Dealers Still Advertising Higher 2007 Fuel Economy Ratings

A breathless, critical report has been issued by CNW Marketing research stating that Toyota dealers are still claiming that the Prius can achieve 60 miles per gallon.

It has been reasonably well known in the automotive world for years that EPA fuel economy ratings were generally higher than what people could expect to see "in the real world." Sure, it's theoretically possible to drive like a stereotypical septuagenarian and achieve those window sticker numbers, but more likely than not, we're accelerating more quickly, driving faster, and using accessories such as air conditioning and power steering that also require fuel to run. With gas prices near historic highs, consumers are more concerned about fuel economy than they have been in years, and were getting irritated when their own gas mileage didn't match the numbers on the window sticker, in spite of the famous disclaimer, "your actual mileage may vary." In response to this, the EPA has implemented a revised calculation to establish fuel economy for the window sticker for all 2008 and later models to better reflect "real world" experiences. The calculations are complex, but the end result is that most vehicles will see a 2-4 mile per gallon decrease in both city and highway fuel economy. The exception to that is hybrids, which took a disproportionate beating in their ratings. The Toyota Prius, previously rated at 60 miles per gallon in the city and 51 miles per gallon on the highway, dropped to 48 miles per gallon in the city and 45 miles per gallon on the highway. My own theory on the reason for the larger drop is not that Toyota was cheating, but that the Prius' driving characteristics were very well suited to the conditions of the old test methodology (truth be told, I also am skeptical of the 21 miles per gallon highway rating of GM's Tahoe full size SUV, thanks to its active fuel management that shuts down four of its eight cylinders, but in reality, rarely has the chance to do so).

The point is, although there really are people who achieved 60 miles per gallon in the Prius, though you have to "know" how to drive a hybrid like the Prius to maximize its fuel efficiency. (From what I have heard, it's not the same thing as driving a conventional car for maximum economy). Most people achieve mileage in the mid-40s in the Prius, which is exactly what the EPA now says it should do.

Details left out of the report, however are:

• Do dealers of other brands also talk about fuel economy in terms of 2007 numbers?
• Are the Toyota dealers in question referring to 2008 Priuses or leftover 2007 models?
• Is doing this illegal, or even unethical?
• Who paid for this research?

Let's dive into the implications of each of these.

I don't know about other brands' dealers, but I can say for sure that if you go today to http://www.gm.com/shop and click on "30+ MPG highway," the only vehicles that come up in the search are 2007 models. Some of the models listed (Impala, Grand Prix, etc.) will not be over 30 miles per gallon in 2008, but GM is still advertising those models as being over 30 miles per gallon.

As far as whether the Priuses are 2007 or 2008 models (which would each have different economy figures on their window stickers), it's impossible to tell (and I doubt that CNW knows), but wouldn't the natural tendency of a salesperson be to cite the highest fuel economy figure he or she can for a given model? If the window sticker says 60/55 for a car they're selling, then they should feel free to show that to a customer. If the customer asks about real world economy, I'd hope that they'd either be more realistic about it or tell them to check a neutral website like http://www.fueleconomy.gov/.

If the dealers are representing that 2008 models get 60 miles per gallon in the city, then I think they are being unethical and misrepresenting the car's likely fuel economy. Actually, a better solution would have been for ALL new car window stickers on sale after a certain date (say, October 1, 2007) to show the new ratings, regardless of the model year. That way, it wouldn't look like an old model was getting better fuel economy than a new one, when in fact they're likely to be mechanically identical. Really, is it that expensive or difficult to reprint the window sticker for a new vehicle, in the interest of full disclosure and minimizing consumer confusion and angst? After all, the Fueleconomy.gov website has converted all past fuel economy ratings to the current 2008 equivalents to enable more fair comparisons between models and especially between different model years.

CNW's website does not list this report, only its infamous "Dust to Dust" report that grossly exaggerated the energy costs of a Prius versus a Hummer (see excellent rebuttals of the Dust to Dust report on TrueDelta.com here and here). However, the company states that it performs syndicated studies that "protect you from seeing information that is skewed toward a particular point of view or company or product." Yet, they seem to have a serious anti-Prius agenda after the Dust to Dust report and now this. Though it's possible that an anti-Toyota client underwrote this latest research project, it is possible that the company undertook it on its own for publicity reasons.

Cars That Should Be Buried for 50 Years

Now that the hype of Tulsa, Oklahoma's Plymouth Belvedere, which sat in an underground (and sometimes underwater) vault for half a century, has died down, I thought I'd take a look at which 2007 model year vehicles might be good to bury for 50 years.

