Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Midsize Sedans 2.0



  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,950
    I'm always hearing people say that CR has these secret tests and they won't give any details. Below is from CRs website. What more do you want? I know they could provide a little more fine detail but from what I read it's about as real world as you can get. I know you're a big Ford guy and CR hasn't been too kind to Ford lately, but at least they compare each car/truck on an equal basis. Their tests may not be equal to any one person's particular driving habits or commute but as long as they are done impartially and the same for every vehicle I consider it a very good test. Is it the "best"? Who knows. Name a better one then. It's certainly not the car mags or web blog tests as they have the car for a couple of days and drive for speed and handling versus an everyday commute type test like CR does. I use their numbers for comparison purposes and have found them to be very accurate. More so than any other tests I read.

    "Road tests. Consumer Reports’ fuel-economy tests are conducted on our track and on public roads. Testers splice a precise fuel meter into each test car’s fuel line to measure how much gas is consumed. Each car is then run through highway and city drive loops, with each performed multiple times by two drivers.

    The city test is conducted on a loop that’s set up on our track to reflect driving in a suburban area. It’s marked so that a driver must maintain specific speeds in certain sections and stop the car at specific points for set idling times. Highway mpg is measured by driving on a particular stretch of sparsely used freeway near our test track at a steady pace of 65 mph. Each driver runs the test in both directions to compensate for wind and the slight difference in grade.

    Our raw results are corrected for temperature using a formula established by the Society of Automotive Engineers. But we don’t test if it’s too hot, too cold, too wet, or too windy. Our overall mpg is a weighted composite of city and highway mpg measurements."
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,174
    Yep. I absolutely adored the Sonata when it first came out, and as if by magic a neighbor bought a black one with the 18"s and dual exhaust...looked great. That is what prompted me to notice Hyundai/Kia in the first place.

    Now, I see 50 GLS models a day, but rarely a nice one like my neighbors. It seems the 199/ mo. advertising has been very effective, and Mr Hyundai is happy man. It needs a face lift, and isn't getting enough of one in 2014.

    I also agree that the previous Sonata did have some quiet, good looks. (Limited V6 look nice)

    What I wasn't prepared for today was seeing a white 2013 Honda Accord Sport at the grocery store after work. WOW :surprise: Awesome. It just gushes with modern, bold.... yet classy styling. Absolutely the best looking Accord 4 door ever. They better make Sirius and Navigation available on it next model year. To have a car that gorgeous and not have modern Infotainment is unacceptable.

    *** sorry about the bold, but I liked it that much.
  • wayne21wayne21 Posts: 221
    Is CR's gas mileage the best? IDK if it's the best, but it's pretty obvious that it could not be any more fair.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,613
    I don't anything in their explanation that I'd be willing to bet the ranch on.
    For example, what is the city/highway weighting they use? It could be any ratio.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,665
    It doesn't tell you any details at all about the test - how long it is, speeds, idle time, etc.

    It's A test but it's hardly THE test. If you're looking for a scientifically controlled repeatable test with very little variance then that's the EPA tests. At least they publish all the details at
  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,950
    I read somewhere else that they use a 50/50 mix but I couldn't find it. I don't bet the ranch on anything. Is there something you reference that you WOULD bet the ranch on? Nothing is absolute and most smart consumers use many different reviews and reference sources including family, friends and neighbors. None of which would I "bet the ranch" on. I use a lot of sources of information before I buy a vehicle. Hope you do too.
  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,950
    Did you even read what I posted. It clearly stated the hwy speed of 65 mph. Also, they mentioned that they repeat the test several times taking into consideration temp, winds, etc. etc and use fuel meter spliced into the gas lines. They seem to take into account many different "scientific" aspects of mpg testing.

    Is it a space shot? Heck no, but you tell me how you compute your city and hwy mpg and prove it's nearly as scientific. Everybody is always bitching about how none of the tests are "real world" and when somebody does it about as real world as one can and still be very impartial about it they still complain.

    I know you like the EPA test as it gives Ford a very optimistic number which most real world type testing proves isn't realistic. I also compare EPA numbers but in many cases they just aren't in line with what people are really getting. Some manufacturers seem to meet or beat the EPA numbers handily, others not so much.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,665
    They don't publish any speeds for the city test which is what I was referring to. The highway test is simple.

