Truth in (MPG) Advertising - Don't be Fooled by Hwy Numbers
Have you noticed how all cars are suddenly being described as fuel efficient? That's because gas prices are on everyone's mind right now. So suddenly we're being told that the 2008 Chevrolet HHR (with a 2.2 L engine and 4-speed transmission) gets 30 mpg! Will you get 30 mpg in the HHR? Probably not. That's because that 30 mpg rating is on the highway only.
Yes, I'm talking about truth in advertising folks. Or the lack of it. Of course, manufacturers are entitled to present their product in the best possible light. But there's something misleading about posting only one fuel efficiency rating. Car buyers will see that number and think, "30 mpg? Great! I'll probably get that too."
Let's look at a car from our long term test fleet, another supposedly fuel efficient car, the 2008 Nissan Versa. What mpg would it be advertised at? 31 mpg. What does it get around town? 26 mpg. What did it get in a year's testing in our fleet? 26.7 mpg.(The 2009 Versa is advertised as getting "up to" 33 mpg, whatever that means.)
So many people are changing cars theses days trying to escape the curse of high gas prices. But they need to be realistic about the car they are considering. Take a moment to think about the percentage of highway and city driving you do. If you aren't honest with yourself about these fuel economy numbers you'll be changing cars again in a year.
And one more thing. Fuel economy isn't everything. You still need a car that you're going to love driving after a few years. So look at the Edmunds.com editors' and consumer ratings. Not all cars are created equally. And looking at fuel economy rating doesn't tell the whole story.
- Posted by
- Philip Reed July 6, 2008, 4:17 AM
- Permalink
- Categories:
- Technorati Tags:
- advertising, fuel efficiency, gas mileage, mpg
I don't think there is any deception here. The EPA sticker on every new car on the lot states the city, highway and combined EPA rating. THe hwy rating is clearly indicated there, so I don't see why anyone would expect 30 mpg in combined use for a car like the HHR.
The EPA now calculates a useful combined fuel economy average, something they didn't do in the past. However, it's not shown right off the bat.
When you look up a car's fuel ratings on fueleconomy.gov, you'll see its city and highway numbers; click on the underlined year/make/model link and then you'll see all three numbers: city, highway and combined.
The combined rating is a lot more realistic, as I've seen many folks averaging close to it with vehicles ranging from economy cars to trucks. That's the number to use when comparing one car to another.
The deception is in vehicle advertising, especially local dealers. Take a look at this bit of fiction: http://www.jerseynissan.com/images/ads/ad_newmodels.jpg
Advertising is quite a bit different from window stickers. Advertising is trying to get you to visit a certain brand or come to a specific dealership. Once you get there, you might learn the real story. But they know that once you're there, they've got a good chance of making a sale. They used to call that bait and switch.
The MPG rating of a given car is comprised of two figures, City AND Highway. One by itself is meaningless. The only single figure of merit is the EPA combined mpg, but even that one is mathematically derived from the city and highway figures.
But now, like Phil, I see a rash of single-figure ads touting fuel economy using the naked highway figure. There are usually no asterisks, no disclaimers, no statements of that this isn't the MPG you'll get day-in and day-out. It's deliberately misleading.
A local Toyota dealer lists the mpg figure for every car on a big sign attached to their building. They don't disclose it on the sign, but it's the highway figure--except for the Prius. They use the city figure for that one. No consistency--they used whatever number looked best.
I remember the car ads after the Arab oil embargo a couple of decades ago. And I remember prominent disclaimers had to be placed in the ads. No so this time around, it would seem. Not yet, anyway.
It's funny how quickly we've gone from having a horsepower war to a fuel efficiency war. These numbers are thrown around to help people rationalize purchases that may or may not be wise for themselves. As "actual size" points out, there should at least be an asterisk to put people on notice that it's not all it claims to be.
I guess you guys have a point about the absence of disclaimers being potentially misleading. But still....it's advertising! If a car dealer tells you his car "starts from" $15k but you know from experience that most (if not all) of them on his lot would cost between $18k and $22k, why should you completely trust him when he says the car gets 32 mpg?
This bait and switch advertising will/should only work on people who are either about to buy their first car or haven't bought in 20 years or so, but the vast majority of people aren't getting fooled!
PS: That Jersey Nissan advert clearly states that those figures are hwy figures.
A local Kia dealer advertises 3-4 mpg ABOVE the EPA rated highway mileage. I called them to find out where they got the number from. They were jerks, but did eventually tell me that the EPA gives a possible range and they chose to advertise the top of that range.
Hopefully, people get to the lot and see that their cars don't get 38mpg and will storm off.
BA, the NJ dealer ad has incorrect mileage figures. No Murano gets 26 mpg.
Interestingly, things haven't really improved all that much as far as fuel economy goes, even in a period of over 30 years.
I say this after having seen a September 1977 issue of National Geographic in my local doctor's waiting room yesterday. In it, there was an advertisement for Toyota's (then) compact pickup, listing 34 mpg highway and 24 mpg city. None of the current crop of compact or midsized pickups does so well. I believe the reason this is so comes down mostly to three things:
1. Folks have been demanding more power (which usually = less fuel efficiency)
2. Folks have been demanding more, period (features, size, etc. which usually = lower fuel economy regardless of the engine toting it around)
3. EPA requirements have lowered the overall fuel efficiency of the internal combustion engine in general, while cleaning up the emissions.
Jerrywimer: I love looking at old car ads like the one you mentioned in the National Geo. But remember, there hasn't really been a strong reason to improve fuel economy until now. People were concerned about global warming in theory but it was only when gas prices hurt them that they became interested in fuel economy. We have five major problems all closely linked: high fuel prices, tightening oil supplies, climate change, urban congestion, international instability. All these could be solved by developing inexpensive small electric cars.
Wow, I didn't know that the NJ Nissan dealer's EPA figures were incorrect! That's just criminal and IMO the manager and/or owner should be arrested or fined (heavily).
brn, I'm sure that Kia dealer is telling lies. If the EPA does indeed give such a range, why can't anybody see that range on everyday websites like Edmunds.com and MSN Autos? I find it hard to believe that it would cost Edmunds.com extra to display tha range if it did exist!
Here is an example of the EPA window sticker showing the variation in economy for a given vehicle: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/FEG/ratingsNewSticker.shtml
BA, as RU indicated, the EPA does give a range. They are playing with technicalities. However, they are doing so to intentionally trick people into thinking these cars get better mileage than similar cars from others. As far as I'm concerned that's deceptive.