CAFE vs. EPA: Obama's MPG targets are closer than you think
If converting current window-sticker EPA mpg ratings, even the V6 version of Toyota's 2009 RAV4 would meet the proposed CAFE mpg requirements for 2016.
On Tuesday, the Obama administration announced their proposed changes to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard. According to the proposal, an automaker's fleet of cars and trucks must average a combined 35.5 mpg by 2016 -- four years earlier than required by the previous standard passed in 2007.
Does that mean we are a few years away from driving 35 mpg cars and trucks? Not quite. First off, the CAFE standard is an average for an automaker's the entire fleet -- not a minimum mpg requirement. In a manufacturers fleet, there will always be some vehicles that get above the mpg average and some below it. So theoretically, GM could still make the Hummer if it made enough Volts to balance out the average.
It's also important to note that the Obama Administration was talking about CAFE mpg numbers, not the EPA mpg numbers that appear on a car's window sticker. Though they start with similar mpg data, the EPA revises its mpg numbers to more closely resemble real-world driving habits, while CAFE has not changed their testing formula since 1975.
The proposed new CAFE's numbers may appear like a difficult target to reach for the automakers, but when compared to current EPA numbers, they're already not that far off. After crunching some numbers, we've estimated that it takes a 2008 combined EPA rating of only 26 mpg to achieve the proposed CAFE rating of 35 mpg. Break it out by cars and trucks, and the proposed 39 mpg CAFE rating for cars translates to only about a 29 mpg EPA rating. For trucks, the proposed 30 mpg CAFE rating equates to roughly 23 mpg on a current window sticker.
When you realize this difference, you'll see that there are already a host of vehicles that would meet the proposed standard, or are so close to it already (within 2 mpg), that they could easily be modified to meet the new mpg targets. Below is just such a list. These currently available cars and trucks would meet or are within 2 mpg of the combined 2016 mpg targets (27 mpg for cars, 21 mpg for trucks). This list would be longer, but we've exlcluded twinned models (Yukon/Tahoe) or shared powertrains (Escape/Mariner/Tribute, etc.).
Automakers will no doubt have to make adjustments and investments to meet the proposed CAFE standards, but they won't have to be nearly as drastic as many in the media have led consumers to believe. The news that consumers should take away from this is that real-world fuel economy is not about to skyrocket in the next seven years, though it will improve. Also, it's likely that there will continue to be plenty of vehicle choices for consumers that meet the proposed new standards.
CARS
2009 Mazda MAZDA3 (2.0L 4cyl 5M) 27 mpg
2009 Nissan Altima Hybrid (2.5L 4cyl gas/electric hybrid CVT) 34 mpg
2009 Nissan Sentra(2.0L 4cyl CVT) 29 mpg
2009 Nissan Versa (1.8L 4cyl 6M) 28 mpg
2009 Pontiac G3 (1.6L 4cyl 5M) 30 mpg
2009 Pontiac G5 (2.2L 4cyl 5M) 29 mpg
2009 Pontiac Vibe (1.8L 4cyl 5M) 28 mpg
2009 Saturn Aura Hybrid (2.4L 4cyl gas/electric hybrid 4A) 29 mpg
2009 Scion xD (1.8L 4cyl 4A) 28 mpg
2009 Toyota Camry Hybrid (2.4L 4cyl gas/electric hybrid CVT) 34 mpg
2009 Toyota Corolla (1.8L 4cyl 4A) 30 mpg
2009 Toyota Matrix (1.8L 4cyl 5M) 28 mpg
2009 Toyota Prius (1.5L 4cyl gas/electric hybrid CVT) 46 mpg
2009 Toyota Yaris(1.5L 4cyl 4A) 31 mpg
2009 Volkswagen Jetta TDI (2.0L 4cyl Turbodiesel 6AM) 33 mpg
2009 smart fortwo (1.0L 3cyl 5AM) 36 mpg
TRUCKS
2009 BMW X5 xDrive35d (3.0L 6cyl Turbodiesel 6A) 21 mpg
2009 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Hybrid (6.0L 8cyl gas/electric hybrid 4A) 21 mpg
