Gas mileage - hybrids

Excerpts from
[url]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB112856197554661289.html?mod=todays_us_personal_journal[/url]


According to a study by Consumer Reports that tested the mileage of
vehicles in real world conditions, hybrids had some of the biggest
disparities, with fuel economy averaging 19 mpg below the EPA city
estimate. The EPA tests assume drivers accelerate slowly, leave the
air conditioning off, and average a speed of 20 mph in the city.

The groundswell of complaints is spurring the EPA to act. The agency
says that by the end of this year it will propose changes to the
methods used in calculating fuel economy ratings for vehicles. The EPA
said the new rules will more accurately reflect how people actually
drive and will consider the impact of air conditioning, aggressive
driving and traffic congestion on fuel economy.

Steve wrote:[color=blue]
> According to a study by Consumer Reports that tested the mileage of
> vehicles in real world conditions, hybrids had some of the biggest
> disparities, with fuel economy averaging 19 mpg below the EPA city
> estimate. The EPA tests assume drivers accelerate slowly, leave the
> air conditioning off, and average a speed of 20 mph in the city.[/color]

I think the worst parameters of the test is the highway, which has an
average speed of 48 mph and a top speed of 60 mph. I don't know too
many people who's *minimum* highway speed is as low as 60 mph.

In article <6le9k198tvemu0ftmgu0d9dg1npn21du8j@4ax.com>, Steve
<mhyt@fpoh.inv> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Excerpts from
>
> [url]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB112856197554661289.html?mod=todays_us_personal[/url]
> _journal
>
>
> According to a study by Consumer Reports that tested the mileage of
> vehicles in real world conditions, hybrids had some of the biggest
> disparities, with fuel economy averaging 19 mpg below the EPA city
> estimate. The EPA tests assume drivers accelerate slowly, leave the
> air conditioning off, and average a speed of 20 mph in the city.
>
> The groundswell of complaints is spurring the EPA to act. The agency
> says that by the end of this year it will propose changes to the
> methods used in calculating fuel economy ratings for vehicles. The EPA
> said the new rules will more accurately reflect how people actually
> drive and will consider the impact of air conditioning, aggressive
> driving and traffic congestion on fuel economy.[/color]

That's my family's experience too, Steve. On trips along a mix of
turnpikes and country roads our '05 Prius is giving us 50 mpg, exactly
as Toyota claims. In our suburban setting, however, we're seeing the
mid 40's, not the claimed 60. I'm not disappointed. I've never seen a
car that got better mileage around town, so from the outset I dismissed
the 60 figure as implausible. I'd have been startled to find it
correct.

Of course, "how people actually drive" is more a comment on drivers'
disinterest in conservation than a standard for fuel efficiency. Just
about any driver could improve mpg with a few changes in behavior.

The Prius is so brilliantly designed that it would still be a great car
even if it weren't thrifty. For us the higher efficiency was a nice
plus. When our Avalon retires, we'll become a two-Prius family.

Brent

"Bucky" <uw_badgers@email.com> wrote in message
news:1128583320.479942.281070@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...[color=blue]
> Steve wrote:[color=green]
>> According to a study by Consumer Reports that tested the mileage of
>> vehicles in real world conditions, hybrids had some of the biggest
>> disparities, with fuel economy averaging 19 mpg below the EPA city
>> estimate. The EPA tests assume drivers accelerate slowly, leave the
>> air conditioning off, and average a speed of 20 mph in the city.[/color]
>
> I think the worst parameters of the test is the highway, which has an
> average speed of 48 mph and a top speed of 60 mph. I don't know too
> many people who's *minimum* highway speed is as low as 60 mph.
>[/color]

Then might I suggest you get some professional truck driver friends who
drive company trucks for a LARGE carrier. 62 mph is the typical governed
vehicle speed for such fleets and of course, traversing mountainous regions
makes 48 mph a HIGH speed.
--

- Philip

On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 14:05:30 GMT, "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>Then might I suggest you get some professional truck driver friends who
>drive company trucks for a LARGE carrier. 62 mph is the typical governed
>vehicle speed for such fleets and of course, traversing mountainous regions
>makes 48 mph a HIGH speed.[/color]

Simply put, you don't know what you are talking about Philip. Have you
ever driven on an interstate west of the Mississippi? Why would they
limit the trucks to 62 when 75 is the limit in many states?

