“150 MPG” Hybrid SUV Company Claims it is Being “Muzzled”
Just weeks before the 2008 LA Auto Show, hybrid car and powertrain maker AFS Trinity is pulling out after saying that show management “muzzled” them by disallowing claims that their highly modified Saturn Vue plug-in hybrids can achieve 150 mpg.
In a statement, AFS Trinity said that “carmakers continue to seek tens of billions of taxpayer dollars, ostensibly to develop fuel-efficient vehicle technologies, but their conduct is evidence they are reluctant to embrace solutions they didn’t invent.”
- » See also: CARB Unveils DriveClean, a New Web Tool to Help Consumers Pick Green Cars
- » Get Gas 2.0 by RSS or sign up by email.
In the show management’s defense, AFS Trinity’s 150 mpg claim is associated with a specific driving pattern which may or may not represent average driving conditions. If their hybrids are driven 40 miles per day for 6 days and then 80 miles on one day of the week, they use about 2 gallons to go 300 miles — which equals 150 mpg.
Because plug-in hybrids are such new technology, there is no agreed upon method to estimate fuel economy. Typically, a plug-in hybrid can drive up to 40 miles per day without needing to use any fuel, and beyond 40 miles the engine kicks in and charges a battery which then powers the car. If you only drive more than 40 miles once in a blue moon, you could have a rather ridiculous fuel economy of several thousand miles per gallon.
What, then, is an appropriate way to rate the fuel economy of these new types of cars? An email from LA Auto Show management to AFS Trinity states:
“We cannot approve this content . . . the mileage claim is of primary concern to us. Manufacturers are forced to quote EPA verified mpg numbers in their advertising, and . . . [your] 150-MPG figure is an estimation. A banner like this one in the lobby is likely to generate unfavorable reactions from manufacturers, which is something we will take action to avoid.”
AFS countered that no concept or prototype car at the auto show has its fuel economy certified by EPA prior to being exhibited, and told show management they would change their promotional materials to say that the 150 mpg claim is an “estimate.” In response, AFS Trinity was told that no materials would be accepted in any form that made a claim of 150 mpg and that the issue was “no longer a topic for further discussion.”
EPA has been struggling with how to rate the fuel economy of plug-in hybrids — the most recent being a spat between EPA and GM about how to rate the upcoming Chevy Volt. So, for the LA Auto Show management to claim that AFS Trinity is not using approved EPA methods to estimate fuel economy, they’re kind of off base, because even the EPA doesn’t really know how to rate fuel economy with some of the new alternative powered vehicles.
AFS Trinity says they will be exhibiting their extreme hybrids elsewhere in downtown LA during the auto show. I’ll be sure to go check their cars out while I’m down there to see what all the hoopla’s about.
Image Credit and Source: AFS Trinity Power Corporation
The claim to getting 150 MPG is bogus. They admit themselves that they plug the vehicle in to recharge. That power isn’t coming from the gasoline, it’s coming from the electric power grid.
Some guy,
I can see both sides of the argument… the point still being, what’s the best way to measure MPG for these types of vehicles?
I’ve voiced a proposal that’s something like:
PHEVXX→YY mpg
Or even more accurate long form:
PHEVXX/NN kWh→YY mpg
So, for the Volt, that would be
PHEV40→50 mpg, or the long form: PHEV40/16 kWh→50 mpg
For the Aptera Typ-1h, that would be:
PHEV60/5 kWh→130 mpg
For the Fisker Karma, that would be:
PHEV50/?? kWh→40 mpg
And so on… I think that accurately reflects visually how the vehicle will perform in the real world.
They prohibit all vendors from displaying non-EPA certified mileage ratings at the auto show. There were no signs on the Chevy Volt nor the Jetta TDI at last year’s L.A. auto show.
Miles per gallon doesn’t make sense if the car runs part of the time on all electric (infinite mpg). The EPA needs to develop a system that either takes into consideration both mpg and total range, or move away from mpg altogether. They could fill the fuel tank, fully charge the battery and see how far the car goes under some standard test conditions. Then divide the distance traveled by the gallons of fuel consumed. Or, they could develop a standard that gives total fuel cost per 1,000 miles city and highway. Neither of these methods would reflect an individual’s actual experience. Rather, they would be used for comparison purposes only.
BTW, the link to the EPA, GM spat doesn’t work.
Ironically I drive less than 40 miles a day, including getting to work and stopping by the market. Sundays are not planned but sometimes we drive a few miles and sometimes we stay at home. My point being, the claims of AFS Trinity would apply to my lifestyle and I would herald the claim that freed me from crippling trip to the fuel pump.
If you use the average price for kw/hr nationally and the mileage achieved versus gasoline it’s hard to compete with a hybrid that “plugs in”. Even at the lower gas prices that we now enjoy over what it has been just a couple of months ago, any plug-in hybrid makes the best gasoline only vehicle look piggish. It’s obvious why the AFS Trinity was “muzzled” at the LA auto show. The only fair EPA estimation for any motor vehicle has to be cents/mile based on a national average for gasoline and electricity and or hydrogen or whatever.That should be based only average American’s driving habits. Personally, I drive 15 miles per day and AFS’s hybrid would save me a small fortune in gasoline and I would love to see their technology come to mass market. We shouldn’t stand for posturing by the major auto companies or the energy companies,their representatives at auto shows or their lobbyist!
thanks Nick! Bill is on the right track…just calculate a ‘cost per mile’ using periodically-updated general prices for a gallon of gas AND/OR a kwh.
The epa.gov website already gives a cars ‘annual fuel cost’…being: “Based on 45% highway driving, 55% city driving, 15000 annual miles and the price of fuel..”.
So to know any average ‘cost per mile’ just apportion for the mechanics.
What AFS is after is a high ‘eco-rating’. This can be accomplished by simply listing the average % that CAN come from renewable sources.
@Bill,
I think you’re on to something too. Btw, fixed the link… too many http’s in there. Sorry.
I’m amazed at the ignorance of practically everyone when it comes to calculating gas used mileage for a plug-in, such as the Chevy Volt. It’s really quite simple - simply collect data of trip distances between recharge points and their frequency. There is simply no other method of determining how much gasoline a representative fleet of such a plug-in will consume. The only data available at this point are commuting trip distances compiled by the Feds. Do the third grade level math and you will see that if you assume NO recharging at the workplace, a fleet of Volts (40 miles electric range and 50 MPG running on the range extender) wil achieve 260 MPG while commuting. While we don’t have data for non-commuting
trips, we do know that : 1) commuting accounts for about half of private transportation gas usage, and 2) the Volt can achieve 50 MPG - thus, even if the fleet of Volts ran all their non-commuting mileage on gas alone, the overall average would top 165 MPG; thus we can safely assume an overall MPG of more than 220. That’s also assuming no recharges away from home, which is totally unrealistic. Assume 1/3rd can recharge at work and the commuting MPG jumps to over
400. The EOa is embarrasingly ignorant of what’s required and providing an MPG on the sticker is total nonsense - that depdends not so much on the car, but the driver’s trip profile. The sticker should tell the truth - the Volt can travel 40 miles on afully charged battery and when runing on the range extender, can achieve 50 MPG. THAT is what the consumer needs to be told - not some fleet average, which is virtually guaranteed to be very diifferent from anything he will achieve. The folks at the EPA have embarrased this country by their absurd actions on this point.