that seems strange that you can actually go over so much as usually they do the best they can to post the best number allowable. And yeah the little difference is why im willing to go to 64. Thats the point where I feel going any faster does not appreciably get me faster. yeah on a long trip you can shave off a good chunk but its just not worth it to me at that point.
Cars in the US have to follow EPA testing methods, and those are the only numbers a seller is allowed to use.
The standard has changed several times over the years, most notably in 2008. Prior to this, the tests were “best case”, and were almost impossible to get in the real world. Since then, the tests have become much more “typical use”, including factors like air conditioning, high speed (80mph) driving, cold engine, and cold weather. These significantly reduced the published numbers vs previous years.
I could easily see a car rated for 27mpg in the 2008 test also getting 41mpg+ in the 2007 test.
that seems strange that you can actually go over so much as usually they do the best they can to post the best number allowable. And yeah the little difference is why im willing to go to 64. Thats the point where I feel going any faster does not appreciably get me faster. yeah on a long trip you can shave off a good chunk but its just not worth it to me at that point.
Cars in the US have to follow EPA testing methods, and those are the only numbers a seller is allowed to use.
The standard has changed several times over the years, most notably in 2008. Prior to this, the tests were “best case”, and were almost impossible to get in the real world. Since then, the tests have become much more “typical use”, including factors like air conditioning, high speed (80mph) driving, cold engine, and cold weather. These significantly reduced the published numbers vs previous years.
I could easily see a car rated for 27mpg in the 2008 test also getting 41mpg+ in the 2007 test.
Yeah, they were super conservative on their efficiency metrics. But I’m not complaining