EPA Tweaks Official MPGs Prior To Cash4Clunkers, Shafting Some
UPDATE: Cash4Clunkers Admin Responds To MPG Switcharoo, Says Nothing
Shazam! Your car magically gets more miles per gallon! That's what some consumers hoping to take advantage of the government's "Cash For Clunkers" program are discovering. And the result is that they suddenly no longer qualify for up to $4500 voucher.
Daniel Anderson's 1991 V6 Toyota Camry went up from 18 mpg to 19 mpg. Same for Jeff Chase and his 1989 Mazda 929, reports Jalopnik. Some time in the past week the FuelEconomy.gov fuel efficiency numbers increased for these cars, rendering their owners ineligible for the program that gives vouchers to drivers who trade in old gas guzzlers for more fuel efficient cars. Jalopnik spoke with several government spokespeoples and none of them had any idea that the change had happened.
Check out FuelEconomy.gov, and see if the government suddenly says you get more mpg and it just so happens to disqualify you from a Cash For Clunkers voucher.
And for information on whether Cash For Clunkers is right for you, check out this Consumer Reports special feature.
EPA Secretly Changing MPG Numbers Ahead Of Cash For Clunkers, Screwing Consumers [Jalopnik] (Photo: seanmcgrath)
Post a comment
Comments:
Not saying this isn't bad, but there are two different MPG ratings for most cars... city and highway.
Perhaps this is just a weighted average of the two using a different equation? And that is why some cars have had their "official" MPG ratings used for the program changed?
Just a guess
The rating for my 2001 Chevy Malibu just went up also. It was 19, but it's now 21. So it doesn't appear that it was just cars with ratings <= 18mpg that were affected.
@Herbz: Exactly: the weighted average equation changed suddenly right at the start of cash for clunkers without any notice.
@Herbz: On the website:
"
EPA has changed the way it estimates MPG.
Starting in model year 2008, estimates reflect the effects of
* Faster Speeds & Acceleration
* Air Conditioner Use
* Colder Outside Temperatures
"
So maybe they changed all the cars to reflect this...
Mine changed but it went down. Not far enough to qualify but it did drop 4 mpg.
Waaaaaay down in the fine print it says that the $4500 will be paid in carbon credits.
Enjoy!
Pretty soon, they'll be in charge of your medicine.
Here's the trick if your gas mileage is too high - drop your car off at the dealer then go for a nice run. By the time you get back to the dealer, you'll be out of breath and emitting too much CO2. The EPA will feel bad and give you the deal anyways.
What they are saying is the government changed the combined MPG overnight for a lot of cars that were borderline. a lot of 18 mpg cars suddenly get 19 mpg. My truck was 14 before, and is 14 now.
Which sucks for Hyundai, because they rolled out their program on-time. The CFC was supposed to start July 1, but the government dragged their feet, so it didn't start until the end of July. Hyundai followed all of the regulations to a "t", but might still lose out on hundreds of thousands of dollars if a bunch of their tradeins over the past few weeks went from 18 to 19, magically.
@_NARC_: How does your 2001 Malibu get only 19-21?
Mine gets 25 regularly, and on highway trips I'm averaging 300 miles / 11 gallons. I always fill the tank so I'm fairly sure of the mileage; I know the Malibu's tank is 13gal but I never let it get *that* low.
Sometimes it's as low as 250/11, which is 22MPG.
(P.S.> I'm "Benanov" but no one approves my comments, ever.)
@Brian Kemp: No, I meant to say that the combined EPA mpg rating for the malibu went from 19 to 21 on the Fueleconomy.gov website.
I regularly get 27/28 mpg on almost all highway driving.
This is a good thing, the numbers should be accurate so that the true gas-guzzlers are the ones the govt is paying for. They are still too low, as other posters state, their cars are now 'rated' 19-21 but they actually get 27.
Obama Giveth, Obama Taketh
@Herbz: That would LOWER MPG ratings, not raise them. They did that two years ago because people complained that there was no reasonable way to get the MPG figures the EPA was claiming.
@Brent Woodle: No, they'll give you planned parenthood vouchers if you turn in your defunct contraceptives. (thats a good thing)
@AldisCabango: Yeah, because the president makes all the laws. Not like we have large groups of elected representatives that make laws or anything. It's all on Obama.
Yeah, my Subie suddenly went from 18 to 19 mpg too. There seem to be a looooot of cars that are 19 mpg.
Granted, I'm going to drive my car until it dies because it's awesome, but it sucks for people who were hoping to trade in.
I was under the impression that the program is all about your *net* improvement. If they bump your MPG from 18 to 19 you need to either improve that new number by 4 MPG for the lower tier, and 10 MPG for the higher tier. So you're not disqualified unless you had planned on buying a car that was specifically 4 MPG better than your old 18 MPG car. If you had planned on a 10 MPG improvement you're now out $1,000, but still getting $3,500.
