VW Vortex - Volkswagen Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Did Hyundai lie again?

24K views 154 replies 57 participants last post by  jebglx 
#1 ·
As reported on another site,

Consumer Watchdog Calls out Hyundai Elantra’s EPA Certification
...
Consumer Watchdog said it has asked the EPA to investigate Hyundai’s high-mileage claims because, “The Elantra has attracted an unusual number of consumer complaints about real-world mpg averaging in the mid-20s, far from Hyundai’s stated average of 33,” it said. The Elantra is rated 33 mpg combined. In our testing the Elantra achieved 25.9 mpg combined, which put it mid-pack among its competitors.
We aren’t the only ones that have failed to achieve the Elantra’s stated average of 33 mpg combined. According to Consumer Watchdog, USA Today also failed to hit 33 mpg, averaging a paltry 22 mpg.
http://wot.motortrend.com/consumer-...s-epa-certification-142051.html#ixzz1fQHKGkBF

Smells judiciary recourse.
 
#49 ·
If anyone is curious about how the EPA calculates fuel economy...
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml

Fuel economy is measured under controlled conditions in a laboratory using a standardized test procedure specified by federal law. Manufacturers test their own vehicles—usually pre-production prototypes—and report the results to EPA. EPA reviews the results and confirms about 10-15 percent of them through their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions Laboratory.
With that said, I would really like to know if the Elantra was one of the cars that was "confirmed" by the EPA. If so, then it's just a shortfall with the test itself.

I have a 2011 Elantra, and I can hit 40 mpg at 55-60mph, but at real-world highway speeds of 70-75mph, I'll only see 35-36mpg. The revised 2008 EPA tests are suppose to test cars up to 80 mph, and even include AC use, so IMO my Elantra should be able to hit 40 mpg at 70 mph.

Oh, and other compact cars are getting mixed reviews when it comes to fuel economy. Before I got my Elantra, I was heavily considering a Chevy Cruze. I read many threads on "Cruze Talk" about bad fuel economy. They have a special fuel economy forum if anyone would like to read...

http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/27-fuel-economy/

However, I don't own a Cruze so I can't comment personally. I just assume that many of the newer cars are more challenging to hit their EPA numbers. Not to mention that fuel economy has always been dependent on the driver.
 
#50 · (Edited)
this website should never be trusted. just look at the log book of this 2.0t sonata.
http://www.fuelly.com/driver/cityroute16/sonata

2miles and .1 mpg doing 15% city? lol noice trolling. never use fuelly as a source ever again. typo or no typo that website cannot be trusted.

don't expect me to believe this either. last mpg 16.5. get outta here. either something is horribly wrong with the car, or he is 1sick trollin.
http://www.fuelly.com/driver/msecc/sonata


i believe my sister, my friend, my own cars, and many i know from my church, but not those unreliable sources. hell, half the people complaining in edmunds are less than 10 posts non regulars.

and yes, camry and passat did get better mpg than sonata in the comparison, but sonata did average 27 which is better than the epa. maybe toyota or VW underrated their cars. lol

only major disappointment is the hybrids. it's understandable because it's hyundai's first attempt.
 
#51 ·
this website should never be trusted.
I agree with you 100% that one has to take the fuelly and EPA user input data with a grain or two of salt. In the end, there will always be hypermilers, people who blindly trust the display (and don't use paper and pencil), people just so taken buy the car or brand that they make things up, and vice versa, trolls or people with a hatred towards a brand.

Sometimes, I just look at the highest column (basically excluding everything else as outliers), sometimes I look at what percentage of users is getting that mileage or better.

However, I think in case of Hyundai it is fair to say that their numbers are unrealistic for and unobtainable by an unacceptably high percentage of owners, and their excuse that EPA numbers are "best-case scenarios" is plainly wrong and incredibly arrogant.
 
#55 ·
Bones_Jones, a ***** in Hyundai's armor was going to show up sooner or later. Nobody is perfect and this isn't the downfall of Hyundai. They would be stupid not work on their cars' ability to consistently meet EPA numbers in this fuel economy-conscious climate. I'd be thankful this is their issue rather than widespread engine failure or something.
 