On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 21:01:28 GMT, --Larry
<ldcolton@san.spamblockerr.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 14:05:30 GMT, "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net>
>wrote:
>[color=green]
>>
>>Then might I suggest you get some professional truck driver friends who
>>drive company trucks for a LARGE carrier. 62 mph is the typical governed
>>vehicle speed for such fleets and of course, traversing mountainous regions
>>makes 48 mph a HIGH speed.[/color]
>
>Simply put, you don't know what you are talking about Philip. Have you
>ever driven on an interstate west of the Mississippi? Why would they
>limit the trucks to 62 when 75 is the limit in many states?[/color]

Because trucks take longer to stop, and they are trying to level the
playing field.

See [url]http://www.fightthe55.com/map_of_truck_speeds.htm[/url] for limits
nationwide.

"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>"Bucky" <uw_badgers@email.com> wrote in message
>news:1128583320.479942.281070@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...[color=green]
>> Steve wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> According to a study by Consumer Reports that tested the mileage of
>>> vehicles in real world conditions, hybrids had some of the biggest
>>> disparities, with fuel economy averaging 19 mpg below the EPA city
>>> estimate. The EPA tests assume drivers accelerate slowly, leave the
>>> air conditioning off, and average a speed of 20 mph in the city.[/color]
>>
>> I think the worst parameters of the test is the highway, which has an
>> average speed of 48 mph and a top speed of 60 mph. I don't know too
>> many people who's *minimum* highway speed is as low as 60 mph.
>>[/color]
>
>Then might I suggest you get some professional truck driver friends who
>drive company trucks for a LARGE carrier. 62 mph is the typical governed
>vehicle speed for such fleets and of course, traversing mountainous regions
>makes 48 mph a HIGH speed.
>[/color]
And the governed speed of a large truck relates to the EPA mileage tests for a
hybrid (or other passenger car) in what way?

Re: Gas mileage - hybrids

Group: alt.autos.toyota Date: Thu, Oct 6, 2005, 11:11pm (EDT+4) From:
[email]andy_hill@hp.com[/email] (Andy*Hill)
"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:

Then might I suggest you get some professional truck driver friends who
drive company trucks for a LARGE carrier. 62 mph is the typical governed
vehicle speed for such fleets and of course, traversing mountainous
regions makes 48 mph a HIGH speed.
-------------------------------------------------
And the governed speed of a large truck relates to the EPA mileage tests
for a hybrid (or other passenger car) in what way?
--------------

Right...??

"--Larry" <ldcolton@san.spamblockerr.com> wrote in message
news:ou3bk1hfmgkppj8b0ig4ta4ecusif7eh72@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 14:05:30 GMT, "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>
>>Then might I suggest you get some professional truck driver friends who
>>drive company trucks for a LARGE carrier. 62 mph is the typical governed
>>vehicle speed for such fleets and of course, traversing mountainous
>>regions
>>makes 48 mph a HIGH speed.[/color]
>
> Simply put, you don't know what you are talking about Philip. Have you
> ever driven on an interstate west of the Mississippi? Why would they
> limit the trucks to 62 when 75 is the limit in many states?[/color]


"Simply stated", I'm a retired line driver. Driven most of the contiguous
48 for 12 yrs. YOU are the one with your ass out in the wind.