@Stubtify: Unfortunately not. Check out CARS.gov: " trade-in vehicles must get 18 or less MPG (some very large pick-up trucks and cargo vans have different requirements)"
@JemimaPashnani: That's actually a bit more generous than the Fed numbers-the Fed weights the average more heavily towards city mileage.
@Herbz: 1) That sounds like it only applies to model year 2008 or later cars, not all the stats since 2008 for all cars.
2) Wouldn't those changes decrease MPG?
My Dodge Caravan still shows a New 18mpg average, but I don't remember seeing these other two boxes on the page. One shows the "Old" rating, which averages 20mpg, and a the other is based on actual owners reports, averaging 18.8. Does my car get more fuel efficient over time. I'd take a screenshot but I'm commenting from my phone.
@Stubtify: On cars, the original car has to be rated 18 or under, regardless of what you trade it in for.
@BeefSupreme: The "old" box is what was on your car's sticker when you bought it. The "new" rating is what your car gets under the EPA guidelines that were revised a while back, and that's the number that counts in the CARS program.
I have a 1999 Mercury Mystique and it was never eligible. The fueleconomy.gov site use to report its new combined rating as 20 MPG. Just checked it now because of all the brouhaha and that number has also increased to 21 MPG.
A good summary is at Cardealerhorrorstories.com. Sure, I'm pimping my own site, but it's Still related.
Drylabbing sucks.
I've got the same car, low miles & nice shape, but starting to show signs of some potentially very expenseive transmission & electrical problems. I was disappointed I didn't qualify too. I only drive about 75 miles a month, mostly trips under 3 miles and get about 19. It gets just under 29 highway when I do travel. Prettry good for a V6. Would love to get something new & not worry @ reliability as much, oh well.
My average mileage went up 4 MPG -- even though my car is 8 years old! at this rate, I'll be averaging hybrid-MPGs when I hit 150,000 miles!
What's curious is that my car wouldn't have qualified for the program when it was new -- so I'm wondering why they're bothering to mess with the stats.
@_NARC_: Same happened to my '97 Malibu. Two weeks ago when I checked the average MPG was 18 - and since I'd found out from a friend from Chrysler about them matching the gov't program I was geeked to get nearly half off a Dodge Caliber. Now the '97 Malibu shows 21MPG average - no joy.
@Stubtify: No, Congress mostly missed the opportunity to make the program about net fuel efficiency improvement, as I commented here:
@Framling: The new system applies to all cars, not just MY 2008 or newer. The Daytona I was planning to trade under CARS ([consumerist.com]) went from combined 22mpg to 20 mpg, but still not enough of a drop to be eligible for CARS.
2 weeks ago, we checked my friend's car and the "official" MPG was 18 (?1992 Chevy Caprice?). Woohoo! She went new car shopping, found one she wanted and when the dealership looked it up, her car had magically changed to 19mpg. No new car for her, no sale for the dealership.
Mines still 18 city :( Given that it's a 2003 convertible, I won't be getting rid of it anytime soon though.
Which average do they use? There seems to be a new and an old calculation when you click through. My "new" mpg is 21, and then old is 24, based on city 18 and hwy 26.
I find it shameful to give someone $3500 to go from 18mpg to 19mpg... thats not going to make a difference!
btw, my 2001 VW passat gets 30mpg
Yup, our 1986 Nissan 300ZX went to 19, MAGICALLY disqualifying us from the program! I smell a rat!
@Bryan Fernandez: huh? They already are in charge of everyone's medicine. That's one of the government's many jobs.
Can we get back to MPG hoodoo, please (IE, the FDA, and medical code in general, can get a rant from me, but this is not the place)?
In Soviet America, clunkers cash you!
WOW, first the Federal Reserve inflates the dollar, next the Federal Government inflates your average mpg for make/model cars. Maybe they bought several 91 V6 Camrys that had a worse MPG, destroyed those bad MPG Camrys thus raising the national average of 91 V6 Camrys by 1mpg since the ones left have better fuel economy now.
I was annoyed to see that my old 1987 Chevy didn't officially qualify as a clunker with a 20mpg rating.
Out to "prove them wrong" I measured the mileage myself between fillups... and got 24 mpg. wheee
@chocobo:
I'm almost willing to bet that you have a Celebrity, because that's what I have and for such an old car, I love it.
Either that or a Cavalier, but they're basically the same car with some extra room.
My '93 Dodge Caravan isn't even listed on that link supplied in the article. All they show are 6 cylinders and I've got a 4 banger.
I went to a local dealership in Cleveland, OH and they said that they were averaging the MPG based on the city and highway mileage. So if your car got 17 city and 24 highway, those numbers were averaged and that was your MPG they based on eligibility for the c4c program. curious!