#61 ·
The EPA's posted MPG figures for any new car can be attained by exactly replicating the test conditions at the time the car was tested. 99.99 % of the motoring public won't be able to hit those numbers because of the multitude of variables that can and will skew the test results. Variables include wind, altitude, humidity, temperature, road surface, tire pressure, driver skill, traffic, the amount of fuel carried during the test and even the test drivers weight. I'm sure there are many more variables that can be added to the list. Any variation of the test conditions, including the way the car was prepped by the manufacture's testers will make a measurable difference in real world MPG. Seems that everyone has forgotten that the EPA's MPG test is intended to be an estimate and shopping guide for what an end user might be able to achieve. Don't forget that the fine print says - "your mileage may vary" but it doesn't say by how much because the EPA doesn't know either.
The EPA's MPG figures posted on today's window stickers are meant to be a guide - not a guaranty :banghead: It's very much like someone going to a doctor and expecting to be completely cured of an ailment when it's well known that doctors practice medicne not guaranty it ;). Throw corporate fuel averages (CAFE) into the conversation which can offset a thirsty car in a companies line up and you can rest assured that all the manufactures want those EPA MPG numbers to be as high as legally possible. A gas guzzler tax slapped onto a car in their line up can really mess up their CAFE stats and get expensive. The whole EPA MPG rating thing is full of loop holes. As far as I'm concerned, EPA MPG listings - while well intended - are useless. :wave:
 
#62 ·
The point is, if you can easily, carelessly exceed the EPA estimates in most cares, like I've done with all 4 of my Hondas, why can't you do the same in Hyundais? They gamed the test some.


Which honestly, is fine. I've got no problem with that. But next time some Hyundai fanboi spouts of with the spec sheet bench racing, we can point back to threads like this.
 
#64 ·
another hearsay. i get better than EPA on my cars. on the other hand, i've never gotten a great mileage on my 06 civic lx and 07 civic si. my 01 acura cls & 03 accord coupe did ok. not great, but ok. never really gotten better than EPA but with little effort, i could match the number.

again, prove me with 15000+ evidence that hyundais don't get close to EPA. you can't. all you have is fuelly and few other forums. too small of a sample size. and believe it or not in fuelly there are many people who are getting better than EPA. believe it or not.
 
#73 · (Edited)
Exactly. Why has the been a consistent issue with only Hyundai? Sure EPA test will always be hard to replicate in the real world, but there appears to be far more Hyundai owners that are not hitting the numbers, or at least far more Hyundai owners "allegedly" complaining about it. Furthermore, the disparity between EPA numbers and real world numbers seems greater for Hyundais than other brands. Look at the Sonata hybrid - it bombed in real world conditions by most magazines that tested it. We aren't just talking about 1 mpg here! And I agree, if they are manipulating the EPA tests some, it isn't nearly as bad as what other auto companies have done. And consumers ignorant enough not to know that EPA figures deserve what happens to them. But if I were them, I would worry how this would affect turning first time customers into repeat customers.

and ok, 2012 sonata non turbo is 28mpg, i got little confused and i used 2011 auto which was 26mpg. again, you can't fault hyundai for getting 27.6mpg. that's pretty damn close.


27.6mpg. yeah, it's so horribly bad.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests..._volkswagen_passat_se_family_court/specs.html

praise camry and passat for getting better than EPA but don't fault hyundai for getting near EPA on a comparo test which most likely isn't even a real world driving.
I am not saying that being only .4 mpg under the EPA claim is bad by any means. But I find it alarming that the Sonata, which has an EPA estimate of 25/35 versus the Camry's 25/35, manages to average 6.5 mpg below what the Camry got in the same driving test. All from a 1 mpg city difference.
 
#74 ·
I am not saying that being only .4 mpg under the EPA claim is bad by any means. But I find it alarming that the Sonata, which has an EPA estimate of 25/35 versus the Camry's 25/35, manages to average 6.5 mpg below what the Camry got in the same driving test. All from a 1 mpg city difference.

again, praise toyota for getting a great number. Hyundai did nothing wrong there. hell, i would blame toyota for 'underrating' their rating.
 