2009 Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid (6.0L 8cyl gas/electric hybrid 4A) 21 mpg
2009 Ford Escape XLT (2.5L 4cyl 6A) 23 mpg
2009 Ford Escape Hybrid (2.5L 4cyl gas/electric hybrid CVT) 28 mpg
2009 Ford Ranger (2.3L 4cyl 5M) 23 mpg
2009 Honda CR-V (2.4L 4cyl 5A) 23 mpg
2009 Honda Element (2.4L 4cyl 5A) 21 mpg
2009 Hyundai Tucson (2.0L 4cyl 4A) 22 mpg
2009 Jeep Compass (2.4L 4cyl 5M) 25 mpg
2009 Jeep Patriot (2.4L 4cyl 5M) 25 mpg
2009 Kia Sportage (2.0L 4cyl 5M) 21 mpg
2009 Mazda B-Series (2.3L 4cyl 5M) 23 mpg
2009 Mazda MAZDA5 (2.3L 4cyl 5M) 24 mpg
2009 Mitsubishi Outlander (2.4L 4cyl CVT) 22 mpg
2009 Nissan Frontier (2.5L 4cyl 5M) 21 mpg
2009 Nissan Rogue (2.5L 4cyl CVT) 23 mpg
2009 Saturn VUE (2.4L 4cyl 4A) 22 mpg
2009 Saturn VUE Hybrid (2.4L 4cyl gas/electric hybrid 4A) 28 mpg
2009 Subaru Forester 2.5XT (2.5L 4cyl Turbo 4A) 21 mpg
2009 Suzuki Equator (2.5L 4cyl 5M) 21 mpg
2009 Suzuki Grand Vitara (2.4L 4cyl 5M) 21 mpg
2009 Toyota Highlander (2.7L 4cyl 6A) 22 mpg
2009 Toyota Highlander Hybrid (3.3L 6cyl gas/electric hybrid CVT) 26 mpg
2009 Toyota RAV4 (3.5L 6cyl 5A) 21 mpg
2009 Toyota Tacoma (2.7L 4cyl 5M) 22 mpg
2009 Volkswagen Tiguan (2.0L 4cyl Turbo 6A) 21 mpg
- Posted by
- Paul Seredynski May 20, 2009, 3:08 PM
- Permalink
- Categories:
- Fuel Economy
- Technorati Tags:
- CAFE 2016, CAFE vs. EPA, MPG ratings
You also excluded most of the makes in the first half of the alphabet:
Ford Focus (28)
Honda Civic (29)
Honda Civic Hybrid (42)
Honda Fit (31)
Hyundai Accent (29)
Hyundai Elantra (28)
Kia Spectra (27)
Kia Rio (30)
Mini Cooper (32)
Why does the media, and the White House, not make it clear that they're referring to CAFE and not EPA? To make things easier, why don't they convert all figures to EPA when they make these announcements?
That's a pretty miserable shopping list. It's plenty of choice between badges on the hood but the constant is they are all tiny and gutless.
"... or are so close to it already (within 2 mpg), that they could easily be modified to meet the new mpg targets."
All of those easy modifications they apparently didn't bother do during three years of gas price panic.
The only easy things left on the table are the XFE treatment, and those are easy because they're glaring compromises - narrow low traction tires and taller gearing, for what's a list of what are already gutless 4 cylinder cars.
Is that CAFE standard based on the old EPA rating? If so, my 26 MPG Civic translates into 29 MPG combined for the old EPA rating. I can average 34 MPG because I hypermile.
One of you should mention this to "the Mechanic" while he's on an Obama rant.
This listing only part of the 'shopping list'.
It doesn't include the excellent new Fusion hybrid which is WAY over the standard.
It also doesn't include the Silvy/Sierra or Tahoe/Yukon 2-Modes which are almost at the new standard.
The Sienna/Odyssey and soon Orlando are also just at or just below the standard.
The GM lambda's are just below the standard as are almost all midsized non-hybrid sedans. However the addition of a hybird system to these will put all of them WAY over the standard.
It looks like not much of a stretch for the vehicle makers but the effect on our fuel usage annually and cumulatively is HUGE.
aspadeAuthor: They're not ALL tiny and gutless. The Versa, Prius, Altima Hybrid and Camry Hybrid are all classified as midsized cars. I don't track SUVs, but the Highlander is a medium sized SUV.
As for power, the Altima Hybrid has 198 hp net system power (I've driven it many times as my mom has one), the Camry Hybrid is 187 hp. The Highlander Hybrid has 270 hp.
(FWIW, I drive a 287 04 Nissan 350Z and a 110 hp 06 Prius. The Prius is adequate in terms of power, even at 70-80 mph and PLENTY for anything <50 mph. The 198 hp Altima Hybrid is has plenty of power on the highway.)