    What does "real world" mean? I can take the same vehicle and get 30 mpg in one case and 15 mpg in another. Both are 'real world' but someone running E-10 in a hilly area with winter fuel and jack rabbit stops and starts and short trips on deflated tires will get different results than E-0 on flat land in summer. That's the problem with any test - there is no such thing as a single 'real world' test or test result.

    The EPA test was never intended to tell you what fuel economy you can expect in the 'real world'. In fact the old window stickers used to give you a range of mpg to expect and it was huge - something like EPA city rating 17 mpg (range 12-25 mpg). It's only intended to compare 2 vehicles using as identical a test procedure as humanly possible.

    The EPA test is structured to remove as many variables as possible and it's the most scientific and easily repeatable test that exists. This is about scientific accuracy and testing methods.

    It sounds like what you're saying is you find CR's fuel economy test to be very close to the mileage you experience on the same vehicles. Fine. That's great for YOU but not necessarily for others who don't drive the same way. Anyone who drives faster or slower than 65 on the highway won't get the same results (e.g.).
  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,950
    edited July 2013
    You just don't get it. The main point is that they test ALL vehicles the same and account for variables. The numbers they come up with are good for comparison, just like the EPA's numbers are good for comparison. I stated very clearly that no test can duplicate every drivers personal situation. Duh. Actually, the EPA numbers do a pretty good job for me as well as CR's do. The average that CR comes up with is pretty close but I find the EPA highway to be closer to what I get. All of which means nothing because that is, like you said, one driver's experience.

    I don't find a lot of fault with the EPA's methodology. Nor do I find a lot of fault with CR's. It's just another data point for research. You seem to have a big problem with the way CR does their testing even though you admittedly don't know much about it. For practical purposes, I think they do a decent job.

    As far as real world, no test can duplicate 200+ million drivers habits and scenarios and it doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure that out. As long as the tests are done exactly the same on each vehicle, which CR seems to do, the results should be good for comparison purposes just like the EPA. There is a reason for the saying "your mileage may vary".
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,665
    You seem to have a big problem with the way CR does their testing even though you admittedly don't know much about it.

    Where did I say that? All I said was that CR doesn't publish much about their tests so it's hard to say anything about it. I was simply replying to whomever said the CR test was better.

    CR intentionally uses vague terms. Why don't they publish what they account for and how? It's not difficult. The EPA is very transparent in what and how they test. Why isn't CR?
  • gee22gee22 Posts: 82
    The Fusion tested does have a higher MSRP, but just looking at the side view mirrors. I'm sure they both have heated side view mirrors, but the Fusion also has a built in wide angle, turn signals, puddle lamps, and Blind spot system.
    That's just the side view mirrors, and I'll bet there are a bunch of other features that are also much better on the Fusion.

    Just to set the record straight, the mirrors on the Mazda Touring that was tested, while they don't have puddle lamps or are wide-angle, they are heated, have turn signals, and have blind spot monitoring. Incidentally, in additon to the visible BLIS on the mirrors, there's also an audible chirp when you turn on the turn signal if there is something in your blind spot.

    It is true that if you get the top of the line models, there is more technology available with the Fusion. One of the reasons we went with the Mazda rather than the Fusion was that Active Xenon headlights were available and after driving with them in our Volvo, they were a must have.
  • I don't understand why HID's haven't been outlawed yet. They may be great behind the wheel, but they blind other drivers with a painful piercing light that should be illegal. I do find it very odd that the Fusion doesn't feature LED daytime running lights though. If I could change one thing about mine, I would add them where they should already be.
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    U need 2 look around: many new models feature some variant on the Sonata grill including the Fusion and Avalon among others.

    You've missed my point; all cars are starting to look the same to some degree. The 06 Sonata looked like the 03 Accord. The '13 Accord looks like the Genesis. Neither is a condemnation of either company in my eyes.

    U need 2 look around: many new models feature some variant on the Sonata grill including the Fusion and Avalon among others.

    The Sonata grill, not the Hybrid catfish face - the one with class-leading aerodynamics. They sacrificed graceful styling for aero.

    And I already own one - my second Sonata hybrid

    I never would've guessed... :shades:
  • thegraduatethegraduate Posts: 9,731
    I don't understand why HID's haven't been outlawed yet. They may be great behind the wheel, but they blind other drivers with a painful piercing light that should be illegal.