Every truck fleet of size (excess of 1000 tractors) has their have their
trucks maximum speed governed in the low 60's. The fuel consumption
increase as you pass 60 mph is ernomous when you have a sizeable fleet. Fuel
costs are tied ... if not higher than the company's payroll costs.
Secondly, the severity of accidents is less with lower speeds. Since the
larger companies are all self insured, they're really really conscious of
the cost/benefits of maximum speed.

Finally, AZ, NV, CO, NM, WY, NB, and OK are the only states I recall
permitting
semis to travel at 75 mph.

--
-Philip

All truth passes through three stages.

First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

-Arthur Schopenhauer

In article <ou3bk1hfmgkppj8b0ig4ta4ecusif7eh72@4ax.com>,
[email]ldcolton@san.spamblockerr.com[/email] says...[color=blue]
> Why would they
> limit the trucks to 62 when 75 is the limit in many states?
>[/color]
Across europe, 56mph is the legally governed speed (or metric
equivalent) on trucks. Even when you include the 70mph motorway speed in
the UK, and the unlimited stretches in Germany.

On most other speedlimits, although not mechanically governed, the truck
speed limit is lower than that for a car (except in 30 and 40 limits).
--
Carl Robson
Car PC Build starts again. [url]http://smallr.com/rz[/url]
Homepage: [url]http://www.bouncing-czechs.com[/url]

On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 06:03:59 GMT, "Philip"
<1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>"--Larry" <ldcolton@san.spamblockerr.com> wrote in message
>news:ou3bk1hfmgkppj8b0ig4ta4ecusif7eh72@4ax.com...[color=green]
>> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 14:05:30 GMT, "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>>Then might I suggest you get some professional truck driver friends who
>>>drive company trucks for a LARGE carrier. 62 mph is the typical governed
>>>vehicle speed for such fleets and of course, traversing mountainous
>>>regions
>>>makes 48 mph a HIGH speed.[/color]
>>
>> Simply put, you don't know what you are talking about Philip. Have you
>> ever driven on an interstate west of the Mississippi? Why would they
>> limit the trucks to 62 when 75 is the limit in many states?[/color]
>
>
>"Simply stated", I'm a retired line driver. Driven most of the contiguous
>48 for 12 yrs. YOU are the one with your ass out in the wind.
>
>Every truck fleet of size (excess of 1000 tractors) has their have their
>trucks maximum speed governed in the low 60's. The fuel consumption
>increase as you pass 60 mph is ernomous when you have a sizeable fleet. Fuel
>costs are tied ... if not higher than the company's payroll costs.
>Secondly, the severity of accidents is less with lower speeds. Since the
>larger companies are all self insured, they're really really conscious of
>the cost/benefits of maximum speed.
>
>Finally, AZ, NV, CO, NM, WY, NB, and OK are the only states I recall
>permitting
>semis to travel at 75 mph.[/color]


Obviously you haven't driven in Texas. I've often driven at 65 to 70
mph and they are passing me up.

<Rob> wrote in message news:5pmck15aalt4irgt0pgfe4nekb66kcholu@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 06:03:59 GMT, "Philip"
> <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>
>>"--Larry" <ldcolton@san.spamblockerr.com> wrote in message
>>news:ou3bk1hfmgkppj8b0ig4ta4ecusif7eh72@4ax.com...[color=darkred]
>>> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 14:05:30 GMT, "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Then might I suggest you get some professional truck driver friends who
>>>>drive company trucks for a LARGE carrier. 62 mph is the typical
>>>>governed
>>>>vehicle speed for such fleets and of course, traversing mountainous
>>>>regions
>>>>makes 48 mph a HIGH speed.
>>>
>>> Simply put, you don't know what you are talking about Philip. Have
>>> you
>>> ever driven on an interstate west of the Mississippi? Why would they
>>> limit the trucks to 62 when 75 is the limit in many states?[/color]
>>
>>
>>"Simply stated", I'm a retired line driver. Driven most of the contiguous
>>48 for 12 yrs. YOU are the one with your ass out in the wind.
>>
>>Every truck fleet of size (excess of 1000 tractors) has their have their
>>trucks maximum speed governed in the low 60's. The fuel consumption
>>increase as you pass 60 mph is ernomous when you have a sizeable fleet.
>>Fuel
>>costs are tied ... if not higher than the company's payroll costs.
>>Secondly, the severity of accidents is less with lower speeds. Since the
>>larger companies are all self insured, they're really really conscious of
>>the cost/benefits of maximum speed.
>>
>>Finally, AZ, NV, CO, NM, WY, NB, and OK are the only states I recall
>>permitting
>>semis to travel at 75 mph.[/color]
>
>
> Obviously you haven't driven in Texas. I've often driven at 65 to 70
> mph and they are passing me up.[/color]