#78 ·
again, praise toyota for getting a great number. Hyundai did nothing wrong there. hell, i would blame toyota for 'underrating' their rating.
So now Toyota is deliberately making its cars less effective for EPA tests to underrate them? That is one of the most ridiculous things you have said - and that says a lot. Did you stop to think that maybe the test was a lot more highway biased then city biased and hence that is why the Camry and the Passat greatly exceeded their EPA combined figures? So by that logic, so too should have the Sonata.

Care to offer any actual evidence that this is a "consistent" issue w/ Hyundai?

As stated, models like the Sonata and Genesis regularly get above EPA estimates.

Hyundai has the Elantra; Nissan has the Juke - if it's a "consistent issue w/ Hyundai, then it is also a consistent issue for Nissan.
It is hilarious that you try and counter those who are trying to keep yall from weasling out of a valid criticism - which numerous other Hyundai supporters agree with mind you - by responding with BMW, Honda, and Nissan retorts as if that is really going to upset us. So juvenille - might as well cap it off with a "na na na na nah."

And as far as the consistent definition, I mean people complaining about this issue happening in several models and numerous magazines getting well-below the EPA claims for numerous models. This isn't a one model issue like the Juke (which could in part have been caused by a smaller gas tank which Nissan rectified by sending out gift cards). This has happened with the Elantra, the regular Sonata, and the Sonata hybrid - which has been a huge issue.
 
#65 · (Edited)
I recently bought my wife a fully loaded 2011 Kia SX turbo (2 liter I-4 with 274 HP :rolleyes:). It's a nice affordable package, is pretty quick and fills my wife's transportation needs very well. The car is essentially a fancy Hyundai Sonata turbo. The SX turbo EPA's at 34 MPH highway. Best MPG so far in spirited but mostly normal country driving with a little city driving thrown in to the mix has been 27.6 MPG. My wife has not reset the average MPG readout since she got the car 5K miles ago so the 27.6 MPG average is its combined MPG since delivery. I doubt the highway claim of 34 MPG will ever be a part of the MPG readout unless I really, really work at it :). I don't plan to. Her 27.6 MPG combined real world average is actually better than I expected especially as she has a tendency to cruise I-95 at or near her 80 mph comfort zone. When compared to the MPG numbers I'm used to in our other cars - her Kia is like driving for free. I'm convinced that the advertised EPA numbers, both city and highway, will likely remain elusive as they will be with the majority of all cars today.
Most importantly, she enjoys her new car and I can afford to fuel it without having to give up occasionally stopping in at the local pub for a pop or two :beer:. All is well. For me, MPG and the EPA aren't mentioned too much when my friends and I talk about cars - but I thankfully don't commute any more either :laugh:.
 
#76 ·
Our 2011 Sonata SE just turned a year and 12K miles.

It's averaged 26, in 80% city driving ... when on 100% highway its good for 38-40 on one VERY important assumption - speed is kept at 65 or just below. (Which is, presumably, the speed at which the test was done) Of course, 65 on any highway in NJ is not possible, but even on our highways, the car averages 33.

This is all with the ECO button turned off. IMO, the ECo button does nothing but makes the drive poorly.
 
#83 ·
Clearly there is something going on and GTRaav summed it up pretty well. It doesn't matter if you have 1 or 14,999 samples, what matters is how much of a stink is made in the media.

When a stink is made in the media, some companies admit there is a problem while some blame the consumers. This will not end well for Hyundai.
 
#84 ·
Right and even if it isn't their fault, it behooves them to try and get down to the root of it and stop it. In the last 3 years they have gained a huge number of first time buyers and have made been an entry on a lot of people's shopping lists for the first time. They don't have the brand loyalty that a Honda or a Toyota or even the Big 3 have. So they really do need to be proactive and not let this turn into another sweeping under the rug event like they did forever with the Sonata pulling left.
 
#100 ·
it's no longer a game when there is a distinct formula for creating fuel efficiency.

Also, I have a question...

What if it's not Hyundai lying, but the EPA test no longer being applicable to todays driving? And other manufacturers have determined that when your vehicle gets 39.5mpg in the test, they should rate it at 39 for PR reasons... I know it was updated like 2 years ago, but change is RAPID now a days...
 