Now, does "good to bury" mean that they are representative of the automotive landscape in 2007, or that they're vehicles we hate so much that our planet is better served by having at least one example underground away from human sight for 50 years? I decided on the former - the best representatives of what's popular with consumers in 2007. You may have a different list, and I'd love to hear any other suggestions or critiques of the list I came up with. Obviously, there's no "right" or "wrong" answer - it's just a fun exercise. I also have no delusions like the Tulsans did in 1957 that ANY of the vehicles in my list will be in style in "2,057," but I just want people 50 years from now to agree with some of my choices. So, let's get into the list!

2007 Honda Odyssey
The Honda Odyssey is arguably the best minivan on the market. Although Chrysler has two new vans ready for battle in this competitive-but-shrinking segment, Honda has set the benchmark with quality, comfort, family-friendly features, and decent handling and fuel economy for a vehicle of its size. They're also strong sellers and a strong profit driver for Honda.

2007 Chevrolet Silverado 1500
The full-size pickup truck market may be under attack from several angles - high gas prices, environmentalists, etc. - but the fact is, the two top-selling vehicles in the US are the Ford F-Series and Chevy Silverado. I was going to choose the Ford to bury, but since it's at the end of its life cycle and the Chevy was all-new for the 2007 model year, I'll give the nod to the Chevy. I chose a half ton because those are the most popular with personal use buyers who rarely need a pickup's carrying capacity.

2007 Toyota Camry
The Camry is the best selling car in the US, and has been for more or less the past decade. If any car defines what the public is driving in the US in 2007, it's the Camry. You see the darn things everywhere.

2007 Honda CR-V
The CR-V is all-new this year, and Honda came up with the right vehicle at the right time. While its competitors were shoehorning V6s into their "cute utes" (Toyota, Mitsubishi, Suzuki), Honda stuck with the four cylinder in a move that with the benefit of hindsight looks to be a master stroke. It gives much of the utility and elevated view of the road of larger SUVs with the fuel economy of a car. People love them - they're the #1 selling SUV in the country (even though they're not SUVs in the traditional sense).

2007 Toyota Prius
One of the founders of the "green" movement in cars, and far and away the most popular hybrid model, the Prius makes the list. I personally am tired of the way the car looks and would never drive something willingly with such an anemic powertrain, but people who have them seem to love them.

2007 GMC Acadia
The crossover segment is one of the few segments growing quickly right now - consumers really seem to take to vehicles that have much of the ground clearance, looks, and capabilities of truck-based SUVs, but with better fuel economy thanks to their unibody car-based platforms. The Acadia (along with its cousins the Saturn Outlook and Buick Enclave) are the leaders in the large crossover segment, which also can count the Honda Pilot, 2008 Toyota Highlander, and Mazda CX-9 as members. These vehicles have been well-regarded so far by the press and by customers, so the Acadia makes the list.

2007 Chevrolet Corvette
If you hopped into a time machine in 1968 and showed the owner of a new Corvette a photo of a 2007 Corvette, I bet they'd be able to figure out what it was you're showing them. The C6 Corvette has modern, yet classic lines with nearly all of the important, classic styling cues that define a Corvette (long hood, arched fenders, gills on the front fenders, four round taillights). I may be biased (since the C6 is my favorite new car), but I believe that someone in 2057 would be as thrilled to open a vault with a pristine 2007 Corvette as they would to open a vault with a pristine 1957 Corvette today. The Corvette is an icon, and I expect it to remain one.

2007 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon
Another icon from a different era that survives, and even thrives, in 2007 is the Jeep Wrangler. Sales are up this year by huge percentages, thanks entirely to the introduction of the first four door Wrangler, called the Unlimited. The Wrangler Unlimited combines more than 90% of the two door's capabilities with much more passenger and luggage space (and more convenient access to the rear seat).

2006 Scion xB
The Scion xB is the vehicle most identified as a Scion by the general public, and Toyota's Scion division has gone from zero sales to a household name in just a few years, thanks to appropriately priced products, a new selling model (low prices, lots of standard equipment, and the only factory option is color and automatic or manual transmission), and Toyota's marketing dollars/acumen. Scions are generally customized by their owners (or by a dealer at the owner's behest), in a trend that many other manufacturers are trying to latch onto because of the healthy profit margins that accessories generate. I chose the 2006 model because there was no 2007 xB, and the 2008 is too wrong to make the list.

2007 BMW 335i Sedan
The 3-series BMW is the consummate sport sedan, and the new twin turbocharged 300 horsepower 3.0 liter I6 makes the current model the best non-M3 yet. The 3-series has also been its class benchmark for decades, and as hard as they try, the competition can't out-BMW the 3. The steering, handling, braking, shifting, and acceleration are simply out of this world, especially for less than $40,000.