Obviously Phillip hasn't driven near Chicago recently. I've seen
truck-tractor-trailer combos going 75-80. About the only time anyone slows
down to near the speed limit anymore is when someone spots Sergeant Buzzkill
of the state police trying to fill up his quota. In Chicago you have two
kinds of drivers: The quick and the dead. That's been true for many years
now.

Charles of Kankakee

On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 06:03:59 GMT, "Philip"
<1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>"--Larry" <ldcolton@san.spamblockerr.com> wrote in message
>news:ou3bk1hfmgkppj8b0ig4ta4ecusif7eh72@4ax.com...[color=green]
>> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 14:05:30 GMT, "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>>>
>>>Then might I suggest you get some professional truck driver friends who
>>>drive company trucks for a LARGE carrier. 62 mph is the typical governed
>>>vehicle speed for such fleets and of course, traversing mountainous
>>>regions
>>>makes 48 mph a HIGH speed.[/color]
>>
>> Simply put, you don't know what you are talking about Philip. Have you
>> ever driven on an interstate west of the Mississippi? Why would they
>> limit the trucks to 62 when 75 is the limit in many states?[/color]
>
>
>"Simply stated", I'm a retired line driver. Driven most of the contiguous
>48 for 12 yrs. YOU are the one with your ass out in the wind.
>
>Every truck fleet of size (excess of 1000 tractors) has their have their
>trucks maximum speed governed in the low 60's. The fuel consumption
>increase as you pass 60 mph is ernomous when you have a sizeable fleet. Fuel
>costs are tied ... if not higher than the company's payroll costs.
>Secondly, the severity of accidents is less with lower speeds. Since the
>larger companies are all self insured, they're really really conscious of
>the cost/benefits of maximum speed.
>
>Finally, AZ, NV, CO, NM, WY, NB, and OK are the only states I recall
>permitting
>semis to travel at 75 mph.[/color]

I hate to argue with you.... (yeah right)....

....but you are either WRONG or the governors do not work!

The only trucks I see going anywhere near the speed limit belong to
Wal Mart and Publix (a Florida supermarket).

--

Scott in Florida

Still Voting Democratic?

You are Stuck On Stupid!

