Hybrid owner sues Honda over mileage claims
 

Article

It is time someone call them on listing facts that we all knew were based on ideal driving in ideal situations and not realistic based at all. And especially with hybrid where one of the biggest draws now is mph, they should have to be accurate.

Hmmmm I don't see how they can be held to this.

At the bottom I believe they still put, "Your Mileage May Vary."

Just like the excercise and diets, "Results not typical."

I further don't see why even the claimed mileage is considered good. Honda was pulling 45-50 actual MPG out of cars in 1988. Surely they can do better now.

Those numbers were based on the old system of calculating the MPG rate. Weather, road conditions and driving habits could make a huge difference in the actual rate.

I'll bet this guy drives his Prius like he drove his Mercedes, which means inefficient. I also can't really imagine that S.CA is a particularly good venue for the Prius given the amount of traffic. Having lived in Riverside and done a lot of business in Ontario, I can confirm that everything backs up pretty well at rush hour there.

Small correction! Prius is a Toyota vehicle. :thumbsup:

Hey, put this guy's car on the dynamometer and if it doesn't get the mileage advertised this guy has a case. Actually, put a large sample on the machine and see how they do and how the cars really score.

Duely noted with a red face. I guess there's a reason that Honda's discontinuing their hybrids - Toyota dominates the market so much that people like me read "hybrid" and automatically think "Prius" even with evidence to the contrary staring us in the face.

Thanks for the correction, LS.

Why does the class action lawsuit just involve honda? As far as i can tell, the epa's method of determining fuel efficiency means most advertised mpg's are off. It also seems totally reasonable that your fuel efficiency would depend heavily on how you drive.

It probably should not just involve Honda, but they do not mention it depends on how you drive. They do not mention that it is based on perfect conditions, instead they just list the optimum (unrealistic) value.

If such behavior were sufficient grounds for a lawsuit the diet industry wouldn't exist.

No one is being physically harmed, new consumer technology, caveat emptor. There aren't dates to go along with the events in the article, but if he bought the hybrid at any point in the last year without knowing about the fuel efficiency discrepancy then he obviously hasn't done any research at all. I think that awareness of the epa's method's shortcomings has been pretty common knowledge for a couple years.

He should really be suing the epa for their simplistic and generally inaccurate method of determining fuel efficiency.

Agreed.

You really can't fault a big business for using a number given to them by the EPA, especially when it sounded so good! They're in it to sell cars. While consumers need to be protected, this sounds like it's pushing it, in my book.

Most of my friends are unhappy with their Prius's gas consumption. 32 mpg in a hybrid is far less effective as a mid 90s geo metro which could get as good as 60 mpg. I wonder if the whole thing is a joke.

The gas mileage of the Prius varies widely depending on the conditions you drive it under--as suggested above, hybrids respond more to your individual driving style. Additionally, the Prius performs better under stop-and-go driving conditions than a traditional engine does. It is not meant for the open road, and performs comparably to traditional engines under those conditions.

I know a number of people who have a Prius, and generally they are quite satisfied with the mileage they get. Of course, my town is 1) a college town, and 2) not overly large, but 3) full of liberals who drive Priuses, and 4) really the perfect condition to drive the Prius under--tons of stop-and-go driving.

Personally, I'm in the market to buy a car this fall. I'm eyeing the Honda Fit, because 1) it's a traditional engine so I can maximize fuel efficiency on the open road, and 2) I can get it with a manual transmission (good for stop-and-go driving, which is what I usually do). The Fit gets in the upper 30s for mpg in real-life driving conditions--much better than the 20mpg I'm getting now in a Volvo station wagon.

Even with variable mileage, one would expect a vehicle to do better than what the Civic Hybrid does. It's more than a stretch to claim it on being a leadfoot when this car can only get a little more than half of the fuel economy that it advertises. Honestly, would you buy a Fit if in reality it only gave you 20 mpg instead of 30?

No matter if the fine print says "Mileage will vary" or "Mileage may vary" or if it doesn't say it at all, was it unreasonable for him to have the expectation that this hybrid vehicle would at the very least be more effeicient than a conventional Honda Civic (which it doesn't appear to be)?

Here's a link to an interview with the waste of skin who filed the lawsuit: HIT ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. he comes off as a crybbaby spoiled brat who needs to get slapped in the face for about 30 minutes. The best bit is this bullshit piece of attempted justification: Have to use the air conditioning?

What, it's against the fucking law to roll your fucking windows down?

What a fucking douchebag.

If you lived in 100+ degree weather, you'd be a 'douchebag', too. Rolling down the windows allows hot air from the outside of the car into the already hot car, not improving the temperature of the air. AC can be necessary when it's hot. The bottom line is that running the AC shouldn't bring you from 51 mpg to 30.

After reading the article, it definitely seems like the plaintiff is kind of an idiot. On the other hand, there is definitely something off here. I get better mileage than him in non-hybrid Accord, using A/C and radio! Maybe it really is his driving habits or the area he lives (lots of hills).

