Comments on: So Much For That; EPA Won't Back Up GM's 230 MPG Claim http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/ What is the future of fuel? What's new? What's next? Since 2007, Gas 2 has covered a rapidly changing world coming to terms with its oil addiction. Sat, 26 May 2012 14:59:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Volkswagen Plans 141 MPG Plug-In Golf By 2015 http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-134221 Volkswagen Plans 141 MPG Plug-In Golf By 2015 Wed, 22 Feb 2012 22:02:10 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-134221 [...] That’s in Imperial gallons though; in the U.S. that’s about 117 mpg, still an incredible number, though these conversions are far from an exact science. Let us not forget GM’s magical 230 MPG claim. [...] [...] That’s in Imperial gallons though; in the U.S. that’s about 117 mpg, still an incredible number, though these conversions are far from an exact science. Let us not forget GM’s magical 230 MPG claim. [...]

]]> By: Chevy Volt Gets Combined EPA Rating of 60 MPG – Gas 2.0 http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-54788 Chevy Volt Gets Combined EPA Rating of 60 MPG – Gas 2.0 Wed, 24 Nov 2010 21:05:17 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-54788 [...] this stuff online. There is so much old, outdated information out there on both of these cars (GM’s 230 MPG fiasco for example) and instead of clearing the air, I feel like the EPA just added more [...] [...] this stuff online. There is so much old, outdated information out there on both of these cars (GM’s 230 MPG fiasco for example) and instead of clearing the air, I feel like the EPA just added more [...]

]]> By: ChuckL http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-11811 ChuckL Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:14:42 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-11811 MD, Kilo-watt is a rate of consumption. The term you are looking for is kilo-watt-hour, which is using power at a rate of one kilo-watt for one hour. What we really need in this argument is a standardized test to arrive at a close estimate of monthly operating costs, since this is really what we are concerned about. This must include all maintenance, all normal use items (expendables) all power replenishment costs, and any home refueling equipment costs which can be prorated over three years. I definitely agree with you that MPG is a misleading term in this discussion. What is interesting in this little MPG story, or battle, is that Ford which did get over 80 mpg from a Fusion Hybrid in a special test in which they ran a Fusion Hybrid on one tank of gasoline until it quit, and they did tell us how they did it, and Ford has not claimed that this is what you can expect from your new Fusion. MD, Kilo-watt is a rate of consumption. The term you are looking for is kilo-watt-hour, which is using power at a rate of one kilo-watt for one hour.

What we really need in this argument is a standardized test to arrive at a close estimate of monthly operating costs, since this is really what we are concerned about. This must include all maintenance, all normal use items (expendables) all power replenishment costs, and any home refueling equipment costs which can be prorated over three years.

I definitely agree with you that MPG is a misleading term in this discussion.

What is interesting in this little MPG story, or battle, is that Ford which did get over 80 mpg from a Fusion Hybrid in a special test in which they ran a Fusion Hybrid on one tank of gasoline until it quit, and they did tell us how they did it, and Ford has not claimed that this is what you can expect from your new Fusion.

]]> By: ChuckL http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-35130 ChuckL Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:14:00 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-35130 MD, Kilo-watt is a rate of consumption. The term you are looking for is kilo-watt-hour, which is using power at a rate of one kilo-watt for one hour. What we really need in this argument is a standardized test to arrive at a close estimate of monthly operating costs, since this is really what we are concerned about. This must include all maintenance, all normal use items (expendables) all power replenishment costs, and any home refueling equipment costs which can be prorated over three years. I definitely agree with you that MPG is a misleading term in this discussion. What is interesting in this little MPG story, or battle, is that Ford which did get over 80 mpg from a Fusion Hybrid in a special test in which they ran a Fusion Hybrid on one tank of gasoline until it quit, and they did tell us how they did it, and Ford has not claimed that this is what you can expect from your new Fusion. MD, Kilo-watt is a rate of consumption. The term you are looking for is kilo-watt-hour, which is using power at a rate of one kilo-watt for one hour.

