VW Passat's in U.K get 78 mpg. U.S. Gov Won't Let Them Be Sold Over Here.

reply to post by generik


Nah man Toyota Hilux is one of the sturdiest well built pick ups/vehicles ever made, they are pretty much indestructible.

Theres a good car show here in the UK called Top Gear search youtube for the episode they try and break on, after being crashed, thrown of a building, set on fire and dumped in the ocean, it still drove lol. Incredible pick ups.

Love top gear, great show and funny guys!

reply to post by Tuttle

Originally posted by Tuttle
Eh I actualy drive a bluemotion diesel passat and the claimed MPG is slightly misleading.

I stand corrected then.

Your first hand experience is of course a better testimony since I just pulled the numbers from VW's homepage.

reply to post by ColCurious


Well its like I think they just base there MPG on what youll get in perfect ideal conditions, rarely ever happens though, but still on my trip computer for the last 6,000 miles ive been averaging 65 MPG, not too bad.

I realize this is a conspiracy site but not everything is a conspiracy.

Here are the fuel economy ratings, in mpg (US), for a VW Passat with a 2.0 TDI diesel engine from VW UK, VW USA, and VW Canada.

UK
manual -- 42.0 urban/58.8 extra-urban
DSG ---- 37.3 urban/52.3 extra-urban

US
manual -- N/A for sale
DSG ---- 30.0 city/40.0 highway

Cdn
manual -- 34.5 city/53.4 highway
DSG ---- 34.0 city/47.9 highway

The engine and transmissions are the same. The difference is in how the cars are tested. The parameters for fuel economy testing performed by the UK Department for Transport (VCA) and Transport Canada are not the same as used by the US EPA.
For example:
The EPA uses a city test that lasts 31 minutes, with an average speed of 20 mph and top speed of 56 mph.
The UK urban test is 13 minutes long with an average speed of 11.6 mph and top speed of 31 mph.

Another car example is the Chevrolet Cruze LT with 1.4 L turbo. Produced in North America, the same model is sold in the US and Canada.

US version manual or auto -- 26.0 city/38.0 highway

Cdn version manual or auto -- 30.1 city/45.2 highway

The ratings are from the EPA and Transport Canada respectively and are in US mpg.

Hmm I know a bit about cars. Fuel is cheaper in the US than the UK. Consumers buy what they want.
You can easily google and look up fuel consumption for vehicles.

If fuel in the US was as expensive as the UK I'm sure you'd see a dramatic shift in what consumers would buy.
If I was in the UK I'd probably end up with a tiny 4 cylinder crap heap as well. If I was in the US I'd get a Corvette.

All measuring devices aside, the difference between 40 mpg and 80 mpg cannot be a testing variance.
If we build them in the U.S.A. we should be driving them!

Originally posted by JimTSpock
Hmm I know a bit about cars. Fuel is cheaper in the US than the UK. Consumers buy what they want.
You can easily google and look up fuel consumption for vehicles.

If fuel in the US was as expensive as the UK I'm sure you'd see a dramatic shift in what consumers would buy.
If I was in the UK I'd probably end up with a tiny 4 cylinder crap heap as well. If I was in the US I'd get a Corvette.

yes, but thats the problem, most european "tiny 4 cylinder crap heaps" out preform ,most mid range US 6 and 8 cylanders. They are just better engineered.

Corvette coupe - 6.2 litre - 8 cylander - 0-60 in 4.2 seconds - top speed 190 mph.

compare to the Porche 911 turbo - 3.8 litre - 6 cylander - 0-60 in 3.6 seconds - top speed 194 mph.

The Corvette is basicly out preformed on every level by a car with an engine half the size.

The US is great at many things, but making cars is not one of them.
[

with the emissions control over here it would only get 45 mpg anyway

the smart cars get like 40 mpg over here

joke

From what I understand, the reason that these vehicles are currently banned in the U.S. has to do with the way our EPA pollution standards for automobiles are written.

In the U.S., automobile pollution standards are measured by documenting the amount of pollutants released per gallon of gas used, without taking mileage into consideration. So in other words, it doesn't matter if you get 60 mpg while the other guy gets 20, it's purely about how many pollutants were released when you burned the gallon of fuel.

I know it sounds really dumb, which it is, but seeing how special interest lobbying firms are really the ones writing the legislation, I'd say that big business is actually getting exactly what they wanted. It's the consumers and the planet that's getting screwed to the wall.

This problem and others like it won't be fixed until we ban all paid lobbying of elected officials.

reply to post by Flatfish


OMG and a big hallelujah brother to that one.!!!! Wow, no one except those who elected an official directing an official. We should called that democracy. Wonder if a country will ever be made using that principle.

.

Originally posted by winterkill
All measuring devices aside, the difference between 40 mpg and 80 mpg cannot be a testing variance.

What a stupid statement.

1. You're comparing a rating in miles per US gal to a rating measured in miles per imperial gal. An imperial gal is 20% larger than a US gal.

2. The Passat that gets 70.6 mpg (58.8 miles per US gal) is equipped with a manual transmission, which is not available in the US. The UK Passat equipped with the diesel and the auto-DSG tranny gets 52.3 miles per US gal according to the UK testing regimen.

3. Whether it fell within or outside testing variance would only apply if you were running the same test. The EPA tests and the UK/European tests are not the same. The results are not directly comparable. The duration, average and top speeds, acceleration rates, number of stops, etc of the tests are not the same.

reply to post by erwalker


Big oil owns the US, and you doubt
they're influencing our ability to use half as much of their product as we currently do? THAT, friend, is stupid.

reply to post by auraelium


You missed the point. The US and Euro car markets are very different, for the price of a 4 cylinder economical car in Europe you could buy a Vette in the US where fuel is much cheaper and you don't have to worry about fuel consumption so much.

