Hyundai, Kia Rapped By EPA Over Misstated MPG Stickers
Nissan Leaf, Solar-Canopy Charging Station In New SIMS Game
The Nissan Leaf is no stranger to videogames. Last year, we had a little race between a Leaf and... Read More
- #6LEADERBOARD RANK
- 1818ARTICLES CONTRIBUTED
- 4COMMENTS POSTED
Also See
-
40-MPG Battle: Elantra Beats Focus To 2012 Car...
-
2012 Hyundai Accent SE: Quick Drive...
-
Five Things We Don't Like On The 2011 Hyundai...
See more video »
The EPA has ordered Kia and Hyundai to amend window stickers on 13 models from the 2011, 2012 and 2013 model years after the two companies were found to be misstating the cars' true efficiency.
The companies will also have to pay damages to 900,000 owners across the U.S.
According to Associated Press (via our sister site, TheCarConnection), the models were red-flagged after customers found they were struggling to get anywhere near the official fuel figures on several cars.
Vehicles featuring EPA sticker discrepancies include the Hyundai Accent, Azera, Elantra, Genesis, Santa Fe, Sonata Hybrid, Tucson and Veloster. Kia vehicles which require re-stickering include the Optima Hybrid, Rio, Sorento, Soul and Sportage.
The figures for most vehicles will change by only 1 or 2 mpg in certain measurements. Others, like the Soul, will lose up to six miles per gallon.
Compensation will depend on just how far out the stated efficiency was. Owners will be paid a rate based on how far they've driven the vehicle since buying it new, multiplied by how much less they would have spent on gas in that time, plus a 15 percent premium.
Kia's Michael Sprague says a car with a 1 mpg discrepancy and 15,000 miles on the odometer would receive $88.03 in compensation, including the 15 percent. A Kia Soul, out by 6 mpg and with several thousand more miles on the odometer, could be in line to receive a large amount of money.
Both companies have apologized unconditionally for the errors, and blame an administrative and procedural error, rather than deliberate intention.
Window stickers on new Hyundais and Kias have already been changed.
Any owners wishing to make a claim for their 2011-2013 Hyundai or Kia should visit HyundaiMPGInfo.com or KiaMPGInfo.com.
+++++++++++
Follow GreenCarReports on Facebook and Twitter.
Related Articles
-
2013 Nissan Leaf Final Ratings Issued: 115 MPGe, 75 Miles Of Range
-
GM Engineer Drives 2013 Chevy Cruze Diesel 900 Miles On One Tank
-
Should EPA Gas-Mileage Ratings Tests Change? What You Need To Know
-
Reader Q: 2014 Honda Accord Plug-In Hybrid Vs Other Hybrids
-
2014 Mitsubishi Mirage: EPA Gas Mileage For Manual Car Revealed
-
Follow Us
On Facebook
Most Popular This Week
More »
Can Tesla Raise More Than $1 Billion On Soaring Stock Price? 
Audi Startled By Tesla Sales Success? Deleted Press Release... 
Four Used Plug-In Electric Cars To Avoid 
How Are Electric-Car Batteries Made? Photos From Nissan's New... 
Toyota Accelerates Switch To Lithium-Ion Batteries, Still Lags... Find Green Cars
Photo Galleries
More from High Gear Media
- Follow Us
Have an opinion?
Hyundai is now looks like it has sold ZERO models with 40 mpg or more.
FAIL.
It is really an EPA guideline where all auto makers suppose to adhere and then submit the final test results to EPA for review. EPA doesn't really do the test on each and every model.
So, if the automakers "cheat" then, it just submit "skewed" data to EPA. The only EPA can do something about it is by hiring independent consultant to verify the data through a 3rd party testing according to the EPA guideline and compare data.
The only way to "prevent" any automaker from "cheating" is by the threat of "fines" and "sanction"...
That does bring up the question of the recent flurry of "high" MPG midsize hybrids and sedans that get close to 40mpg.
Also, one thing to point out is the fact that those EPA rating are assumed with 100% gas, not one of those 10% Ethanol mixes. I know for a fact that all the cars that I own lose about 5-7% in MPG when I use the 10% Ethanol mix...
As for your other comments, I would say it depends a lot on how you drive. But I'm going to bet that all of those fuel economy labels were derived with "clean" tests strictly according to EPA specifications.
EPA audits around 15% of the tests annually in their Ann Arbor lab. All of the manufacturer labs and the EPA lab are very heavily correlated. If the EPA finds a statistically significant discrepency, they call the manufacturer in and reach a conclusion on what to do. Prior to Hyundai/Kia, BMW had to adopt the lower EPA lab results for a specific vehicle. But H/K seem to have "overestimated" over a large range of vehicles. Suspicious.
2. Manufacturers perform fuel economy testing in their own labs using a very specific set of tests. See
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml
3. Tests are performed on a dynamometer with prototypes, but the powertrain calibration has to be at production level (i.e., you can't have a different calibration for certification and another for production).
4. EPA audits around 15% of vehicles in their Ann Arbor lab
5. There is a big difference between a vehicle that doesn't perform well in real life vs. the label fuel economy, and a company that somehow had "procedural problems" that caused them to report economy that is exagerated over a range of vehicles.
also, I agree on #5. There are ways to "tune" the car to pass EPA rules with flying color but don't do well in real world driving... That is different from "cheating" the EPA rules.
A couple of other comments:
1. There are car-to-car variances. Sometimes a vehicle will perform exceptionally well (called a "flyer"). This result can be used, but if it is not typical, it could be audited and the label reduced (happened to BMW).
2. Calibration code is sophisticated. I suppose it's possible that a vehicle would be able to recognize when it's being tested and modify the calibration. But that would be cheating. And I truly believe that most manufacturers are honest in their testing.
3. The decision with H/K is unprecedented. Label too high over a wide range. Very, very suspicious. Nobody is using the word "cheating", but I wonder...
In electronics industry, manufactures are required to submit their produces to independent labs for certification. Perhaps it's time auto manufactures are required to preform similar 3rd party certified testing?
1. Weight. Vehicles are measured with all options over 33% installation rate. That places the vehicle in a specific weight band for testing.
2. Coastdown. Vehicles coast down from a set speed to a full stip under controlled conditions. This test measures aerodynamics, tire rolling resistance, and other friction factors (bearings, etc.).
The Detroit Free Press is reporting that H/K's coastdown procedures might be at the root of the problem. More here:
http://www.freep.com/article/20121103/BUSINESS01/121103009/How-the-Hyundai-Kia-mileage-rating-mistakes-happened
The penalty paid by owners is much greater than paid by manufactures. This seems to be little incentive to manufactures to insure future EPA data is valid! Expecting we'll see more issues with EPA data as requirements move to higher MPG values, (where MPG differences are increasingly magnified).
Have an opinion?Join the conversation!