Why you could see lower fuel-economy ratings in 2017

A number of vehicles could see gas-mileage ratings fall due to tweaks in the calculation of EPA fuel-economy ratings.

Julio Cortez/AP/File
A man pumps gas at a Delta gas station in Newark, N.J.

The steady rise of corporate average fuel economy rules through 2025 puts increasing pressure on manufacturers to boost the gas mileage of all vehicles.

Lately, carmakers are challenged by cheap gas and a resulting public preference for utility vehicles of all sizes against sedans and hatchbacks.

Now, a slight tweak to EPA calculations for the widely-used EPA fuel-economy ratings poses a further challenge.

For the 2017 model year, the EPA has slightly changed the calculations for its gas-mileage ratings. (Full details of the changes, first announced in February 2015, are here.)

The updates apply to what's called the "coastdown" part of the cycle, in which carmakers calculate the mechanical resistance and aerodynamic drag of the car at higher speeds.

The new calculations mean that a number of vehicles will see their ratings fall slightly, generally in the highway part of the three ratings quoted: city, highway, and combined.

As a post on the EcoModder gas-mileage forum indicates, the results vary.

The EPA rating for the V-6 version of the 2017 Toyota Camry mid-size sedan, for instance, loses 1 mpg highway over the identical 2016 car, from 31 to 30 mpg.

That's enough to cut its overall figure from 25 mpg to 24 mpg combined.

The 2017 Kia Rio Eco, on the other hand, also loses 1 mpg in its highway rating—from 37 to 36 mpg—over the 2016 model, but its 31 mpg combined rating stays the same.

The same applies to the 29-mpg combined ratings for the 2016 and 2017 Acura ILX with the 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine.

While the 2017 Ford Fusion city number goes down, that vehicle received numerous updates to hybrid hardware and control software and over its 2016 counterpart that make the two figures not entirely comparable.

Several manufacturers have already started to point out the new cycle in their publicity materials.

A press release on the 2017 Honda Accord Hybrid, for example, includes this wording:

EPA fuel economy ratings of 49/47/48 (city/highway/combined) put the Accord Hybrid at the top of the class for ratings, making it the most powerful and fuel efficient midsize hybrid sedan in America.

These EPA fuel economy ratings are based on new, more stringent ratings requirements enacted by the U.S. EPA for the 2017 model year.

Based on the new requirements, Honda estimates the 2015 Accord Hybrid ratings would be 48/45/47 (actually rated at 50/45/47 under the previous method), indicating a +1/+2/+1 increase for the 2017 model over the previous version.

Whether the public will notice (or care about) such minor adjustments is debatable.

But the overall lesson, as EcoModder stresses, is that 2016 and 2017 numbers can't be directly compared without understanding the EPA's procedural changes.

This article first appeared at GreenCarReports.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.