#101 ·
Here's the test schedules that the 2007 EPA test includes:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml

I do think there are some issues with the EPA's methodology - due to CAFE requirements, the old 1975 test cycles - designed when there was less traffic, and under the 55 mph national speed limit - are still there. Also, stop-start isn't used, meaning some automakers don't want to bring stop-start technology (they fear that Americans aren't ready for stop-start's NVH additions, especially with no gain in EPA ratings.)

I think it'd be best for the EPA to use three sets of test, all the same cycles:

A heavy traffic city surface street test (think NYC)
A moderate traffic city surface street test (able to reach 35 mph consistently, hitting lights about half the time)
A light traffic city surface street test (able to reach 35 mph and stay there)
A 55 mph 2-lane highway cycle
A 75 or 80 mph divided highway cycle

These cycles would be run three times. All three sets would be run at a certain target cabin temperature, with the testing facility refrigerated or heated as required - if it's too hot in the cabin, additional ventilation and/or AC are used. If it's too cold, heat is used. The three sets would be: Average US winter temperature, average US spring and fall temperature, average US summer temperature.

The heavy/moderate/light is necessary, due to multiple definitions of city. For instance, where I live, I have light to moderate city traffic (although I short-trip, killing my fuel economy). But, my results are completely useless to someone living in NYC.
 
#109 ·
^^ I seem to recall, while defending Hyundai against unfair attacks, that, at the same time, those of us haven't been w/o our fair share of criticism (if not more).

Heck, I got attacked for having the gall to criticize the silver painted plastic on the dash of the Veloster which I simply detest.

Also, unlike others who have tried to pawn off the Camry SE as a "choice" for posters looking for a sporty sedan (you all know who did that), I've actually tried to dissuade a couple of posters from keeping the Sonata SE Turbo on their list.

Same for the thread of the poster who was trying to decide btwn the Odyssey and Sedona (all of us picked the Honda).
 
#111 ·
Fuelly has too many trolls

1 guy signed up for 2012 azera. 12.3mpg? suspicious
http://www.fuelly.com/driver/jaimep/azera

veloster - rest gets 31-37mpg, but 1 car with only 22.7mpg doing 40/60? lol. must be a lemon
http://www.fuelly.com/car/hyundai/veloster/2012

11 accord coupe 4 banger only getting 12.3mpg? lol srly?
http://www.fuelly.com/driver/pugmobile/accord

and i'm supposed to believe what people say on internet? hell naw!

fuelly or wherever people are complaining about fuel economy = too small of a sample size & too many trolls

case closed.
 
#120 ·
I don't know, but it's easy enough yourself to look at the median rather than the average. For the 2011 Elantra, that's ~30mpg, which is close enough to the average of 30.8. In fact, for the half dozen or so models I quickly scanned, the median and their average were all within ~1mpg, so not bad.
 
#123 ·
This thread reminds me of the time I got a $1.02 check from Hyundai as part of a class action suit for them overestimating the horsepower on my wifes '01 Elantra. :rolleyes:
 
#126 ·
I think every mfg tunes their test cars just to get better EPA numbers. The difference is that some mfg like to be more conservative by not over tuning their cars to get unreachable numbers. This would cause a nightmare PR.

I think Hyundai will soon lose a lot of sales when people realize 40mpg is not reachable even the Cruze Eco cannot hit 42mpg with an auto. It's the manual trans Cruze Eco that can hit 42mpg.
 
#137 ·
his elantra isn't a new elantra? well then obviously he overachieved with his last gen elantra. actually his elantra is very impressive because my 08 elantra avg around 28-31mpg doing 50/50.

but 34.1mpg AVERAGE isn't that bad for a car which is rated 32mpg combined(45/55highway). even if he does 20/80 highway, that's still not a bad number because it is a brand new car which hasn't even broken. i would say 5-7% loss at most, but of course it's a winter so it evens out.

and he did achieve 40mpg once, so maybe he should keep trying harder.
 
#140 ·
He's got over 6k miles on his car....
He said that he hit 40mpg when he drafted an 18-wheeler for 100 miles...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top