So, which of the above ten cars should be buried? Or should it be something else? Comment below!

Toyota Announces New Prius Pricing

From the mouth of the super fun happy time true American glorious horse-

The fuel-efficient 2008 Prius is a better value this year with an expanded lineup to include a lower-priced, new standard model. The base MSRP for Prius ranges from $20,950 for the newly introduced standard model to $23,220 for the Touring model. The total Prius average MSRP increases $150 or 0.7 percent.

Last I checked, they sold almost 18,000 of these things last month with the supply chains opened up versus previous years. With this price drop, how long before we see 25,000 per month, and 300,000 per year? Toyota must be laughing all the way to the bank as they've now matured their technology and are well on their way to mass market acceptance with the Prius- what was once a fringe car with a loud following mostly due to pricing and supply constraints can now be bought by just about anyone out there. Meanwhile the competition is either licensing their stuff from Toyota (hi Nissan!), proceeding VERY slowly (hi Ford!), doing nothing (hey there Chrysler, Hyundai, et al!), bowing out of the market altogether (we can see you Honda!) or just now releasing a relevant competitor in higher priced vehicles while touting future technology that is still at a minimum 2 years away (hey there GM!).

And no one has even mentioned the real elephant in the room for everyone else- Prius, The Brand.

How GM May Have Muffed Up An Easy Win.

Concept cars are always an interesting gamble for a manufacturer. Sometimes they're legitimate sneak peaks at future vehicles. Sometimes they're pie in the sky exterior design exercises covering humdrum mechanicals. Sometimes they're purely engineering exercises. And sometimes they portend a revolution.

At NAIAS in Detroit this year, GM portended a revolution. Somehow evading the embargo breakers, they unveiled a concept that actually caught a lot of people by surprise- the Chevrolet Volt. Not only did it have concept styling, but it had one hell of a futuristic premise- the kind that portends a revolution: a purely electric vehicle charged every so often by an internal combustion engine. Such a simple premise, and yet one that hadn't been broached by the industry yet.

Theoretically, a vehicle like the Volt would erase gasoline needs for anyone travelling less than 60 miles in day. Drive it less than that, and all you'd have to do is plug it in when you got home. Easy, quick, painless. Heck, drive it 100 miles, and you'd only be using the small and economical gas generator for 40 miles. 40 miles for 100 miles is a great tradeoff no?

The problem with all of this was that, well, GM didn't preview a revolution. Yet.

Rather, they previewed a possible revolution. If things went perfectly the way they wanted them to. If battery technology got to a certain capacity point. If the battery technology got cheaper. If the battery technology increased the amount of recharge cycles it could endure. That's a lot of ifs. It's an especially large amount of ifs when you realize that in the last 100 years or so, battery capacity and flexibility has only increased 8-fold, which is rather piddling considering we've been trying to extract more power from batteries for some time now.

Of course, GM did nothing to dissuade the positive press. And why would they? The Volt did evreything they could have imagined, and more. In one fell swoop, GM became the darling of NAIAS and a feel good old fashioned example of American ingenuity once again leading the world. And read carefully- that is EXACTLY what they wanted. The press, enamored with their story, buried the news about how this was not feasible at all unless a lot of ifs were satisfied in the middle of their stories. Headlines sprung forth that inferred that the Volt would be ready quickly. Again, GM did NOTHING to dissuade this. Bob Lutz even gave interviews saying that the battery technology was 90% there and that GM should have the vehicle by 2010.

But things seem to have hit a snag.

Instead of being forgotten and relegated to the dustbins of auto shows past, the Volt idea has lived on. It's a testament to how good of an idea it is really.

And now, after all the thunder and lightning, GM is trying to cool down expectations.

From the Detroit News:

The enormity of GM's challenge was evident last week when it called journalists to a backgrounder to explain the technological hurdles facing the Volt project -- and reiterate that it can't guarantee the futuristic car will ever hit the road.

Isn't that a pile of BS? Two months ago, they had no problems letting imaginations run wild. Now, they're backing up quickly. So if Toyota/Honda/InsertBrandHere comes to market with a plug-in hybrid before GM, they will have basically advertised the idea for free at NAIAS this year. And with rumours of the next gen Prius being a plug-in, this may very well be the case. And don't even try to imagine the backlash against GM if they don't get this thing to market at or close to 2010- after the EV1 debacle, they'll be crucified. And they will have done it all to themselves.

At the very least, this whole situation continues to exhibit just how much trouble GM really is in- with no united message, and the same old 'wait till next year' approach to both their vehicles AND now their concepts, has GM changed?