pretty darn accurate.

So take your 65 mpg highway car in European cycle, with the rule of thumb derate you would get 38 mpg US EPA cycle.

The longer conversion is explained here: That is a UK site that lists your car at 65 mpg (imperial gallon) * .833, which would be 54 mpg (US gallon). Then account for the European test cycle and this is where you don't have a fixed conversion, but based on available info for identical cars, dividing by 1.2 or 1.3 is very conservative and as much as 1.4 is realistic, so you end up with between 38 and 45 mpg (US gallon) EPA fuel economy.

I'd be glad to be shown wrong, so I welcome any criticism.

No, what I listed with the 60 and 65 was me converting them from imperial to US. Their imperial listings were all over 70+ for highway (the numbers I showed). I checked the conversions and the math and it's all accurate. I even said I converted the numbers to US before making that list. Attention to detail my friend.

 

[JNR]

No, what I listed with the 60 and 65 was me converting them from imperial to US. Their imperial listings were all over 70+ for highway (the numbers I showed). I checked the conversions and the math and it's all accurate. I even said I converted the numbers to US before making that list. Attention to detail my friend.

Sorry, I used the 65 mpg as their combined #, but I erroneously stated highway, that I saw on that website for the egnine combined with the ASG transmission. The math is still the same. 65 combined Imperial mpg with European cycle conservatively becomes 38-45 US mpg using combined EPA cycle. 78 UK highway mpg European cycle becomes 46-54 highway US mpg and on down the line it goes.

A concrete example: A 2011 Honda CRZ is rated 31/37 in US and it's European test equivalent would be 39/57 US mpg all after including the US/Imperial gallon conversion (conversions done by me). The following text is from Wikipedia:

"For example, the 2011 Honda CR-Z with a six-speed manual transmission is rated 6.1/4.4 L/100 km in Europe[23] and 7.6/6.4 L/100 km (31/37 mpg ) in the United States.[24]

The purpose of my post was that I was adding that I found more information about the drastic difference in the testing cycles of EAP vs. European cycle. The EPA cycle is realistic, the European cycle is not, did you see the link that states these are the following items that can be done for the European cycle? Note that these are the major items, which implies there are even more items than those listed, just not as important:

"The major loopholes in the current EU tests allow car manufacturers a number of ‘cheats’ to improve results. Car manufacturers can:

• Disconnect the alternator, thus no energy is used to recharge the battery;
• Use special lubricants that are not used in production cars, in order to reduce friction;
• Turn off all electrical gadgets i.e. Air Con/Radio;
• Adjust brakes or even disconnect them to reduce friction;
• Tape up cracks between body panels and windows to reduce air resistance;
• Remove Wing mirrors."

 

[HoofHearted]

If "Big oil" is such a conspiracy, they are REALLY bad at it... Tesoro's profit margin has ranged from -3.83% to +7.91% over the past 5 years compared to Apple's +28.2% profit margin... Fuel efficient cars being "hidden by big oil" is a crock of crap. There are plenty of very high mileage cars... They don't sell very well so manufactures end up making fuel inefficient cars and trucks that people will actually buy. Flame away.

I wonder how Tesoro managers did.

 

[Velnias]

Sorry, I used the 65 mpg as their combined #, but I erroneously stated highway, that I saw on that website for the egnine combined with the ASG transmission. The math is still the same. 65 combined Imperial mpg with European cycle conservatively becomes 38-45 US mpg using combined EPA cycle. 78 UK highway mpg European cycle becomes 46-54 highway US mpg and on down the line it goes.

A concrete example: A 2011 Honda CRZ is rated 31/37 in US and it's European test equivalent would be 39/57 US mpg all after including the US/Imperial gallon conversion (conversions done by me). The following text is from Wikipedia:

"For example, the 2011 Honda CR-Z with a six-speed manual transmission is rated 6.1/4.4 L/100 km in Europe[23] and 7.6/6.4 L/100 km (31/37 mpg ) in the United States.[24]

The purpose of my post was that I was adding that I found more information about the drastic difference in the testing cycles of EAP vs. European cycle. The EPA cycle is realistic, the European cycle is not, did you see the link that states these are the following items that can be done for the European cycle? Note that these are the major items, which implies there are even more items than those listed, just not as important:

"The major loopholes in the current EU tests allow car manufacturers a number of ‘cheats’ to improve results. Car manufacturers can:

• Disconnect the alternator, thus no energy is used to recharge the battery;
• Use special lubricants that are not used in production cars, in order to reduce friction;
• Turn off all electrical gadgets i.e. Air Con/Radio;
• Adjust brakes or even disconnect them to reduce friction;
• Tape up cracks between body panels and windows to reduce air resistance;
• Remove Wing mirrors."