Anyway, Honda shouldn't put numbers on the car that are unachievable by ANYONE, whether or not the EPA generated them. If the guy can show that no one can get close to that performance out of the car he may have a point. If even a couple of people get close (and I bet some can surpass the EPA estimates), than it's not a question of fraudulent claims.

Why always so pissy about everything? Calm down.

They also did a show on A/C vs. windows down in relation to fuel efficiency on Mythbusters and with windows down actually performed WORSE than A/C on full blast.

I gotta disagree about it being necesary. For hundreds of years people have lived in deserts before the advent of cars or air conditioning. People are used to having it available is all. But agreed, AC shouldnt drop you that low. But the overall combination of being a lead foot, the AC and some possible engine issue certainly could. And it sounds like he's loading it to nearly its weight capacity as well. Big friggin surprise.

Personally, I think hybrids are a joke. They don't really improve mileage. They don't really take us through the necesary steps toward getting rid of fossil fuels. They just use the same ole technology augmented by an electric motor.... Which gets powered by fossil fuels. They are, in essence, pointless.

And many, many people died from the heat for hundreds of years--heck, people have died from the heat out here every year of my life. As a resident of the Mojave Desert, I will agree that air conditioning can be a vital necessity.

So chill out, Mr. Shadow.

I lived in the Florida panhandle for three years which has scorching heat and extreemly high humidity and I used my car's air conditioning exactly 4 times.

And as for Mythbusters, just 'cause it's on a TV show doesn't mean it's true, in fact, most of the stuff on MythBusters has been disproven.

Could be true. Do you have "proof" to the opposite? Show me that windows down is so much better than A/C for fuel efficiency in order to justify A/C being a bad option.

LA is dry heat. Having lived in St. Louis and CA, I can say that dry heat is a lot worse.

As to the tough talk: I've been shot in the leg, so why do other people complain about getting shot?

Having spent a few years living out in the Mojave Desert, all I can say is driving around with no a/c out there is downright masochistic. Set your oven to 450, then put a fan in front of it, then put your head in front of that fan. That's what driving around with the windows down feels like out there. There is no cool breeze, all you'll just be greeted with a blast of hot desert air.

As for windows down vs windows up w/ a/c, open windows increase a vehicle's coefficient of drag, moreso than the parasitic loss on an engine caused by the compressor in an air conditioning system. In stop-and-go traffic, yeah the a/c might be seen as inefficient, but at highway speeds, you're better off using the a/c.

Either way, it shouldn't be enough to result in a 40% difference between advertised and actual mileage

As an endurance athlete that's competed in the Deep South, the Southwest and Midwest, dry heat's got nothing on humidity. If it's going to be 90 degrees outside, I'd much rather have 25% humidity than 75% humidity. The ONLY time I've ever been in real danger of being hospitalized was after the Florida Relays 5k. That's one of only two track races where I have absolutely no recollection of the last mile, and I was a DNF (did not finish) because grabbed me when I started waivering between lanes in a straight.

If you live in Florida and don't use your air conditioner regularly, I'm man enough to admit that I couldn't do it.

/threadjack

QuasiMondo is right about the coefficient of friction and windows. Running your air conditioner in stopped traffic raises the RPM's than you'd otherwise have, but on the highway, it shouldn't really affect the MPG more than a few percentage points, which isn't going to be the big factor in this case.

Like I said before, driving a hybrid like an E320 isn't going to result in the best possible performance.

Driving like it was a Mercedes-Benz E320 wouldn't give you the worst possible performance, either. A mid-sized luxury car doesn't exactly invite you to drive like you're a member of the Andretti family.

Here's a link to the interview conducted with John True:
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/07...es-the-guy-su/

That's how I would read it. We as a society have gotten too used to shady advertising. A simple disclaimer shouldn't allow you to say whatever the hell you want about your product. "Results not typical", "actual mileage may vary" etc. it's all bs.

First of all, you don't understand how hybrids work, so don't act like you do. You don't plug hybrids in, they are not full electric cars.

Second. If it was a an actual electric car that you have to plug in, yes the electricity is likely coming from fossil fuels. However, electricity generation is more efficient at the plant AND they have much better pollution controls.

Hmmm I've driven the 2007 Honda Civic Hybrid for well over 1500 miles.

I did this out in Arizona, covered literally the whole state in most directions.

On the LONNNNG drives that were mostly either flat or downhill (Out there you can easily spend 2 hours driving downhill.) I easily attained 48-52 mpg.

BUT.

Driving anywhere that even remotely uphill (I mean as low as 3% grade) or city driving I never broke 37 mpg.

I use cruise control as often as possible, and with the Hybrid Civics you cant drive like a Ferrari if you wanted to. They have HORRIBLE low end power for quick starts compared to non-Hybrid variations.

Was it a great car to travel 1500~ miles in? Hell yeah.
Would I buy the Hybrid over the normal Civic? Nope. That extra 5-6 grand will take YEARS to pay off. Not worth the extra dough.

