RSS_Auto_Poster
Well-known member
Written by Paul Horrell
Whatever the laughably discredited official tests might tell you, real-world fuel consumption of new cars is now getting worse. That"s according to the most comprehensive and accurately-measured set of on-road tests, which are today made public for the first time.Emissions Analytics is the British company that does the tests, calling them EQUA. They"re taken from the same on-road tests as the NOX and CO tests EQUA launched earlier this year.Simply put, EA straps a portable emissions lab onto the back of cars. This looks like a bodge-up but is actually extremely sophisticated and accurate. EA then connects up the tailpipe, and drives in a very controlled way around a fixed road route. The roads are in the South of England, and the speeds and style of driving are meant to mirror the average driver. Not an economy-obsessed engineer. Or a lead-footed Top Gear road-tester.The system produces analysis of several exhaust gases, as well as the actual mpg. You can see the results by clicking on the website here.As we"d all have predicted, the EQUA mpg measurements are a whole lot worse than the manufacturer"s quoted numbers.Those official numbers come from a test called NEDC, or New European Driving Cycle. This was designed many years ago and was meant to give a valid basis for comparison across cars.But the trouble with the official test is manufacturers have found more and more ways to game the system. They run the test with over-inflated tyres, special oils, mirrors removed and several other tweaks. They also design engines and gear ratios that work well in the test which involves very gentle acceleration and slow speeds rather than the real world.A striking result of the NEDC test"s slow speeds is that in the real-world EQUA tests, some cars drink nearly twice as much fuel as their official figures. Small-capacity petrol engines are among the worst. See the results for the Fiat/Alfa 0.9 Twinair engine, Ford"s Ecoboost 1.0, the Mini One three-cylinder and the Smart triple. Between them they account for most of the top 10 cars that diverge furthest from their official ratings.
Date written: 2 Sep 2016
More of this article on the Top gear website
ID: 4871
Whatever the laughably discredited official tests might tell you, real-world fuel consumption of new cars is now getting worse. That"s according to the most comprehensive and accurately-measured set of on-road tests, which are today made public for the first time.Emissions Analytics is the British company that does the tests, calling them EQUA. They"re taken from the same on-road tests as the NOX and CO tests EQUA launched earlier this year.Simply put, EA straps a portable emissions lab onto the back of cars. This looks like a bodge-up but is actually extremely sophisticated and accurate. EA then connects up the tailpipe, and drives in a very controlled way around a fixed road route. The roads are in the South of England, and the speeds and style of driving are meant to mirror the average driver. Not an economy-obsessed engineer. Or a lead-footed Top Gear road-tester.The system produces analysis of several exhaust gases, as well as the actual mpg. You can see the results by clicking on the website here.As we"d all have predicted, the EQUA mpg measurements are a whole lot worse than the manufacturer"s quoted numbers.Those official numbers come from a test called NEDC, or New European Driving Cycle. This was designed many years ago and was meant to give a valid basis for comparison across cars.But the trouble with the official test is manufacturers have found more and more ways to game the system. They run the test with over-inflated tyres, special oils, mirrors removed and several other tweaks. They also design engines and gear ratios that work well in the test which involves very gentle acceleration and slow speeds rather than the real world.A striking result of the NEDC test"s slow speeds is that in the real-world EQUA tests, some cars drink nearly twice as much fuel as their official figures. Small-capacity petrol engines are among the worst. See the results for the Fiat/Alfa 0.9 Twinair engine, Ford"s Ecoboost 1.0, the Mini One three-cylinder and the Smart triple. Between them they account for most of the top 10 cars that diverge furthest from their official ratings.
Date written: 2 Sep 2016
More of this article on the Top gear website
ID: 4871