The 911 Turbo is a much more expensive car than the Vette. The ZR-1 Vette is pretty fast. The 2012 Nissan GT-R blasts both of them and is cheaper than the 911 Turbo.
Compare the Vette against some similarly priced Euro cars.

Back to fuel consumption. Generally US made cars are bigger and cheaper than European cars because fuel is much less expensive and US consumers buy them so they make them.
The big 3 Ford, GM and Chrysler need to lift their game and build better cars to compete with the Europeans and Japanese car makers in terms of engineering, design and build quality. The Chevy Volt is new and a good attempt at placing more emphasis on fuel economy or you could buy a Toyota Prius, there are economical options for US consumers but they don't place as much importance on economy.


PS Stick twin turbos or a supercharger on the Vette and see how it goes. Turbocharging can effectively increase the power of the engine that's why we love it! And that's why the 911 Turbo is so fast, get a non turbo 911 and it isn't that fast but still very expensive.

2013 Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1 0-60mph 3.4 seconds top speed 205mph $112,600 USD.
www.chevrolet.com...

2013 Porsche 911 Turbo 0-60mph 3.5 seconds top speed 194mph $137,500 USD.
www.porsche.com...

You might want the 911 Turbo S to get in front of the Vette ZR-1 but it will cost you. The base model Corvette is less than half the price of the 911 Turbo at $49,600 USD.

2013 Nissan GT-R 0-60mph 2.7 seconds (insane) top speed 196mph $96,820 USD.
www.nissanusa.com...

Or get the GT-R.

reply to post by JimTSpock


Its not all about speed and economy either both the Nissan and Porsche are able to go round corners try doing that in a 'Vette' and then you have quality of build materials and build quality, the 'Vette' falls far short on both.

reply to post by biggilo


That's not entirely accurate. The Corvette is pretty good as for build quality and engineering that's another story. Lap times at the ring it's right up there. Dodge Viper SRT-10 ACR beats all Porsche's and GT-R's.

fastestlaps.com...

The VW Passat. There is a UK version which VW UK claims 78.5mpg with the BlueMotion engine it is not offered in the US, I'll try to find out why. That figure seems very optimistic and there's no way you'd get that in real life.

www.volkswagen.co.uk...#/new/passat-vii/which-model/engines/fuel-consumption/

I am a huge VW fan, but love all cars. It's obvious we pay more for less, the USA wants our money and as much as they can get, heck they are starting to tax gas based on how many miles you drive per year or something in some states.

I like that VW has technology and other manufacturers to do this. They don't show the actual numbers you will get on a daily bases, but they are higher numbers then other cars previously could put out. Speaking of putting out, I like my cars non-fuel efficient. In my short time on this planet I will have fun with lots of horsepower, torque, and only try and ignore how outrageous gas prices are.

Found this article on the VW it's pretty interesting and what I thought Americans just aren't interested in buying it much. They prefer bigger cheaper cars and don't care as much about economy.

First, VW used to sell the same (or similar?) Passat as is sold in Europe here in the US. But it didn't sell very well. It was too expensive and too small in the mid-size sedan segment. So they came up with a larger version with a better price point; and of course the size effects the mileage. [Americans are not nearly so concerned with mileage as Europeans are.]

Second, the way the US' EPA calculates mileage is different than the way the European equivalent does it. "The cycle is different," he said. The driving course and rigor set in the dynamometer is different. The fuel types used are different. The EPA estimates for diesel mileage tend to be lower than reality. For example, while the EPA says the Passat is 44 mpg, the Consumer Reports number comes in at 51 mpg. "The number for the combined US cycle for the US Passat is 35 mpg, whereas the same powertrain in a European Passat gets 61.2 mpg on the Euro cycle."
Third, a US gallon (3.79 L) is less than an Imperial gallon (4.546 L).

Fourth, the US government doesn't stipulate to an automobile company what vehicles they can and cannot sell, other than setting the regulations for things like emissions, with which the manufacturers are required to comply.

pesn.com...

Thats good and well. But I prefer a larger vehicle so I dont creamed by all the other large vehicles.

Originally posted by winterkill
So You don't think big business controls what's happening in the U.S. Go to the U.K and you can buy cars running 70 mpg plus. Over here...40 mpg. Why? The U.S. government won't allow it.
Here's a quick vid from a guy who tried to buy one and what he found out.

video.staged.com...

I think you are combining two things here and though it is quite irrefutable that some industries affect policy, the blame squarely falls on the bureaucracy that creates the regulation. This is a rehash of a story regarding a Ford model a few years back that couldn't be sold in the States because of regulations on diesel fuel and motors. It was completely cost prohibitive (due to Government regulations on the fuel itself) to sell the car in the States.

65 mpg Ford the U.S. Can't Have

Taxes aimed at commercial trucks mean diesel costs anywhere from 40 cents to $1 more per gallon than gasoline. Add to this the success of the Toyota Prius, and you can see why only 3% of cars in the U.S. use diesel.

The Government has decided it wants "green" vehicles to win...regardless of cost. So it continues to tax the heck out of diesel and offer tax "incentives" for people buying hybrids.....

Business lobbyist surely get some of the blame but the larger portion goes to the cost prohibitions put into place by US regulators.

ETA:
It isn't that these companies are blocked from selling their cars here that have such high mileage, it is because the Government placed a virtual ceiling on making it cost-effective to do so.