I absolutely love the ignorance and arrogance of the USA in thinking that only we can be accurate and correct in things of this nature. When most of the world agrees to something that differs from what the USA believes, why is it that we as a society still refuse to accept that as the truth and realize that what we are told here is the real lie?

As for the question of conversion, I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers from, but they are wrong. Here is the formula to use and you'll see that it's not even close to the low numbers you keep projecting.

Convert Liters Per 100 Kilometers to Miles Per Gallon (US)
mpg =
100 * lpg
kmpm * lp100km

definitions
mpg=miles per gallon
lp100km=liters per 100 km
lpg=liters per gallon (US) = 3.785411784
kmpm=kilometers per mile = 1.609344

So with that, if we take 100*3.79 (rounded off) to get 379, then take 1.61*3.6 (one of the better highway numbers) to get 5.796, finally dividing that into the 379, we end up with 65.39mpg US.

http://www.calculateme.com/cGasMileage/LitersPer100kmtoMPG.htm

Same math, different site:

http://calculator-converter.com/l_100km_mpg_convert_mpg_to_l_per_100_km.php

And yet a 3rd site just in case:

http://www.unitjuggler.com/convert-fuelconsumption-from-lper100km-to-mpg.html

Feel free to double check the math. But it's accurate and not based on imperial gallons. All 3 sites will show you the same result, and you can verify it's not imperial by going here and getting the imperial conversion (which comes to 78 btw):

http://mpg.webix.co.uk/

Just because we're the USA does not make us the experts or correct in everything. Our government and our corporations are more corrupt than any other developed nation on earth, only being surpassed in corruption by 3rd world developing nations. So excuse me if I don't take what our government or our propaganda (errrr news) medias tells us is true as the real truth.

 

[JNR]

I absolutely love the ignorance and arrogance of the USA in thinking that only we can be accurate and correct in things of this nature. When most of the world agrees to something that differs from what the USA believes, why is it that we as a society still refuse to accept that as the truth and realize that what we are told here is the real lie?

As for the question of conversion, I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers from, but they are wrong. Here is the formula to use and you'll see that it's not even close to the low numbers you keep projecting.

Convert Liters Per 100 Kilometers to Miles Per Gallon (US)
mpg =
100 * lpg
kmpm * lp100km

definitions
mpg=miles per gallon
lp100km=liters per 100 km
lpg=liters per gallon (US) = 3.785411784
kmpm=kilometers per mile = 1.609344

So with that, if we take 100*3.79 (rounded off) to get 379, then take 1.61*3.6 (one of the better highway numbers) to get 5.796, finally dividing that into the 379, we end up with 65.39mpg US.

http://www.calculateme.com/cGasMileage/LitersPer100kmtoMPG.htm

Same math, different site:

http://calculator-converter.com/l_100km_mpg_convert_mpg_to_l_per_100_km.php

And yet a 3rd site just in case:

http://www.unitjuggler.com/convert-fuelconsumption-from-lper100km-to-mpg.html

Feel free to double check the math. But it's accurate and not based on imperial gallons. All 3 sites will show you the same result, and you can verify it's not imperial by going here and getting the imperial conversion (which comes to 78 btw):

http://mpg.webix.co.uk/

Just because we're the USA does not make us the experts or correct in everything. Our government and our corporations are more corrupt than any other developed nation on earth, only being surpassed in corruption by 3rd world developing nations. So excuse me if I don't take what our government or our propaganda (errrr news) medias tells us is true as the real truth.