"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
news:smtck1dhecasv95ti241e2f4cjnckvnbum@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 06:03:59 GMT, "Philip"
> <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
> >
> >"--Larry" <ldcolton@san.spamblockerr.com> wrote in message
> >news:ou3bk1hfmgkppj8b0ig4ta4ecusif7eh72@4ax.com...[color=darkred]
> >> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 14:05:30 GMT, "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>Then might I suggest you get some professional truck driver friends who
> >>>drive company trucks for a LARGE carrier. 62 mph is the typical[/color][/color][/color]
governed[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >>>vehicle speed for such fleets and of course, traversing mountainous
> >>>regions
> >>>makes 48 mph a HIGH speed.
> >>
> >> Simply put, you don't know what you are talking about Philip. Have[/color][/color][/color]
you[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> >> ever driven on an interstate west of the Mississippi? Why would they
> >> limit the trucks to 62 when 75 is the limit in many states?[/color]
> >
> >
> >"Simply stated", I'm a retired line driver. Driven most of the[/color][/color]
contiguous[color=blue][color=green]
> >48 for 12 yrs. YOU are the one with your ass out in the wind.
> >
> >Every truck fleet of size (excess of 1000 tractors) has their have their
> >trucks maximum speed governed in the low 60's. The fuel consumption
> >increase as you pass 60 mph is ernomous when you have a sizeable fleet.[/color][/color]
Fuel[color=blue][color=green]
> >costs are tied ... if not higher than the company's payroll costs.
> >Secondly, the severity of accidents is less with lower speeds. Since the
> >larger companies are all self insured, they're really really conscious of
> >the cost/benefits of maximum speed.
> >
> >Finally, AZ, NV, CO, NM, WY, NB, and OK are the only states I recall
> >permitting
> >semis to travel at 75 mph.[/color]
>
> I hate to argue with you.... (yeah right)....
>
> ...but you are either WRONG or the governors do not work!
>
> The only trucks I see going anywhere near the speed limit belong to
> Wal Mart and Publix (a Florida supermarket).
>
> --
>[/color]

When I read the "governor" assertion, I started to wonder about that,
myself.

I did the long driving vacation thing this summer and, looking back, I was
passing trucks very often and they were only very rarely passing me.. I was
usually going about 4 over, nowhere more than 9 over, except in Chicago,
where, well, Chicago was 5mph in places and just wild in others...

It seems to me that trucks were particularly well-behaved in Ohio, where
truck speed limits are lower, if I remember aright.

It could be that the states I traversed happen to be states with aggressive
enforcement.
[color=blue]
> Scott in Florida
>
> Still Voting Democratic?
>
> You are Stuck On Stupid![/color]

<Rob> wrote in message news:5pmck15aalt4irgt0pgfe4nekb66kcholu@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 06:03:59 GMT, "Philip"
> <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>
>>"--Larry" <ldcolton@san.spamblockerr.com> wrote in message
>>news:ou3bk1hfmgkppj8b0ig4ta4ecusif7eh72@4ax.com...[color=darkred]
>>> On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 14:05:30 GMT, "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Then might I suggest you get some professional truck driver friends who
>>>>drive company trucks for a LARGE carrier. 62 mph is the typical
>>>>governed
>>>>vehicle speed for such fleets and of course, traversing mountainous
>>>>regions
>>>>makes 48 mph a HIGH speed.
>>>
>>> Simply put, you don't know what you are talking about Philip. Have
>>> you
>>> ever driven on an interstate west of the Mississippi? Why would they
>>> limit the trucks to 62 when 75 is the limit in many states?[/color]
>>
>>
>>"Simply stated", I'm a retired line driver. Driven most of the contiguous
>>48 for 12 yrs. YOU are the one with your ass out in the wind.
>>
>>Every truck fleet of size (excess of 1000 tractors) has their have their
>>trucks maximum speed governed in the low 60's. The fuel consumption
>>increase as you pass 60 mph is ernomous when you have a sizeable fleet.
>>Fuel
>>costs are tied ... if not higher than the company's payroll costs.
>>Secondly, the severity of accidents is less with lower speeds. Since the
>>larger companies are all self insured, they're really really conscious of
>>the cost/benefits of maximum speed.
>>
>>Finally, AZ, NV, CO, NM, WY, NB, and OK are the only states I recall
>>permitting
>>semis to travel at 75 mph.[/color]
>
>
> Obviously you haven't driven in Texas. I've often driven at 65 to 70
> mph and they are passing me up.[/color]

I've driven all over TX you self absorbed geek.

What partS of my posting did you not understand.

My guess the fleet size I mentioned is the part you missed. TX does not
permit 75 mph travel speeds. That owner/operators of tractor/trailers
choose to test the local smokies by going that fast is an entirely different
discussion.
--

- Philip