    If aligned properly, they aren't blinding; the exception being when you meet one coming over a hill - when the light focuses on your face it's like staring into the sun. :shades:

    One thing I noticed is a lot of Nissan lights blind me at night. It seems their standard alignment is higher than other OEMs. It doesn't matter what model, Sentra, Altima, Frontier, Maxima... I've actually "flashed" my high-beams at Nissan drivers to remind them to use low-beams before only to realize they weren't even using their high-beams.
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,325
    Seems like it comes down to paying about $4K more for 2 extra HP, 2 lower MPG, the Acura name, the longer warranties, and a better interior.

    I wish the Accord had a SH-AWD option; nah!never mind. Acura just needs to up the TL's performance! It should be at 330 HP by now with a diet losing 500 lbs.
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,325
    I test drove the new Accord and if it had been the first CVT I ever drove, I'd of never previously said "CVT's suck!"

    Honda nailed it! Great car for the price.
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,325
    Everything CR does is better, didn't you know? :P :)

    As far as I'm concerned, they are the only "tell it like it really is" publication still around. They won loyalty by telling the truth, it all comes down to trust. They've EARNED that trust over the years.
  • kyrptokyrpto Posts: 216
    edited July 2013
    The Hyundai Sonata Hybrid was promoted as the first hybrid engineered primarily for better highway mileage. It can cruise on all-electric at speeds up to 62 mph.
    I personally have observed electric-only driving at over 65 mph under light acceleration on the flats or downhill.

    In our 2011 Sonata Hybrid on the way to the OBX via Rt. 64 early in the morning but still with constant AC, at interstate speeds using cruise set @ 70 mph, you could watch the battery load up past ¾ charge, then the EV light would illuminate while the blue arc mpg would peg, followed by the battery charge bar retreating.
    All EV.

    This would last between 30 and 40 seconds - we timed it - then the battery begins recharging, another cycle starts.
    All the while the mpg indicator held at nearly 42.
    Cooler early am temps surely helped out.

    Switch to the power flow display going 70 mph like we did and watch the ICE and traction motor interact with the battery.
    It can be distracting.
    Really shows the sophistication of the first Hyundai hybrids.
    Very smooth transitions at this speed.

    Looking forward to even better mpg on the 2013 in these conditions.
  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,950
    Really shows the sophistication of the first Hyundai hybrids.

    CR, in their tests, shows the Fusion H getting 39 avg mpg versus the Sonata H getting 33 avg mpg. That's quite a difference. Doesn't appear to be that sophisticated to me as it's results that matter. If the Sonata system was that sophisticated it seems it would do better than 1 mpg better than a regular Mazda6. Results are what matters and also longevity and dependability which the Toyota hybrid system has in spades.
  • kyrptokyrpto Posts: 216
    edited July 2013
    That is from 2011; Consumer Reports have yet to test the upgraded version.

    Hyundai downgraded the 2012 Sonata Hybrids by 1 mpg on their EPA estimates.
    In question now is whether, having been chastened by its lessons, and sending the Sonata Hybrid back to the drawing board, the 2013s may possibly under promise but over deliver.
    The MPG advertising number game is a big part of the marketing for these cars, and Ford was similarly caught short with its “47 mpg” Fusion Hybrid, while Toyota’s Camry Hybrid is more on-target with its advertised numbers.

    We pressed Hyundai for details as to whether these specs add up to more than the conservative upticks in EPA estimates suggest. The last time Hyundai was accused of overpromising, it fully admitted its overstepping the bounds, and immediately got busy updating the cars to make good in full.

    So, given the serious attempts at demonstrating an about-face and market competitiveness, we asked whether instead of overstating mileage its self-certification for EPA numbers might be holding back a little in a more conservative stance?

    Hyundai would not directly answer this pointed question, but Senior Manager, Midwest Product Public Relations Miles Johnson merely said, “All I can say is I can’t wait for you to drive it.”

    Check out the real world numbers for the 2013s on Fuely.
    We're gotten over 40 mpg since we bought the 2013 using AC most all the time w/o any special hypermiling techniques in mixed driving.

    Never got under 35mpg in our 2011 -2 years and 53,000 miles - for comparison; usually upper 30s and over forty regularly in the fall and spring.

    BTW, Toyota is scrambling to redesign the '12 Camry as it failed the offset-crash-test.

    With the advanced Lithium Polymer battery pack and 6 speed transmission, the Sonatas are true next gen hybrids; Toyota is sticking with the older nick-hydride battery and CVT to save $$,
Sign In or Register to comment.