Does this guy have a good complaint, I'd say so. Long as he only tries to get the EPA/Honda to admit AND fix the problem does he deserve it. He does not deserve any sort of money in return though.

**
Notes:
**

Every single fuel up I do in fact calculate my mpg. These numbers are very important to me, they tell me how good of a driver I've been.

Going from 50 mpg to 37 mpg is a massive difference, and it is very sad that Honda only relies on the higher one when it comes to advertising.

The Civic has one kickass panel.

Blame it on global warming. Obviously it is much hotter now than it was in the old days before cars and AC and apparently it is only going to get worse. So yes, it is and will be even more necessary. Because of global warming.

LOL!!! Awesome analogy.

However, I also disagree with you on the humidity. Humidity is much much worse than dry heat. Israel and Egypt was quite bearable in the summer but Southeast Asia was brutal with all the mugginess. It's like being smothered with a wet blanket AND it's hot....ugh...

But seriously, I am a bit mad at Honda too. I bought a Civic (non-hybrid0 recently. It is advertised at 30/40 mpg. Sadly, I am getting nowhere near that. I am not even getting 30 mpg. That really sucks especially since I bought the car specifically for it's mileage. If i had known it would be that far off, I would have bought a different car. Yes, I realize results will vary but this is waaay off. It constitutes fraud and false advertising to me.

Actually, I do understand how they work, thank you. Hybrids use a battery pack and a motor, along with an engine. This allows the fuel driven engine to be aided by the motor. But guess whats providing the juice to those batteries. That same fossil fuel engine that giving you the bulk of your power. So which part of my post doesn't make sense given the nature of hybrids?

God I love engineering school for this stuff...

And I spent a summer in KC, the heat was pretty brutal, I still don't use my AC. I just don't like them.

krwlz, it is my impression that the battery is charged by energy produced when the driver brakes. This energy would be purely lost as heat. If the battery was charged by the combustion engine you'd NEVER see an increase in mileage because there will be inherent loss of energy to inefficiencies in conversion/storage.

Regenerative braking does not provide enough energy to recover the charge on a hybrid vehicle's battery on it's own. While coasting will increase the time spent charging the battery, any increase in mileage will be from being a lightfoot, and not from regenerative braking. If the battery runs low, the engine will start up to recharge the battery.

I can squeeze 20mpg out of a 1991 Lincoln with a 5.0L High Output engine that got a 17/24 on the old test. This guy is driving like a jackass if he's not getting decent mileage. That said, hybrid cars are a sham, it's all about image. Take out the extra thousand pounds of electric drivetrain and batteries and you'll get better mileage with just the gas engine most of the time.

The average hybrid driver is some yuppie jackass who watched "An Inconvenient Truth" and thinks they're doing something good by switching to mercury-filled CFL bulbs (I guarantee 90% of people don't recycle them) and driving a car with a quarter ton of toxic heavy metal under the back seat and thinking they're making a difference and looking good to all their yuppie buddies.
Seeing as we have cars with more than 50HP now, it's going to take a while.

I just bought a used (1997) VW Golf 1.6, manual transmission, here in Iceland... and the thing runs like a champ. Has about 80,000 miles on it, gets between 30-40 mpg regularly (unleaded), even after 10 years. No way I would buy a hybrid if its mileage wasn't any better than a 10 year old VW. The last owner told us that it was getting close to 40 mpg highway driving, and I've seen it with my own eyes. I'll take this car over any new fancy thing any day. :thumbsup:

Also, why don't more people drive diesel? My mom also has a VW Golf, bit newer than mine (2001?) and she gets insane mileage in that thing. One fill up on her diesel tank will get her at least 450+ miles, which beats any hybrid I've seen. I know diesel exhaust isn't the best for the environment :rolleyes: but if people are looking purely for higher MPG, then diesel seems the way to go.

Weight, weight weight. Those 45-50 mpg cars built back then were light, with a curb weight of less than 2000 lbs. The civic hybrid and prius both tip the scales at nearly 3000 lbs, some 300 lbs lighter than the Ford Bronco II of that era. 3000 is the new 2000 and as heavy as these cars weigh nowadays, you'll never get those kinds of numbers without a bit of help from other technologies.

Now that is a very good point, and batteries don't come light the way technology is now. I'm not sure how much room there is left in that industry, but I have hopes.

what happens to the batteries once they are no longer able to hold a recharge? is the environmental impact on that "good"?

Actually, no. The chemicals in the batteries are highly toxic and not necessarily recyclable. The carmakers (and consumers for that matter) are kind of taking a nuclear waste approach in that they're assuming that technology is coming to solve the problem.

As of now, it isn't.

But obviously people can get the mileage posted by the EPA and by Honda. The fact that said mileage may occur under so called optimal conditions is immaterial, because you can in fact achieve such mileage.

I can win the lottery, too, but the outcome is not typical and that fact should be made clear.

The 50/40 mileages are clearly not typical. That information should be made available to buyers.