4 ms·

"3. Deducting 4% from measured results Bizarrely the NEDC procedure allows carmakers to actually declare (use) a value 4% lower than the one measured. The prov

"3. Deducting 4% from measured results Bizarrely the NEDC procedure allows carmakers to actually declare (use) a value 4% lower than the one measured. The provision is designed to minimize the testing burden but is being abused by carmakers to declare lower test results systematically." I wonder if there is a person that didn't expect this to happen.

Someone1234 11y ago
Does it matter however when it is systematic? This is going to sound backwards, but consider this: People buy cars based in part on MpG, however MpG is within itself an abstract thing (i.e. you don't actually get X miles per gallon, never did, never will too many other factors to include). So if everyone removes 4% from an abstract number, the entire market has shifted down, but the relative difference between two models remains identical (e.g. if one car has 21 MpG and another has 25 MpG, even with 4% removed from both they retain their relative position). If some were removing 4% while others weren't, that would legitimately be a problem. If they're all removing 4% then we're essentially where we would be at the start just with lower abstract numbers.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
  >you don't actually get X miles per gallon, never did, never will too many other factors to include This wouldn't be hard to fix. Loan cars to a random selection of non-professional beta drivers. Graph the results, showing the median and sd. It would be cheaper to do this than to get hit by a class action for misleading buyers. Of course reality-based non-expert mpg would look very bad compared to the dishonest figures you get now. But that's because of manufacturing and design decision, and not really the fault of the drivers.
- sgc 11y ago
  It does because emission regulations are not there for comparison purposes alone. We need to reduce emissions to a certain level, and the environment won't be fooled. This is similar to the way unemployment is now calculated based on active job seekers rather than people who are, well, unemployed.
- jsprogrammer 11y ago
  The order/position may stay the same in your scheme, but the values do not retain their proportions relative to each other. Presumably not everyone cheated the same, as well.
- debacle 11y ago
  It definitely does in 2015 when you are comparing against cars that don't have an MPG.
- schwabacher 11y ago
  I can think of three reasons that it matters: - We base regulations and taxes on absolute MpG, so overstating efficiency weakens the regulations and allows automakers to cheat on taxes. - It misleads consumers about the cost to operate the vehicle. - It is an issue when comparing efficiency of new cars to older cars produced before the systemic cheating.
  - rtkwe 11y ago
    In the US the EPA confirms the MPG ratings for 10%-15% of vehicles and has prescribed (edit: prescribed vs proscribed) testing regimes for each of the estimates. The issue isn't with manufacturers lying so much as the test schedule laid out by the EPA just doesn't reflect how people drive.
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      Nitpick, but "prescribed"; is pretty much the opposite of "proscribed".
      - rtkwe 11y ago
        Whoops. Serves me right for writing comments 3 words at a time between Sametime pings...

Someone1234 11y ago

Does it matter however when it is systematic? This is going to sound backwards, but consider this: People buy cars based in part on MpG, however MpG is within itself an abstract thing (i.e. you don't actually get X miles per gallon, never did, never will too many other factors to include). So if everyone removes 4% from an abstract number, the entire market has shifted down, but the relative difference between two models remains identical (e.g. if one car has 21 MpG and another has 25 MpG, even with 4% removed from both they retain their relative position). If some were removing 4% while others weren't, that would legitimately be a problem. If they're all removing 4% then we're essentially where we would be at the start just with lower abstract numbers.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
>you don't actually get X miles per gallon, never did, never will too many other factors to include This wouldn't be hard to fix. Loan cars to a random selection of non-professional beta drivers. Graph the results, showing the median and sd. It would be cheaper to do this than to get hit by a class action for misleading buyers. Of course reality-based non-expert mpg would look very bad compared to the dishonest figures you get now. But that's because of manufacturing and design decision, and not really the fault of the drivers.
sgc 11y ago
It does because emission regulations are not there for comparison purposes alone. We need to reduce emissions to a certain level, and the environment won't be fooled. This is similar to the way unemployment is now calculated based on active job seekers rather than people who are, well, unemployed.
jsprogrammer 11y ago
The order/position may stay the same in your scheme, but the values do not retain their proportions relative to each other. Presumably not everyone cheated the same, as well.
debacle 11y ago
It definitely does in 2015 when you are comparing against cars that don't have an MPG.
schwabacher 11y ago
I can think of three reasons that it matters: - We base regulations and taxes on absolute MpG, so overstating efficiency weakens the regulations and allows automakers to cheat on taxes. - It misleads consumers about the cost to operate the vehicle. - It is an issue when comparing efficiency of new cars to older cars produced before the systemic cheating.
- rtkwe 11y ago
  In the US the EPA confirms the MPG ratings for 10%-15% of vehicles and has prescribed (edit: prescribed vs proscribed) testing regimes for each of the estimates. The issue isn't with manufacturers lying so much as the test schedule laid out by the EPA just doesn't reflect how people drive.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    Nitpick, but "prescribed"; is pretty much the opposite of "proscribed".
    - rtkwe 11y ago
      Whoops. Serves me right for writing comments 3 words at a time between Sametime pings...