What we really need in this argument is a standardized test to arrive at a close estimate of monthly operating costs, since this is really what we are concerned about. This must include all maintenance, all normal use items (expendables) all power replenishment costs, and any home refueling equipment costs which can be prorated over three years.

I definitely agree with you that MPG is a misleading term in this discussion.

What is interesting in this little MPG story, or battle, is that Ford which did get over 80 mpg from a Fusion Hybrid in a special test in which they ran a Fusion Hybrid on one tank of gasoline until it quit, and they did tell us how they did it, and Ford has not claimed that this is what you can expect from your new Fusion.

]]> By: Brian Jones http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-11810 Brian Jones Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:01:21 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-11810 "russ," above, is 100% correct. GM never said this was an EPA rating. They said it was based on internal testing in-line with the current EPA proposal. Is it possibly misleading? Of course. Fraudulent? Not in the least. GM needs hype right now. If they jump the gun, don't castrate them - they are trying to make a come back. -bZj PS: As a qualifier, I work for Toyota (my company even makes Prius parts). “russ,” above, is 100% correct.

GM never said this was an EPA rating. They said it was based on internal testing in-line with the current EPA proposal. Is it possibly misleading? Of course. Fraudulent? Not in the least.

GM needs hype right now. If they jump the gun, don’t castrate them – they are trying to make a come back.

-bZj

PS: As a qualifier, I work for Toyota (my company even makes Prius parts).

]]> By: Brian Jones http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-35129 Brian Jones Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:01:00 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-35129 "russ," above, is 100% correct. GM never said this was an EPA rating. They said it was based on internal testing in-line with the current EPA proposal. Is it possibly misleading? Of course. Fraudulent? Not in the least. GM needs hype right now. If they jump the gun, don't castrate them - they are trying to make a come back. -bZj PS: As a qualifier, I work for Toyota (my company even makes Prius parts). “russ,” above, is 100% correct.

GM never said this was an EPA rating. They said it was based on internal testing in-line with the current EPA proposal. Is it possibly misleading? Of course. Fraudulent? Not in the least.

GM needs hype right now. If they jump the gun, don’t castrate them – they are trying to make a come back.

-bZj

PS: As a qualifier, I work for Toyota (my company even makes Prius parts).

]]> By: MaxHedrm http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-11809 MaxHedrm Thu, 13 Aug 2009 02:22:00 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-11809 Bwahahah. I just saw one of these ads before a ONN (Onione News Network) video on YouTube. Seem amazingly appropriate! :^D Bwahahah. I just saw one of these ads before a ONN (Onione News Network) video on YouTube. Seem amazingly appropriate! :^D

]]> By: MaxHedrm http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-35128 MaxHedrm Thu, 13 Aug 2009 02:22:00 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-35128 Bwahahah. I just saw one of these ads before a ONN (Onione News Network) video on YouTube. Seem amazingly appropriate! :^D Bwahahah. I just saw one of these ads before a ONN (Onione News Network) video on YouTube. Seem amazingly appropriate! :^D

]]> By: Mitch http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-11808 Mitch Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:51:33 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-11808 Hi, "My average commute consists of about 60 miles round trip, but in a Volt that would only cost me twenty miles worth of gas, probably under a half-gallon since the Volt will still get very good gas mileage." NO gas if you charged at work. Hi,

“My average commute consists of about 60 miles round trip, but in a Volt that would only cost me twenty miles worth of gas, probably under a half-gallon since the Volt will still get very good gas mileage.”

NO gas if you charged at work.

]]> By: Mitch http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-35127 Mitch Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:51:00 +0000 http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-35127 Hi, "My average commute consists of about 60 miles round trip, but in a Volt that would only cost me twenty miles worth of gas, probably under a half-gallon since the Volt will still get very good gas mileage." NO gas if you charged at work. Hi,

“My average commute consists of about 60 miles round trip, but in a Volt that would only cost me twenty miles worth of gas, probably under a half-gallon since the Volt will still get very good gas mileage.”

NO gas if you charged at work.

]]>