New EPA Fuel Economy Numbers: Ford and GM Show the Most Gains
New projected 2009 US fuel economy figures out from the EPA show that we have now reversed a long-term trend of gradually worsening fuel efficiency since 1987—that bottomed out in 2004 at 19.3 mpg.
While our international readers may find an industry average of 21.1 mpg and 422 grams CO2 per mile a laughable “achievement”—this does represent a real improvement over 2004 levels.
Industry wide, average model year 2009 light vehicles overall are projected to achieve the mileage they got back almost 20 years ago in 1991.
>> Interested in solar power? See if group discounts are available in your city
>> Don’t forget to: Sign up for our electric car interest list.
After the Saudi oil shocks of the ’70’s our vehicles rapidly became more fuel-efficient in response. EPA records going back to 1975 show that they got better mileage till 1987, then gradually got worse till 2004. (That is why there was this 25 year age limit for Cash-for-Clunkers; to generally retrieve the worst of the worst from these dark ages off the roads).
Overall fuel efficiency trends:
1. A rapid increase from 1975 through 1981;
2. A slower increase with efficiency peak in 1987;
3. A gradual decrease until 2004; and
4. An increase for the five years beginning in 2005.
This model year’s average CO2 emissions are now 8% lower than 2004’s 461 grams per mile.
While past reports in this series focused exclusively on fuel economy data, this year’s report includes CO2 emissions data as well. In any case, fuel efficiency and carbon emissions are correlated: the more fuel efficient a vehicle is, the lower the CO2 grams per mile figure.
Honda had the highest fuel economy/lowest CO2 emissions with 23.6 mpg and 376 grams per mile CO2 emissions, while Chrysler rated the worst, and was the only auto manufacturer to actually achieve lower fuel economy than in 2004.
Honda: 23.6 mpg 376 g/mi
Hyundai-Kia 23.4 mpg 380 g/mi
Toyota 23.2 mpg 383 g/mi
Volkswagen 22.8 mpg 398 g/mi
Nissan 21.6 mpg 411 g/mi
BMW 21.6 mpg 412 g/mi
Ford 20.5 mpg 434 g/mi
GM 19.9 mpg 447 g/mi
Chrysler 18.7 mpg 476 g/mi
While Honda and Kia beat Toyota to the best performance figures, two domestic automakers have come from behind to make the largest gains in fuel efficiency. Ford and GM.
You Might Also Like
Americans Want More Fuel-Efficient Cars, US Hybrids Up 48%
Hybrid Sales Plunge in January
Last Bailout Plea: Chrysler Needs $7 Billion
Clean Diesel Cars Coming to US This Fall: 2008-2010 Timeline
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Looking at those manufacturers’ numbers, some things to consider:
1) Honda, Hyundai/Kia, Volkswagen, and BMW have no offerings in the full-size pickup/SUV category (which is unfair in a sense…if you need one of those vehicles, you have to buy from another manufacturer…lowering that manufacturer’s numbers).
2) Although Toyota and Nissan offer full-size pickups and SUVs, because they’re relatively new to the class, they don’t have anywhere near the market-share of the American brands. So, if GM/Ford/Chrysler stopped making full-sized pickups and SUVs, Americans would buy up all the Tundras, Sequoias, Armadas and Titans, and Toyota’s and Nissan’s mpg numbers would plummet.
3) Only Toyota, GM, Ford, and Chrysler offer anything in the
“Large Sedans” market class (BMW, Acura, Lexus, Infiniti, etc. offer “Luxury Sedans” (as do the American brands) which is a different class and they sell a lot fewer of them because of cost). Again, this skews numbers downward for these manufacturers.
4) By offering a “Large Sedan”, those manufacturers are giving consumers an alternative to buying an SUV (and large sedans generally get better gas mileage than all but the smallest SUVs).
November 23rd, 2009 at 10:07 pm
I am in full agreement with Tim Cleland on this one. In addition I disagree about the fuel efficiency increases in the 70s following the Oil turn off of OPEC in 1973. The emissions laws of the times greatly hampered performance and fuel efficiency. Fuel efficiency did not recover until fuel injection was becoming common in the mid 1980’s.
When Ford brought back the “Boss 302″ it had a two barrel carburetor as they attempted to provide some semblance of performance along with fuel efficiency. Amazingly, it worked.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Tim, the report divided up the comparisons between apples-to -apples categories by vehicle classifications.
Chuck, if you look at the data, it shows the full history from the oil shocks of the 70’s showing the cars of that era got better mileage.
November 24th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
The emission rates for the oxides of nitrogen through the mid 1980’s allowed for a lean strategy at cruise and emissions were essentially uncontrolled at speeds above 57 mph (the maximum speed on the FTP UDDS) until 1990, when new Federal regulations were passed. The comparison of fuel economy from vehicles 1970-1990 to those after the 1990 Clean Air Act does not take into account the measures that had to be taken to reduce the oxides of nitrogen in vehicles from 1991-present. There is a significant fuel economy penalty associated with maintaining the combustion chemistry around stoichiometry. Vehicles are still restrained by NOx emission limits in reaching the most fuel efficient driving modes or in using diesels. While aftertreatment devices (catalytic convertors) exists to reduce the oxides of nitrogen in lean exhaust, they are prohibitively expensive, complicated, new, and until they become more robust, will only be used where it is absolutely required (such as in heavy duty diesels starting in 2010). This said, there was a disincentive among automakers to push fuel economy over power throughout the period of 1990s-2006 because fuel economy was typically the third or fourth most important factor driving consumer purchase decisions behind cost, styling, reliability, etc. You can’t sell a product with attributes people don’t value, for long.
November 25th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Let’s get real about something: Automakers will never ever stop making trucks, because a) they’re big profit vehicles that bolster the bottom line and b) they’re necessary for the economic growth, whether you’re talking big fleets or small business. Arguably, drivers should require a special license to operate pickup trucks (for business use only). By limiting their sale for legitimate needs, you’d automatically lift the overall fuel economy stats. End of story.