I think you may be taking this too personally or reading way too much into my answer. Your straight conversion from UK mpg to US mpg is of course correct. What I added is the rated mpg in Europe is essentially a joke that doesn't reflect real world driving. I frequently have heard reference to this, but now I have looked into it and the answer seems to be clear and simple. There is a reasonable additional conversion that is necessary to use when you see a European mpg rating. Only when the same exact car is sold in both areas can we find this exact discrepancy, so I used the CRZ as the example.

You can disagree all you want, but there are the some same cars for sale in the US and in Europe and they have different ratings when normalized for a conversion. What changed? The test.

All your political opinions may be true, they may not be, I could care less for this discussion. What we do know as a fact, not opinion, is the identical Honda CRZ has different rated/tested L/100km in the US than the UK. And it obvious that if someone drives that car the same way in Europe as the US, the actual consumption will be the same.

 

[HoofHearted]

There are at least two things I realize about this site. 1) The discussions are lively, and 2), (maybe one reason the discussions are lively) Some of us were likely potty trained at gunpoint.

 

[Velnias]

If "Big oil" is such a conspiracy, they are REALLY bad at it... Tesoro's profit margin has ranged from -3.83% to +7.91% over the past 5 years compared to Apple's +28.2% profit margin... Fuel efficient cars being "hidden by big oil" is a crock of crap. There are plenty of very high mileage cars... They don't sell very well so manufactures end up making fuel inefficient cars and trucks that people will actually buy. Flame away.

No wonder you see it as a crazy "conspiracy theory" you can just laugh at and ignore. You're out of touch with reality if that's your example of "big oil". They don't even rank in the top 10 in the USA let alone have much footing in the world market. Let's look at numbers shall we?

Tesoro:
Revenue

US$32.97 billion (FY 2012)[2]
Operating income

US$1.40 billion(FY 2012)[2]
Net income

US$743.0 million(FY 2012)[2]
Total assets

US$10.70 billion (FY 2012)[2]
Total equity

US$4.25 billion (FY 2012)[2]
Tesoro is an independent refiner and marketer of petroleum products, operating six refineries in the Western United States with a combined rated crude oil capacity of approximately 845,000 barrels (134,300 m3) per day.

Exxon/Mobile:
Revenue

US$ 420.836 billion (2013)[2]
Operating income

US$ 40.301 billion (2013)[2]
Net income

US$ 32.580 billion (2013)[2]
Total assets

US$ 346.808 billion (2013)[2]
Total equity

US$ 174.003 billion (2013)[2]
With 37 oil refineries in 21 countries constituting a combined daily refining capacity of 6.3 million barrels (1,000,000 m3), ExxonMobil is the largest refiner in the world.

Chevron:
Revenue

US$ 220.264 billion (2013)[2]
Operating income

US$ 28.486 billion (2013)[2]
Net income

US$ 21.423 billion (2013)[2]
Total assets

US$ 253.753 billion (2013)[2]
Total equity

US$ 149.113 billion (2013)[2]
Daily production in 2010 was 2.763 million barrels per day (439.3 thousand cubic metres per day). (didn't find any newer figures)


And let's not forget BP who has major stake in US oil production:
Revenue

US$ 396.217 billion (2013)[2]
Operating income

US$ 31.310 billion (2013)[3]
Profit

US$ 23.451 billion (2013)[3]
Total assets

US$ 305.690 billion (2013)[4]
Total equity

US$ 129.302 billion (2013)[3]
As of December 2013, BP had operations in approximately 80 countries,[5] produced around 3.2 million barrels per day (510,000 m3/d) of oil equivalent,[1] had total proved reserves of 17.9 billion barrels (2.85×109 m3) of oil equivalent,[13] and had around 17,800 service stations.

So if your idea of "big oil" is a company that could be bought by any of the other 3 w/o even noticing it on their finance books, then you are really out of touch with reality and it now makes sense as to why you think that "big oil" doesn't have the power they do in the US.

 

[James Sparks]

Looking at the platform design....it could be any configuration. Diesel, hybrid, or electric. That is one of the many reasons that this (Elio Motors) could be the start of something really big.

 

[Ty]

LOL. Not out of touch. Just not the best example and don't care enough about this crazy line of thought to research further. I'm done. Can't convince people to change their "beliefs" so I won't bother. Have fun with all your conspiracies. Out.